Ralph Nader appraises Obama's first 9 months as president (guess how he feels). Warning: video starts automatically (with bizarre illustrative clips occasionally thrown in).
[more inside]
posted by leibniz
on Oct 14, 2009 -
189 comments
DontvoteRalph.net "Look at just a few of those who supported Nader in 2000, but see that this year is crucially different: Noam Chomsky, Ben Cohen, Peter Coyote, Phil Donahue, Ronnie Dugger, Jim Hightower, Robert McChesney, Michael Moore, and Bonnie Raitt. In fact, can you think of a prominent supporter from 2000 who supports him in 2004? Are we all members of Nader’s “liberal inteligentsia”? Or is the Bush presidency simply such a disaster that we realize there is only one responsible action for real progressives? Despite Mr. Nader’s inevitable disagreement, we don’t think everyone is out of step but Ralph." | So who is supporting Nader?
Some think its the GOP.
posted by skallas
on Jun 23, 2004 -
41 comments
Electoral slight of hand is suggested by NYT columnist Bruce Ackerman in his opinion piece for May 5th, where he suggest that Nader choose Kerry's electoral slate when filing for the November election. It's a clever idea, and I'd be interested in seeing if it has any traction.
posted by silusGROK
on May 5, 2004 -
52 comments
My Life as Ralph Nader's Flunkie Ralph Nader believes an independent candidacy should "generate more understandings and support for major new directions for our country." His website says these new directions include "repeal of laws that obstruct trade union organization by millions of workers mired in poverty by wages that cannot meet their minimum family livelihoods." The site prescribes "a living wage for tens of millions of workers making under $10 an hour." But the perennial leftist candidate, whose name will appear on the presidential ballot for the third consecutive time this November, has not played by the same rules he strives to make binding for corporations and private businesses.
posted by Postroad
on Apr 27, 2004 -
19 comments
Ralph Nader: The Unchallenged Hero of Muslims Before you jump to note that the magazine this appears in is Right of Center, what you need to ask is how well documented is the case being made. For me, what is of interest is that if Nader is in fact liked by Muslims, as this suggests, then Muslims may vote for him and take votes away from Bush or would they take votes from Democrats?
[...]Nader must have made quite an impression, because the next year, ICNA's former president invited him to headline an Islamic conference in Florida with none other than Shaikh Abdur-Rahman Al-Sudais, a top Saudi cleric who has called on Allah to "terminate" Jews -- "the scum of humanity" and "grandsons of monkeys and pigs" -- while urging Muslims to shun peace with Israel.[...]
posted by Postroad
on Mar 26, 2004 -
31 comments
Ralph Nader's Dark Alliance - (LA Weekly) In search of support for his candidacy, "...Nader has now jumped into bed with the ultrasectarian cult-racket formerly known as the New Alliance Party and its guru, Fred Newman" who "recruits and controls his followers through a brainwashing scheme baptized "social therapy," designed to create blind allegiance to Newman", and who has "dipped his rhetoric in the poisonous blood-libel of anti-Semitism, denouncing Jews as "storm troopers of decadent capitalism."". More on this
right wing cult ( via
Orcinus)
posted by troutfishing
on Mar 4, 2004 -
19 comments
Ralph repents? Or something? The man many Democrats see as just a few steps short of an evil spawn of Satan for being a 2000 election spoiler has issued statements of support for 13 non-Green candidates in tight races. These are
all Democrats, including Jean Carnahan (Mo.), Tim Johnson (S.D.) and Tom Strickland (Co.). "I certainly don't want Republicans controlling Congress," Nader said. What happened to the "things have to get worse before they get better" theory? Or has the situation in D.C. indeed grown so bad that at least
some Dems. are turning far enough left for Nader? (Note: He'd thrown support behind Wellstone, even though there's a
Green candidate for Senate in Minn.)
posted by raysmj
on Oct 31, 2002 -
44 comments
Ralph Nader's at it again. The Nation's Top Consumer Watchdog apparently is a Kings fan. He's taking the NBA to task for the phantom fouls and blatant non-calls in Game 6 of the Western Conference finals. Can't say as I blame him though. That was some pretty crappy officiating. But doesn't he have better things to do?
posted by shecky57
on Jun 5, 2002 -
36 comments
Enron? Nader is glad you asked While Democrats are readily dismissive of Nader's efforts, claiming he wrecked their chnces in the last election, the Demorats and the Republicans seemed incapable of standing up to the corporations and the largesse being handed out.
Could Nader have made a difference? Or, better, can he now make a difference?
posted by Postroad
on Feb 10, 2002 -
9 comments
Nader to Gates: "It is significant that a small number of persons who run the company hold a substantial share of the stock in the company, a fact that is very unusual for such a large publicly traded corporation."
"This also raises questions about whether or not these persons, including yourself, are accumulating these staggering sums of cash to advance other agendas, rather than to advance the interest of shareholders."
Nader Nader Nader
posted by crasspastor
on Jan 8, 2002 -
29 comments
Is Nader Right? Or is he just fooling himself? I mean, even I can tell the difference between Democrats and Republicans. Apparently, the best Ralph can ever hope for is to ruin the Democratic party. If I were a Republican, I'd be donating to the Green party right about now.
posted by Jart
on Sep 6, 2001 -
69 comments
Unrepentant Nader Is Nader a Sancho Panza, the realist, or Don Quixote, the dreamer, when he says Bush policies toward environment help ignite attention to our needs and thus good to have?
Or is he just a guy who can't believe he might have been wrong?
posted by Postroad
on Apr 23, 2001 -
76 comments
Nader editorial in the WSJ (with another guy). They were prolly watered down a lot and given that "two cheers for the president" sub-title, but Nader still seems remarkably sanguine about Bush's plans to rein in corporate welfare.
posted by kliuless
on Mar 7, 2001 -
4 comments
"My Untold Story" - What if we threw a presidential campaign and nobody came? Ralph explains how he tried to engage the press, and why it didn't work.
posted by fleener
on Jan 26, 2001 -
20 comments
What went wrong for Ralph? Now that the whining and accusations has died down a little, it's time to finally ask the hard question:
So why did Ralph Nader do so badly?. Did his campaign drift too far left? Was Winnona LaDuke the right running mate? Did the Green party help or hurt him? What did Nader himself do to screw his own campaign.
posted by lagado
on Nov 28, 2000 -
16 comments
Looks like the end is in sight. And I'm glad. I'm so sick of the political rhetoric I could puke. I wish more people could address these issues with clear thinking, instead of defaulting to the rhetoric of the side they tend to favor. If anyone else says 'The American people want...' I will puke. Looks like Bush is going to win. Who cares? Nader is right: they've both been bought and sold. People who harp on 'the very clear policy differences' aren't making enough allowances for the other dynamics.
posted by Sean Meade
on Nov 22, 2000 -
12 comments
So, I guess, everyone is now ready for the greatest competition on Earth? It sure took long enough to get here and everyone has been intensively jockeying for position. It looks like it's going to be a exciting event. The whole world will be watching.
What, the election? No, of course not, I'm talking about the one and only
Melbourne Cup. Needless to say, I'm backing Diatribe (9 to 1). Oh, and here's one more
election story.
posted by lagado
on Nov 6, 2000 -
10 comments
Why the Democratic Party would rather lose this election --
Michael Albert clarifies the strategic implications of voting Nader: "Liberals talk and write as though the most important thing in captivity is their winning the election, or at least Bush not winning it. But at the top of their campaign, centrally important policies demonstrate that winning the election is not, in fact, their first priority. For them, priority one is serving the interests of their elite constituencies, and, just below that, of the Party itself...."
Also: hard-core Nader junkies should check out this vigorous (but quite long) rant:
What every Republicrat should know (but is afraid to ask)
And, finally, a reason to join Greenpeace: new executive director John Passacantando takes a
refreshingly sane, nonhysterical approach to Election 2000. Amen.
posted by johnb
on Nov 5, 2000 -
24 comments
Nader Responds to Accusations of Hypocrisy “I will fight for the U’wa and investor accountability by backing a shareholder resolution at the next Annual General Meeting of Fidelity Investments–one of the largest shareholders in Occidental Petroleum and I urge social and environmental screens as a filter for all holdings."
posted by snakey
on Nov 3, 2000 -
13 comments
Nader Pro and Con (omnibus). The L.A. Weekly brings you about 20 prominent liberals' statements on whether they are voting Nader or Gore, and why ... captures pretty much all of the nuances in once place.
posted by MattD
on Nov 2, 2000 -
0 comments
Jesse Ventura talks about his bid at Governership and voting your conscience. There's more than a little in common here between his campaign and Ralph's.
posted by skallas
on Nov 1, 2000 -
0 comments
Nader's new television ad parodies those hilarious monster.com ads with the little kids hoping they'll grow up to have crappy jobs. In the Nader ad, the kids hope they'll grow up to have the same crappy politicians, sold out to corporations, with no real change.
posted by daveadams
on Oct 31, 2000 -
6 comments
Not exactly "Green". "The trouble is, Nader seems uneasy being Green. He refuses to join the party (never has joined one, and swears he never will). And while he matches the Greens in anticorporate fervor—our current government is "of the Exxons, by the General Motors, and for the DuPonts," he says—the environment seems rather low on his policy agenda. Last year he devoted just three of his weekly syndicated newspaper columns to the subject. "
posted by owillis
on Oct 30, 2000 -
8 comments
Unsafe in any state. Salon trashes the Nader campaign big time, mainly claiming that his run for the Presidency is "reckless" and "dangerous". In an alleged democracy, doesn't any candidate who passes muster with the entry requirements have the right to run for the office?
posted by ethmar
on Oct 30, 2000 -
38 comments
