Not a positive force in any election. According to a recent poll, John Kerry would recieve 41 percent of the vote to Bush's 43 and Nader's five percent; yet pitted head to head Kerry beats Bush by two percent. Now I know this may sound like specualtion but Ralph Nader is detrimental to John Kerry. He is one reason Gore wasn't 'officially' elected and it looks like because he feels the need to run for office that Kerry will be another victim of his votes. Nader knows he will not win the election, he's known he can't win, yet he runs anyway. Someone close to Nader should talk some sense in to him and make him pull out of the election because frankly, we DO NOT need four more years of George Bush, and that's what may happen if Nader runs in an election he can not win.

Sorry to kick up such an old thread, but I've been researching a lot of polls online. What I've found is that since February, in almost every single poll that pits Kerry against Bush directly, Kerry wins. However, when Nader is a choice, Kerry and Bush are neck and neck. By dropping out of the race, Nader would hand the election to Kerry.

Now sjt, if you can still sit there and chant the old Independent slogan "Dems and Republicans are no different", then you're the one with your eyes shut. Now more than ever the differences between the parties is evident.

John Kerry is in favor of states having the power to determine gay marriage, while Bush is strongly opposed to gay marriage in any form. Now if you'd care to point out one other single facet that liberals and conservatives currently agree on, I'd gladly listen. From foreign policy to Medicare to social issues, Democrats and Republicans could not be more different, especially in these crucial years. Of course there will always be odd groups like Democrats for Bush, Republicans for Kerry, and black white supremacists. These people contradict themselves and are few and far between.

And by the way, sjt, have you heard where Nader is getting a lot his funding from?

John Kerry and George W. Bush are about as alike as an elephant and a pack of gum. And the fact remains: a vote for Nader is a vote wasted. Maybe someday we'll have a three-party system, but that is not today, and we can't make that happen today. If we want a third party, we have to try to make it strong in a less crucial election year.

Right now, America must decide: the elephant of the pack of gum?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aguagon:
Nader is indeed running as an alternative to both parties, but his views on most issues tend to swing closer to the left. Sure, he's taking some votes away from Bush, but he's taking a lot more away from Kerry. While Nader himself may dislike Bush and Kerry equally, your typical Nader supporter dislikes Bush more.

For that reason, I sincerely ask anyone who is voting Nader to reconsider what they are doing. He is not going to win, as you already know, but now is not the time to stand up for what you belief is right. Clinton couldn't have beat Bush in '92 without Perot, and Dubya couldn't have beat Gore without Nader.

So if Nader looks like the answer to you, just remember a vote for Nader is essentially a vote for Bush. I urge you to weigh Bush and Kerry against each other, and determine which you dislike the least. You'll probably come up with Kerry, but if you come up with Bush, by all means, vote for him. It'll shut us Dems up about unfair elections.

---

First off, Kerry is not much different then Bush, it's sad if you can't see that. One day he's against gay marriage, the next for "civil unions", one day for the war, the next agaisnt.

As a Nader supporter, I can go on and on abou how GORE cost GORE the election. You know, the fact that 200,000 democrats in florida voted for Bush, compared to the 98,000+ OVERALL votes Nader received in florida.

And how about the group "Democrats for Bush"? they might have something to do with it, if Bush wins re election. Nader is currently endorsed by the Reform Party, and is one of the front runners in the GP race, though he is running as an independent. he's been polling anywhere from 5-7%, Kerry has led in some polls, and trailed in others, both with and without Nader. Nader's run brings in more votes then a non Nader run. A key thing to remember is that a vote for the lesser of to evils is still a vote for an evil. Research all the canidates and then make your decision. Dubya isn't the only problem in our political system right now, the fix isn't John Kerry.

Nader is indeed running as an alternative to both parties, but his views on most issues tend to swing closer to the left. Sure, he's taking some votes away from Bush, but he's taking a lot more away from Kerry. While Nader himself may dislike Bush and Kerry equally, your typical Nader supporter dislikes Bush more.

For that reason, I sincerely ask anyone who is voting Nader to reconsider what they are doing. He is not going to win, as you already know, but now is not the time to stand up for what you belief is right. Clinton couldn't have beat Bush in '92 without Perot, and Dubya couldn't have beat Gore without Nader.

So if Nader looks like the answer to you, just remember a vote for Nader is essentially a vote for Bush. I urge you to weigh Bush and Kerry against each other, and determine which you dislike the least. You'll probably come up with Kerry, but if you come up with Bush, by all means, vote for him. It'll shut us Dems up about unfair elections.

Yes, because this country needs to be run by neurotic isolationists who are afraid of everyone.

The ultimate solution.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bauhaus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Communism101:
You Americans need a good 3rd party.

---

Libertarian

---

couldn't agree more, also the republican party needs to be replaced by a party that will do more for American sovrienty (by dealing with illegals), and supports Smithian capitalism (instead of giving corperations all of these special benefits).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Communism101:
You Americans need a good 3rd party.

---

Libertarian

You Americans need a good 3rd party.

A rich ***** who is screwing up the elections. Gore didn't need to win.

I just think he is in there to throw off the vote, he isn't in the election to win persay. And he was successful in the gore election and i think he will be successful in this one as well.

Uhhhh....Ralph Nader isn't RUNNING as a Green...just so you know.

I think "messing up the system," while an admirable goal, is not really possible through simply inserting yourself into the presidential race and saying "Look at me! I'm....different!"

Doesnt anyone realize why Nader is running? It's not to be an alternative to John Kerry, it's an alternative to BOTH parties. Nader, and the Greens in general, don't like Republicans or Democrats. He would dislike it if Kerry was elected just as much as Bush.

So bascially, he's doing what we should be doing democractically. The two party system is what we rely on, but it's not absolute concrete.

Nader is a maniac. He thinks he can win the presidency, and he clearly can't. All he's doing is messing up the system. Yes, he has the right to run...but when he consistently gets less than 5% of the vote every time he runs for presidency...does he actually think he can win? Or is he doing it specifically to screw the democratic party over? Crazy lil' egomaniac.

i agree with smurf. no one should be allowed to say "in a recent poll."

nader really shouldn't run. i hope to god he drops out before anything stupid happens. he's splintering the demoratic party.

Nader cannot be blamed for the unrelated failures of the democratic party to establish some sort of party platform and maintain unity.

Man, once you've used the phrase "in a recent poll..." just go away.

As an ardent capitalist and true Republican, I actually like the fact Nader is running.

If the Libertarians can't get anyone on the ballot in November in Texas (my home state), Nader will get my vote.

I'd rather vote for Nader than waste my time with Kerry and Bush.

good, I support nader and what he believes in.. and thats why a lot of you live ****d up lives because you dont stand up for what you believe in. Nader does, he doesnt give a **** what people think.