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 -
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 -
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
posted by johnb
on Nov 5, 2000 -
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 -
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 -
I just got polled for the presidential election
. . .and they didn't even mention Nader's name as a choice for president! I had to tell them 'I am voting for Ralph Nader." Ralph is pulling 6% in recent national polls. This really gets me steamed that they don't include his name in the %#@*!! polls.
posted by snakey
on Oct 22, 2000 -
Hey Bay Area Nader fans -- get your tickets!
(if you haven't already) -- 6:30 PM today at the Kaiser Arena in Oakland: the only
California Super Rally, featuring Cornel West, Medea Benjamin, Danny Glover, Jello Biafra, Patti Smith, Tom Tomorrow, and other surprise guests! For those who can't make it there will be a Live Webcast
available at votenader.org
posted by johnb
on Oct 21, 2000 -
MetaFilter has already noted
that Ralph Nader was prevented from debating Gush and Bore in the presidential debates hosted by the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD)
. Here is Nader's letter to the commission explaining the events and also making three demands that come due October 10...
posted by lagado
on Oct 9, 2000 -
Well here's why Ralph is running.
Do the other guys have anything this succinct and clear-cut? I can't find on the 'Net any page, nor have I heard in any of their speeches, where Bush or Gore come straight out and state exactly why they're running.
posted by ZachsMind
on Aug 6, 2000 -