The journey from there to here
Published on April 27, 2008 By Gideon MacLeish In Politics

As the election year drags on, I have actually begun giving strong consideration to voting for a candidate I would have never considered. While I disagree with many of his ideas, it is quite possible (depending on the LP candidate) that my vote may go for Ralph Nader.

Why is this? First of all, integrity. While I don't fall for the "Chicken Littles" of this world, Nader is at least a true believer. One who takes his responsibilities seriously. You can use a lot of adjectives to describe Nader; "phony" isn't one of them. The same cannot be said of Obama, Clinton, OR McCain. All three of those candidates disgust me to no end.

Next is the fact that Nader is not a major party candidate. To pass any legislation, he will definitely need bipartisan support, meaning he will work harder to find ideas that can actually PASS through Congress. Sure, some bad legislation will get through as well, but again, with "Run OMC", we're going to see a lot of garbage legislation as well.

In an election that offers us no real choices, but only the lesser of several evils, I may just have to bite the bullet and vote the lesser of several evils. And that just might lead me to cast my vote for Nader!


Comments
on Apr 28, 2008
I agree - he is true to his core. And that is why I cant vote for him, but I do respect him.
on Apr 28, 2008
with "Run OMC",


on Apr 29, 2008

The minute Nader said that everything over $100,000/year should be taxed at 100%, he proved that he is "unsafe at any speed".

 

on Apr 29, 2008
As the election year drags on, I have actually begun giving strong consideration to voting for a candidate I would have never considered. While I disagree with many of his ideas, it is quite possible (depending on the LP candidate) that my vote may go for Ralph Nader.
Why is this? First of all, integrity. While I don't fall for the "Chicken Littles" of this world, Nader is at least a true believer. One who takes his responsibilities seriously. You can use a lot of adjectives to describe Nader; "phony" isn't one of them. The same cannot be said of Obama, Clinton, OR McCain. All three of those candidates disgust me to no end.
Next is the fact that Nader is not a major party candidate. To pass any legislation, he will definitely need bipartisan support, meaning he will work harder to find ideas that can actually PASS through Congress. Sure, some bad legislation will get through as well, but again, with "Run OMC", we're going to see a lot of garbage legislation as well.
In an election that offers us no real choices, but only the lesser of several evils, I may just have to bite the bullet and vote the lesser of several evils. And that just might lead me to cast my vote for Nader!


Nader is nothing more than a has been who long ago jumped the shark into irrelevance. He can't stand the fact that he is meaningless in this day and age and his only true long term legacy is his infliction of the cancer known as the Bush presidency on the US.
on Apr 29, 2008
He can't stand the fact that he is meaningless in this day and age and his only true long term legacy is his infliction of the cancer known as the Bush presidency on the US.


Seriously. Did he even run last election, or does he only do that when a Dem might win?
on Apr 29, 2008
Seriously. Did he even run last election, or does he only do that when a Dem might win?


Kind of like Perot on the other side.
on Apr 29, 2008
Nader is nothing more than a has been who long ago jumped the shark into irrelevance. He can't stand the fact that he is meaningless in this day and age and his only true long term legacy is his infliction of the cancer known as the Bush presidency on the US.


The fact is, the entire "Run OMC" crew sucks. And while most of your points are spot on, the fact that Nader can't get a majority of party members on his side in Congress kinda gives me warm fuzzies!
on Apr 29, 2008

Politico:

Nader is nothing more than a has been who long ago jumped the shark into irrelevance. He can't stand the fact that he is meaningless in this day and age and his only true long term legacy is his infliction of the cancer known as the Bush presidency on the US.

Your own comment proves he isn't "meaningless", but that tired "Bush didn't win" stupidity sure is.

on May 01, 2008

Ralph Nader only hurts the Democrats as was shown in the 2000 Elections when his votes hurt Al Gore and stole the victory from the Democratrs.

on May 01, 2008
Ralph Nader only hurts the Democrats as was shown in the 2000 Elections when his votes hurt Al Gore and stole the victory from the Democratrs.


How did people exercising their right to vote "steal" anything from anyone? You act as if Al Gore had some kind of "right" to those votes.
on May 01, 2008
How did people exercising their right to vote "steal" anything from anyone?


In the "royal droit" of the liberal mindset, anything that does not fulfill their right to power is theft.