Warpath

Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)
-   Parking Lot (http://www.thewarpath.net/parking-lot/)
-   -   Ralph Nader (http://www.thewarpath.net/parking-lot/25865-ralph-nader.html)

Mattyk 10-09-2008 11:25 PM

Ralph Nader
 
What are your guys' thoughts on [URL="http://www.votenader.org/issues/"]Ralph Nader[/URL]? Am I missing something? Because the guy seems to have a lot of solid ideas and seems to say all the right things. I went to see him speak back in 2000 and he just made so much sense, too much sense I guess. So why can't this guy get any sort of serious consideration? Is he just so far off the charts of left/right that nobody takes him serious? Is the current system so far gone that someone like Nader is just "too radical"? Why are we stuck with the same old crap that the 2 party system generates? Am I asking too many questions?

saden1 10-10-2008 12:12 AM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
He's just another book peddler now. Same ideas, different year. Keeps hating on corporations as if they are all evil. Another Ron Paul is what he is. Don't really care for him anymore.

12thMan 10-10-2008 12:50 AM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
Other than consumer protection, what else is Nadar really known for. It's not that Ralph Nadar isn't smart or doesn't have the ability to inspire people, but I don't get the sense that Nadar wants to be President. I mean, really wants to President. The issue of leading the country seems to be optional to him. Nadar seems to always be running against other candidates more than actually running for President. And that just doesn't resonate with the majority of the American people.

That Guy 10-10-2008 12:55 AM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
sometimes he can come off as a crack pot conspiracy theorist...

his ideas on military budgeting are out of touch... solar is stupid compared to nuclear, yet that's what he wants to do (solar's cost and huge foot print make massive scaling very very difficult)... so that one's dead too.

speculation tax is a very good idea, and obama has something similar i believe (like .1%)

some other stuff like national initiatives just aren't workable - too easy to abuse and too much apathy. the last thing we need is more legislative churn funded by professional lobbyists.

a lot of it just isn't very well thought out i guess. I'd like to be able to go after corporate crime the way china can, instead of letting everyone commit high crimes with money and get away with a hand slap and 20$mill... and a fair tax wouldn't be terrible either.

SmootSmack 10-10-2008 01:07 AM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
[quote=12thMan;487866]Other than consumer protection, what else is Nadar really known for. It's not that Ralph Nadar isn't smart or doesn't have the ability to inspire people, but I don't get the sense that Nadar wants to be President. I mean, really wants to President. [B]The issue of leading the country seems to be optional to him. Nadar seems to always be running against other candidates more than actually running for President.[/B] And that just doesn't resonate with the majority of the American people.[/quote]

That's it in a nutshell, in my opinion. His platform seems to be "I'm not that guy" (no offense to That Guy)

For those out there who "worry" about McCain's age and believe there is a real possibility that, if he won, Palin would be President, here's a question for you. How would you feel about President Matt Gonzalez, after all Nader is two years older than McCain.

Mattyk 10-10-2008 08:48 AM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
[quote=12thMan;487866]Other than consumer protection, what else is Nadar really known for. It's not that Ralph Nadar isn't smart or doesn't have the ability to inspire people, but I don't get the sense that Nadar wants to be President. I mean, really wants to President. The issue of leading the country seems to be optional to him. Nadar seems to always be running against other candidates more than actually running for President. And that just doesn't resonate with the majority of the American people.[/quote]

yeah that's a good point, I think his motivation is to simply keep plugging away at keeping the idea of a 3rd party alive which is important nonetheless.

Beemnseven 10-10-2008 12:57 PM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
Too many people believe a third party will never work, because too many people believe a third party will never work.

I can't understand it. For ages, the American people have complained about Washington, complained about politics, and freely admit that policitians are all crooks and liars, but continue to put the same two-headed monster in charge in election after election.

For some reason, people in this country cannot fathom the thought of voting differenty than the vast majority -- or as we should call it, the giant herd. Gotta be part of that "[I]winning team[/I]" right?

Until we break loose of that mentality, there will never truly be 'change' in Washington.

12thMan 10-10-2008 01:40 PM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
[quote=Beemnseven;487996]Too many people believe a third party will never work, because too many people believe a third party will never work.

I can't understand it. For ages, the American people have complained about Washington, complained about politics, and freely admit that policitians are all crooks and liars, but continue to put the same two-headed monster in charge in election after election.

For some reason, people in this country cannot fathom the thought of voting differenty than the vast majority -- or as we should call it, the giant herd. Gotta be part of that "[I]winning team[/I]" right?

Until we break loose of that mentality, there will never truly be 'change' in Washington.[/quote]

Well, is it really about whether or not a third party will work or fail? I question whether or not that's the real argument. I think people, especially Americans, love tradition and that sense of pride that comes with being affiliated with a certain party. Families have passed down party traditions and ties to generations

People take great pride in saying this is the party of FDR or JFK or Lincoln or whomever. See what I'm saying? I think it's more about belonging to some long standing ideology rather than a hand full of policy positions that could perhaps make America better.

saden1 10-10-2008 01:59 PM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
Third parties will never flourish as long as people hate the Democratic or Republican party. Plus, why go with Linux when your computer comes pre-installed with Windows and the apps you are familiar with only work on Windows?

The only way I see a third party taking off is if a new party is created by unsatisfied factions of the Democratic and Republican party joining forces to create a new party. Either that or people get tired of spyware and viruses and pull the trigger out of peace of mind or spite.

mheisig 10-10-2008 02:34 PM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
I don't think we'll see a third party unless this country experiences some major upheaval, probably on an economic scale.

The two current big parties are so long entrenched that it's too risky to try anything else for most people.

You'd need a depression on the order of the 1920's or some kind of massive economic collapse before people are really ready to consider an alternative.

SmootSmack 10-10-2008 07:50 PM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
I don't know that the right approach to establishing a third party is at the executive level. If Nader wanted to build a strong party, it almost seems like the better solution would be to build a legislative base first.

That Guy 10-10-2008 10:05 PM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
there is some voter fatigue, so remembering 14 candidates positions and values becomes a lot more work than tracking 2 guys, especially if you're busy (i'm not saying that's my personal take, but an example), and the 3rd parties here tend to try to get elected president first, instead of looking to win local/state seats, then house seats, then get a senator or two...

most presidents are ex-senators or governors...

GTripp0012 10-11-2008 05:17 PM

Re: Ralph Nader
 
[quote=Mattyk72;487902]yeah that's a good point, I think his motivation is to simply keep plugging away at keeping the idea of a 3rd party alive which is important nonetheless.[/quote]A legitimate third party that could actually win a few states would force us to amend the electoral college. Neither the Republicans or Democrats would have a candidate strong enough to pull 270+ electoral votes if say, Nader was pulling 30 in an election.

I do think that the presidential election in November of every fourth year should be between only two candidates, just so we aren't electing a president on a plurality. However, I would like to see a system where those two candidates aren't necessarily one democrat and one republican, but two good candidates that a majority of America could both get behind.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.

Page generated in 0.08458 seconds with 8 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25