Nader said he would only accept contributions from individuals and not from corporations.  If every Republican sent him a small contribution he would have enough money to run a meaningful campaign and siphon off enough votes from the Democratic Candidate in November to cause the Democrats to lose.  Think of it like the same sex marriage issue.  The issue came along just in time to energize voters who might not have been motivated enough to vote without the issue.  Of course, we all knew the constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage was bull shit but it worked.  I have no doubt there are enough idealistic Democrats who would vote for Nader and thus sink their candidate.

but when you're right, you're right.

Anybody who's being honest with himself, even the biggest right winger in the world has to admit that the same sex marriage houpla was what got George W reelected. As you said, it was bullshit, but it worked.

A vote for Nader is a vote against Obabma, I think I'll write him a check today. If Nader runs and gets even two percent of the vote it will prove what I've been saying for years, "The democrats are too stupid to be trusted with running this country."

and it's not about trust.   You can trust a stupid man.  It's the corrupt man you can't trust.

But who's gonna win a footrace between a stupid man, and a corrupt one?  

And do you think you are gonna influence it?  Do you think you are TRUSTING the Republicans to run the country?  Or more like, BENDING OVER?  What you're trying to do is hope you're high enough on the food chain to get a few crumbs.

Everybody just keeps on doing what they have always been doing.  Republicans are corrupt, Democrats are dumb.  

So exactly why are you complaining about Democrats who are smart enough to feed the dumb ones a line of hope, and control what, 40% of the voters?   That's enough bucks for a few good times, I think.

which is not all that uncommon. I'll take corrupt every time.

A smart, yet corrupt individual will do what is in his own best interest. You never know what a stupid person will do.

and yes, I am high enough ont the food chain to get a few crumbs. I am there through hard work, and I am sick and tired of those lazy mother fuckers who want the lions share of what I have earned. If you want to be higher on the food chain, get off your lazy ass and work for it, and while you're at it stay the fuck out of my wallet.

Dems are stupid, but after the last few presidential elections they have learned enough to deploy similar techniques by now on stupid conservatives.  And with a Republican candidate that already doesn't toe the line, it would not be hard to field a "real" conservative as another capital (I).

Stupid people voting.  I can't wait.

Nader will not make any difference I do not think.Its possible, I just don't think he has enough credibility left--at one point he was a novelty and a "protest" vote, but I don't think many voters are going to go for that any more.
But if they do they will be Dems so welcome back

which of course you have to be stupid to believe.  

What you don't know is what the other fella - whether he's corrupt or stupid - thinks is in his best interest.   Or thinks at all.  

If you were to bet on who would do what, I'm thinking you would outguess the stupid fella more often than the corrupt one.

A stupid fella can usually eventually be taught not to shit where he eats.  The problem with the corrupt one is that he doesn't care.   And that becomes everybody's problem.

You're more than just a little short-sighted here in failing to understand that the argument is about what the gov't should do - you're a regular crybaby slacker.

For example, should the govt be handing contracts to people to build shit that everybody knows is going to get blown down?  Or should they be putting more money into county revenue & recovery?   I find it amazing how Republicans will whine about paying for roads unless it's the roads to THEIR development.

votes in 2004 and the last time I checked, Democrats seem pretty enthusiastic about their choices. I bet he'll get more votes from disgruntled Republicans who can't stomach voting for McCain.

I know you have ideas and thoughts you are trying to express in writing.  However, your thoughts are so disjointed and poorly written that it is hard to follow the message you are trying to convey.  To help remedy this problem I suggest you do the following:  First of all think about what you want to say before you start writing.  After you have reduced your thoughts to writing, read what you have written. If it doesn’t make sense to you it’s not going to make sense to the reader.  You should start by identifying the subject you are writing about, and then articulate your opinion.  If you want to cover more than one issue make sure you don’t commingle more than one subject in the same sentence or paragraph.  You should be able to string your thoughts along in an organized form so the reader can understand what it is you are trying to say without having to re-read the material and “guess” what you mean. Syntax is important when writing but as you can see, it’s lacking in this forum.  However, punctuating a sentence correctly gives a certain amount of credibility to your point of view.  Separating thoughts with a series of periods or dashes in not punctuation; it is an indication the author lacks the skills to properly compose a sentence. Writing is a form of communicating: Like all forms of communication, the idea is to express a thought, or thoughts, as clearly as possible.  

I'm not talking to the folks who can't follow 2 lines.

For that matter, nobody does.

BTW, paragraphs are your friends.

-- Modified on 2/25/2008 7:43:10 AM

Disgruntled Republicans who believe McCain is not a true conservative are going to vote for the biggest, socialist leftist of them all??  That makes so much sense.  You...are....so....smart!!!!

only white guy not named McCain on the ballot, I would say that yes they will. You are apparently stupid enough to believe that he has a chance of winning. Most people who vote for him will not be that stupid and will know that they are throwig their vote away in a giant FU to the GOP.

that means if one of Huckabee's supporters is so teary-eyed that Mike's not on the ballot that he votes for Nader, that could still be "more" than the Democrats who vote for Nader - who could conceivably be zero.

So surely you are not just another hostile, illiterate Republican?  I hope not.

If Gore had only one percent of the estimated four percent of the votes Nader received, Gore would have won: The election was that close.  The Republicans who are the most disenchanted with McCain are the conservatives. However, I doubt many conservatives would vote for Nader regardless of how much they dislike McCain.  A vote for McCain would really be a vote against the Democratic candidate. So far neither Obama nor Clinton appears to be too concerned about Nader entering the race.  At least that is what they are saying publicly.  However, several of the Democratic strategists are very concerned.  At this point it is too early to assess what impact Nader will have on the election.  We will just have to wait and see.

any ballots yet and with his piss poor showing in 2004 I imagine he will have a harder time getting on any this time. And second, anyone who votes for him at this point has no intention of voting for a Democrat anyway.

intention.

Let's see if you can follow this very complicated logic.  Some Democrat voters went for Nader over Gore because he ran well left of Gore.  Many liberals were upset with Gore's very moderate positions he held in 2000.

The ballot will have plenty of candidates running well RIGHT of the moderate McCain.  Nader isn't the only alternative candidate out there.  Arguing from a position of ignorance and stupidity is not the best way to go.

I can defintiely see an evangellical Huckabee supporter from South Carolina voting for Nader and not a liberal with green dreadlocks and a nose ring from Seattle.

You definitely know people.

because you aren't gonna learn to read anytime soon.

then you really are an idiot pretending to be an asshole, rather than an asshole pretending to be an idiot. I guess there is another possbilitly, are you just so bored that you'll take on any argument, no matter how hopeless?

The thought of a Republicans voting for Nader because they're pissed at McCain just proves my earlier point, Democrats,especially ones like Bender, are just too stupid to run anything.

"any ballots yet and with his piss poor showing in 2004 I imagine he will have a harder time getting on any this time. And second, anyone who votes for him at this point has no intention of voting for a Democrat anyway."



 Jeremy I thought you already knew there are some ridiculously Dim Dems out there, and many will vote for Nader..

are illiterate, only a high correlation.

"Jesus fucking christ - not yet PROOF that Republicans are illiterate, only a high correlation."

What the fuck are you trying to say? I know that Quad is a high school drop out, what's your excuse? I hope you were drunk when you made this post. I speak drunkenese and various other dialects of stupid and illiterate, but I have no idea what the fuck you are trying to say.

Please take your meds and come back when you are able to compose a coherent sentence.

...Starbucks would have been opened tonight.  But I have to go to Dunkin' Donuts for coffee.  Thanks, you fuckin' Dems.  Thanks a lot.

the fact that hardly anyone voted for him in 2004 and he was not a factor. This is a non-story.

voted for Nader in 2000 because they believed him when he said there was no difference between Gore and Bush. Four years later and hardly anyone voted for Nader because they saw that that was BS. Now after four more years of this disaster, I really don't think there are many left who believe this.

By the way, I simply said that more Republicans will vote for Nader than Dems. That does not mean that many will. After all, he got 0.3% of the vote last time. I assume that he will get less this time. It should only take 2 Republicans voting for him to to pass the Dems.

Hey stupidass! Ann Coulter said she was voting for Hilary. Give me a break. Are you telling me that that makes more sense than a repug voting for Nader?


-- Modified on 2/26/2008 7:17:49 PM

I've read it drunk and I've read it sober. I doesn't make any sense either way.