Ralph Nader
(23 votes, average: 2.26 out of 5)You need to be a registered member to rate this post.
Loading ...
Add to favorites Tags: Politics
Processing your request, Please wait....
Leave a comment ?
(23 votes, average: 2.26 out of 5)You need to be a registered member to rate this post.
Loading ...Add to favorites Tags: Politics
February 25, 2008 at 7:27 am
Is this thing still alive, or is this the Zombie-Nader?
February 25, 2008 at 8:41 am
He just announced that he’s going to try to steal votes away from the Democrats.
To quote: “If the Democrats can’t landslide the Republicans this year, they ought to just wrap up.”
February 25, 2008 at 8:45 am
is it just me… or does his name sound like Darth Vader ?
February 25, 2008 at 10:17 am
I like what this man stands for, hate ‘em for the first 4 years of G.W. Bush.
February 25, 2008 at 12:31 pm
He did a lot of (controversial) good in the 70s and 80s in terms of consumer protection. Then he threw it all away by running for president in 2000 and staying in til the end.
If he had just dropped out when it looked like the race was going to be close… he could have endorsed Gore in exchange for a prominent advising position in Gore’s administration, giving Gore the win. In such a position, he could have gotten a LOT done for the causes that he claims to care for.
Instead his overinflated ego and self-righteousness made him stay in until the end, even though he knew he couldn’t win, and now he’s nothing more than a blowhard gasbag has-been who’ll go down in history not for being a consumer protector or environmental activist, but for playing the spoiler in the most contentious election in U.S. history and playing a large part in allowing for the appointment of the worst president ever.
I hope he’s skull-fucked by a rabid bison in front of his family on live television.
February 25, 2008 at 1:17 pm
deuce is 100% correct!
February 25, 2008 at 1:19 pm
“most contentious election in U.S. history”
You mean the 1876 election between Rutherford B Hayes and Samuel Tilden?
Or the 1888 election between Harrison and Cleveland?
Or the 1960 election between Kennedy and Nixon?
The spat in 2000 probably isn’t even in the top 10 most contentious elections in US history.
February 25, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Ok, excuse me, I should have said “most contentious election in U.S. history that MATTERED” which leaves out the 19th century… and as for Kennedy vs. Nixon, Kennedy’s dad may have had the Mafia rig the Ohio election, but at least the guy with the most votes (fake or not) was allowed to take office and the election didn’t have to be decided by 5 Bush family friends on the Supreme Court.
February 25, 2008 at 4:50 pm
I concur with reboot on this one, the 2000 election was close, but there have been closer, and there have been others elected president who did not win the popular vote. Just because it was the most recent controversial election does not make it the most important deuce. And it is the presidents prerogative to appoint Justices … get over yourself deuce.
February 25, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Oh and the worst president ever, that title belongs to Andrew Johnson.
February 25, 2008 at 4:54 pm
Hahaha, Kennedy vs. Nixon has got to be the funniest election ever, in part because one of the candidates refusing to wear faggy makeup was one of the main deciding factors. And now all the male candidates wear faggy makeup, which I predict will become less and less subtle until the whole campaign will be a drag contest.
February 25, 2008 at 5:15 pm
@Caio:
Clown contest
fix’d
…. Am I the only one who wants to see Hillary with clown make-up? I’d laugh.
February 25, 2008 at 5:25 pm
From your posts, BowToMe, I gather that you don’t understand the definition of the term “most contentious” (it doesn’t necessarily mean “most important” or “closest”) and that you have no problem with Supreme Court judges halting perfectly legal recounts and declaring their buddies the winner of Presidential elections (and declaring that such actions shall not set precedent, meaning it will only work for Bush Jr.). Also you seem to think a less-than one-term impotent douche bag who got almost nothing done is somehow worse than a 2-term soulless monster who wreaked incalculable damage on the country’s foreign and domestic policies while his party and his opponents alike fully capitulated, but that’s a matter of opinion I guess.
February 25, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Hayes was actually pretty influential for single term President. He officially ended Reconstruction, dealt with continuing civil rights conflicts and used federal troops to put down labor riots that were starting to turn into a 2nd Civil War.
I only brought up those other election to give some perspective. In 100 years, some jack-ass the Internet is going to be dismissing Bush, the 2000 election and the war in Iraq the same you way dismiss the entire 19th century.
February 25, 2008 at 5:55 pm
loller, people will remember and discuss Iraq just about as much as they currently remember and discuss America’s wars with the Barbary Coast.
February 25, 2008 at 6:52 pm
^^^ That is assuming America’s power and influence will continue to grow for another 100 years.
February 25, 2008 at 7:44 pm
We’re all getting away from the point, which is Ralph Nader is a douche.
February 25, 2008 at 8:52 pm
^^^ agreed!
February 26, 2008 at 6:23 am
I’d say he was more of a Zombie-Douche…
It’s that “Evil Dead / Bad Ash” look on his face.
February 27, 2008 at 1:09 am
I like how you blame one of the candidates rather than the gaping flaw in your voting system.
Having a two party system is not healthy for democracy.