Looks like the end is in sight.

November 22, 2000 11:38 AM

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 (12 comments total)

What's Nader doing now? I haven't seen any updates on his page in a while -- and I'm especially curious about where his suit against the Debate commission is going.
posted by snakey at 11:45 AM on November 22, 2000

I, DoublePostGuy.
This is being covered twice?
God, what have you done???

http://www.metafilter.com/comments.mefi/4407
posted by DoublePostGuy at 11:59 AM on November 22, 2000

It's all about priorities. Nader is great for a handful of things, and has no record or a poor record in everything else.

It's niave to think one man will mirror your political leanings 100%, and even more niave to think that Nader's one strong suit (he can't be bought or sold, aside from all those shares he holds in companies he criticizes) makes him the ideal candidate.



posted by jragon at 12:00 PM on November 22, 2000

As I stated before the election, Nader has a way of disappearing after elections which is why I have always questioned his commitment.

I am curious as to whether he will work for the party—which he hasn't joined—to help get Greens (or other third party candidates) elected in 2002.

My guess is that he will simply continue to skulk around Dupont Circle out of the spotlight. Which is unfortunate, because he should lend his name and time to continue the fight he started.
posted by terrapin at 12:17 PM on November 22, 2000

You may be partly right, there, jragon. Nader's campaign took a contrary stand on issues that the GOP and Democrats have in common, (NAFTA, Iraq, the death penalty) and brought up issues the 2 parties never addressed, like the drug war, military spending and treaty rights.

Meanwhile, Nader had very little to say about social security, and he wasn't as Gung-ho as Gore on abortion.
I'm sure you know other issues where Nader has a poor record . . . help me out here.
posted by snakey at 12:28 PM on November 22, 2000

to set the record straight. i'm no Naderite (Nader as Savior). i just said he was right on that issue. didn't mean for this to be a Nader thread. ah, the joys of MeFi. (my intent was more of a rant that none of the options was a good one. i didn't vote because of it. i would like a vote to indicate support at some point, not the choice of the perceived least evil.)

doublepost guy: same event, different spin (as the direction of the thread shows). are you the MeFi enforcer?
posted by Sean Meade at 12:36 PM on November 22, 2000

Enforcer or not,
That he replied in haiku
Is kind of spiffy.
posted by youhas at 1:21 PM on November 22, 2000

Spin within first post.
Do not spin a second thread.
Take advice. Live long.
posted by MarkBakalor at 1:30 PM on November 22, 2000

Regardless of what they think of Nader, lots of folks, especially progressive Democrats, think that the two parties cater to the same corporate interests.

It was particularly telling that Gore never adopted any of Nader's agenda, even when he was chasing Nader's votes.
posted by snakey at 1:31 PM on November 22, 2000

granted, the first two haiku were spiffy.

i hear the double post critique.
posted by Sean Meade at 7:28 PM on November 22, 2000

i didn't vote because of it.

Then kwitcher bitching. If you couldn't find enough to like in Bush, Gore, Nader, Buchanan, Browne, Hagelin or Phillips to actually drag yourself to the Votomatic and impregnate some chad, you have no right to complain about the mess we're in. Some states even allow you to vote for None of the Above.
posted by rcade at 8:51 PM on November 22, 2000

that 'kwitcher bitching' if you didn't vote argument is old and tired. the material point is it wouldn't have mattered anyway. voting is not the ante for political discourse (cf Jim Lehrer).
posted by Sean Meade at 9:09 AM on November 27, 2000