Letters to the Editor
-
In defense of Nader
Of course Nader said he couldn't see any meaningful difference between Bush and Gore right before the 2000 elections. He was running against both of them.
And Nader wasn't entirely wrong (although he was mostly wrong) about Al Gore in 2000. The Al Gore who ran for president in 2000 is not the rockstar Al Gore of today. The Al Gore of 2000 seemed to have the life, spirit and passion focus-grouped out of him. And as against George W. Bush many of us were in 2000, few of us thought he'd turn into a despot-in-training who'd start a pre-emptive WWIII in the Middle East.
The country, if not the world, would have been better off with a Gore presidency. But being out of politics allowed Gore to flourish and be himself in a way politics never allowed.
Although the Edwards Campaign isn't touting Nader's support, it does matter among small groups: 1) angry Democrats who appreciate Ron Paul's respect for the Constitution and 2) populists dissatisfied with corporate America. These are the types of people who liked Nader and are looking for a presidentially-viable version of Nader this time around.
Edwards is Nader with an actual chance at winning the presidency. Don't discount the power of angry populism. It's how Edwards is running and it's how Nader made a name for himself in consumer advocacy. Something for which we still owe him a debt of gratitude. Even if we're still mad about 2000.
-
Gore was running for office in 2000
That accounts for a lot.
-
Nader was running...
....is what I meant.
Of course Ralph is going to place Gore and Bush in the same 'establishment' camp in 2000.... He was running for office.
Now he's advocating, which is what he does best.
-
Sorry folks, but....
Ralph Nader is irrelevant.
Most people don't give a damn what Nader has to say.
-
I wonder if.......
...... Nader would have run if he had known how aweful Bush was going to be. I think he picked the wrong time and/or the wrong method to make his statement about our system. Now he needs to make amends for the damage he indirectly did, and go back to doing what he does best: advocating for the consumer and the average american citizen. He's been awol for the past decade. Get off your lazy egotistical but Nader, your nation needs you!
-
Remember folks:
Ralph Nader did not choose our President, the Supreme Court did.
-
Salon is
so outrageously in Clinton's corner that an endorsement for Edwards has to be spun into a chance to burnish Clinton?
This is outrageous.
So if this is the "War Room," from its first day a distasteful name, the war is now Clinton versus all challengers?
Sickening.
-
Ralph Nader's foggy crystal ball
The author's argument is fallacious. The context of Mr. Nader’s statement makes clear that he was speaking of the chances of Mr. Gore’s successfully implementing his views as policy were he to have become president. In all likelihood, his efforts would not have been terribly successful. (Mr. Gore's performance in the Florida extravaganza alone argues against it). Perhaps it is unfair to judge him by the record of compromise on significant issues by the Clinton Administration; but it can hardly be considered more probable that he would have prevailed against the enormous and powerful opposition that would have arrayed itself against him than that he would have failed.
Matters look different when we consider Mr. Nader’s own case: it would seem both these gentlemen function more effectively outside government than in it.
-
And of course
he was right when he said that. What did Al Gore do to promote environmental sanity as an elected office-holder? Right. As it turns out, not that much. He attended Kyoto, but that treaty was never endorsed by the U.S., so...
Gore has done a lot of good work on the environment, just not when he was in office. And that's what Ralph was talking about.
-
Did Nader ever apologize for helping put Bush in office?
Nope. He never has. And he denes all culpabilty. And the same crap he now throws at Hillary (corporatism, the sin of moderation, etc.), he threw at Gore. I know for a fact that Bush won New Hampshire by 5000 votes. Nader got more than 15,000 votes. If Gore had won New Hampshire, he would have had more than enough electoral votes to beat Bush. But no. Up to the end, knowing he could not win, Nader chose to sacrifice the well- being of all Americans (and the world) at the alter of his own self-interest. Truly a scumbag despite his initial good work on consumerism.
-
Nader did not beat Gore
That's a myth. Nader's only crime is to advocate for issues that American's have become too programmed to care about. He's no saint, and he's about as charismatic as a 5 lb. bag of potatoes, but if he's irrelevant, it's on us, not him.
-
@ Sorenreport- Yes truly only a "scumbag" challenges the two party system
Unfortunately its all to easy to look back upon the Clinton era of the 1990's with rose colored glasses as one views the devistation wrought by the current adminstration.
-
Nader
The man has done some good works, no question, and we should be grateful to him for that. But he has become a major ass-hat and needs to go live quietly in the woods, now. 'Bye, Ralph...and thanks for everything.
-
Myth??
Would someone care to present evidence that Nader did NOT hand the 2000 election to Bush?
-
Nader and the 2000 election
If Ralph Nader was not in the race, both New Hampshire and Florida would have fallen into Gore's column. There would be no tight race in Florida, and even with a Florida loss, New Hampshire by itself would have put Gore over the top. No need for a Supreme Court intervention.
In fact, without Nader in the race, Gore would have probably done a lot better all around. Gore spent a lot of time campaigning against Nader in states that should have been Democratically safe in order to prevent them from going over to the Republican column. Without Nader, Ohio and its 21 electoral votes would have probably gone to Gore. Without Nader, Bush would have spent more time playing defense in order to keep Republican states safely Republican. The whole election dynamic would have changed.
Gore had an excellent environmental record before 2000 and Nader pooh-poohed it because Nader was too much into his own little warped world. The only change for Gore is that after 2000, he gave up politics and discovered other aspects of his life. He started Current TV, serves on the Apple board, is a technical adviser to Google, and now is a Nobel Prize winner.
We lost a lot in the 2000 election, and Ralph Nader played a not so insubstantial role in that.