Read: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5411492/site/newsweek So... Gonna vote for Nader? Don't forget to pick up you RNC pamphlet on the way out.
im still going to vote for nader and heres why...i live in utah and there is no way utah is going to vote for anything but republican...so a vote for kerry is just as wasted exept if nader can get 5% of votes then a third party will get more funding like the other 2 parties get...honestly i think republicans and demecrats follow the same damn agenda anyway...i liken it to coke and pepsi, whats the damn difference?...did you really give me much choice
I read about this last week I think it was. I also heard that there has already been a complaint/request to the Campaign cops to investigate. If the RNC is using money donated to their party, then funding a candidate from another party with said money is illegal. How low can they go????? Deeper than the sewage flows.... Sue
I've known about this, when I did an article on Nader for my journalism class. It's one big thing that's turned me off from Nader.
Yep, it's rather bothersome to know that Nader would ACCEPT their money. At least that's the first thought I had. Course he might think if they are stupid enough to give it to him, why the hell not use....
Well, we may speculate that, but I think it's pretty clear that most of these GOP donors are donating to Nader because they see him as a convenient tool to undermine their competition. Nader's political stance is in general nowhere near even the old-school Republicans that may not support Bush's brand of Republicanism.
In the last part of the article it mentions that Nader told a gathering "I think I'll end up taking more votes away from Republicans than Democrats." Sounds like he believes those Republicans are actually going to vote for him on November 8th. OR Maybe he's doing what he's been paid to do.
naders not trying to win the election...hes trying to get 5% to get federal funding for a third party next election
These Reps are probably donating to Nader because they see him as an uber-democrat, and anything to draw voters away from Kerry can only help Bush. These guys are all millionaires so $50,000 betweent them is ass wiping money. I guess they think that if Nader can take votes away from Kerry, then Bush has a better chance of winning. At least that's how I understand the article.
Everyone here can believe what they like, that is why this country is so wonderful. I find it ironic, the supposed "liberal" democrats sue someone to keep them from bringing on more competition, mainly because they know that Nader represents what they obviously do not, and a few people from a group known for being (at least in my mind) close minded, unfair, cheating assholes, are giving money to whom I consider "the good guy". Has it ever dawned on anyone that these people giving money are just that, people? Maybe they haven't got some hidden agenda, maybe they simply feel compelled to donate to Nader, so he can at least have the opportunity to try to run a campaign (which we all know will be no where near that of Kerry or Bush). And are you all seriously freaking out over 5%. That is all these supposed people are giving him. Where does the rest of his money come from? Hmm.. at least he isn't stealing it from churches, and manipulating it from people. If I were running for President, I'd take money from them as well... and I would give it to the community, to the programs like housing assistance and education where it belonged to begin with. So Nader is a modern day robinhood, perhaps, though I'm sure to outrage people here with that claim. Honestly, I really do not see what the big deal is. Of course the Nader bashers do and will come up with all sorts of fun conspiracy theories to talk us all out of voting for Nader come fall. Who is playing for what team again? Democrats talk a good game, but they don't do much different from Republicans, and when they can both gang up on someone, or a party, whoooo hooo let the good ol boys go at it. Its funny how concerned you all are that a few GOP members are giving a whopping 5% to Nader to run for president, but you see absolutely nothing wrong with the billions of dollars being spent to invade a country and plunder it. Of course, you are Americans, that is exactly how they have brainwashed you all to think. Funny, how no one cares about the whole "no child left behind" thing which was ridiculously underfunded after promises for more education money. Interestingly enough, no one questions where all the dirty money from the other parties comes from, can anyone say ENRON? And you all honestly know for a fact that Kerry or Bush wouldn't take money from an opposing political party? Hell, I wouldn't put it past them to steal candy from a baby, of course they would. Find something interesting to argue about, there is no story here, they said the same thing 4 years ago.
I question all of those things (well, I think the "no child left behind" idea is sorta daft anyway). Just because I'm liberal doesn't mean I consider Nader sacrosanct from criticism.
Neither do I. I have criticized him many times. One for leaving the Green Party and thinking that he can do this on his own. But I'm not concerned with where he receives his miniscule amount of campaign money when you have got two other major wheelers and dealers doing their best to keep him at bay, by not allowing him to debate, and by the mere fact that they have significantly more money than he does, and only God knows where it comes from. The only reason they even have to do anything about him is because they both see him as a threat, because they know he is right. Wake up people! Good grief what the hell is this country coming to? If you guys want to be fair about this, then I suggest you investigate every single person who runs for any sort of office and find out where every last red cent comes from. Then we can start pointing fingers. Otherwise, this arguement is ridiculous, and only shows the levels that people are stooping to in this election. (as if last election didn't go low enough). Criticize Nader, but come up with something worth worrying about.
If there's anything we can all agree on, it's that Nader has a slim-to-nonexistent chance of being elected. The best he can hope for is that the winning party's candidate will incorporate some of his ideas into their platform. The Republicans don't seem terribly likely to do that, and I've heard that the Democrats have got quite a bit of their platform written. Nader would have been best off trying to get the Democratic nomination...still a heck of a long shot...and at least get the chance to influence the platform and speak on national television at the convention. The way he's doing it now makes him seem like a real egomaniac. Third parties face serious uphill battles in the USA. You need incredible money and a large, skilled organization behind you. Perot had gobs of his own money behind him, and he still didn't really make much of a dent. I'm voting for Kerry not so much out of a desire to see Kerry in office, but I'm going to do every little thing I can to help unseat Bush. I'm voting for Kerry and plan to donate money to a campaign for the first time.
