|
BrAiN
Art Fag


Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
|
Re: Nader gets serious about presidential bid [Re: falcon]
#7961206 - 01/31/08 05:34 PM (16 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Doesn't leading involve pointing out what's wrong with the status quo and offering to try to change it? How is that whining?
If that's whining, then every presidential candidate for the past few months has been a whiner... whiners with more support than nader... but whiners nevertheless
I said it before and I'll say it again. Nader's a great guy. It's his followers that make him look like a douche. They're the hardcore black-block-mommy-and-daddy-pay-all-my-tuition-and-i-spend-all-my-time-bitching-about-capitalism-and-growing-dreadlocks spoiled brats.
Don't confuse that with Nader himself. He's done good things for this country. He's succesfully fought for and won battles to force car manufacturers to create safer automobiles. His umbrella organization helped facilitate the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Freedom of Information Act, Consumer Product Safety Commission, etc. I don't agree with all his views and think he wants to overregulate a lot of things like more of the hardcore democrats do, but everyone's got their own opinions. Don't let that veer you from recognizing the great work the man's done all his life.
Edited by BrAiN (01/31/08 05:41 PM)
|
falcon


Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,005
Last seen: 9 hours, 50 minutes
|
Re: Nader gets serious about presidential bid [Re: BrAiN]
#7961240 - 01/31/08 05:41 PM (16 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Read the article, he was barred entrance, state troupers were going to arrest him, this would have meant big press for him, it would have drawn attention to the that fact that third party candidates are out of luck when it comes to the debate, he can't act on his feet.
Doesn't leading involve pointing out what's wrong with the status quo and offering to try to change it? How is that whining?
An act of civil disobedience that got him arrested would have given him a larger audience. He would have been able to point out what is wrong to a larger group of people.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Nader gets serious about presidential bid [Re: zappaisgod]
#7961251 - 01/31/08 05:45 PM (16 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: If you will recall Nader didn't fuck over Gore so much because Gore voters wanted to vote for Nader. The accusation, with pretty much zero actual support apart from some anecdotal reports from retards, was that people were confused by the ballot and mistakenly selected Gore. Three things about this.
1. No actual proof 2. Should people too stupid to fill out a ballot even have a vote? 3. Isn't it funny that it is naturally assumed that the stupid vote goes Democrat?
A real example of a gadfly candidate who did fuck somebody over is Ross Perot. If it wasn't for that jug eared Martian we never would have had Clinton.
yah, I didn't say I agreed that he spoiled anyone... then again I succumed to stupidity and voted for kerry in 04 as opposed to a third candidate at the last minute to try and prevent bush from winning
What is your opinion on our voting system though, zappa?
Would you support a trickle run-off election where you get a first and second choice vote of the kind endorsed by nader? This would seem to limit the spoiler effect (presuming only one spoiler per popular candidate if you only get on second tier vote)
Quote:
Instant Run-off Voting allows voters to rank their vote -- voters indicate a one for a first choice, two for a second choice, and three for a third choice. This simple but ground-breaking advance in elections ensures that in an election with more than two candidates, your vote can count for your second choice if your first choice can't win. Here's how it works: if a candidate receives a majority of first choices, that candidate wins. If not, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and a second round of counting occurs wherein the eliminated candidate's votes go to each voter's next choice. Rounds of counting continue until there is a majority winner.
http://www.votenader.org/issues/index.php?cid=40
I support this idea in principle, and think it would work better in practice.
Don't know if your a fan of any third party candidates in recent elections, but woulnd't you agree this would be more fair, without favoring either the well known or less known candidates?
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: Nader gets serious about presidential bid [Re: johnm214]
#7961313 - 01/31/08 05:58 PM (16 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
I am certainly not overwhelmed by the efficacy of what is currently the system. For instance it disgusts me unto death that Iowa and NH are so vital. Yeah, I wouldn't weep to see the end of primaries. Cut to the chase, everyone duels against everyone, and the last two run off. I'd go for that. Won't ever happen, though.
--------------------
|
BrAiN
Art Fag


Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6,875
Loc: Chocolate City
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
|
Re: Nader gets serious about presidential bid [Re: zappaisgod]
#7961578 - 01/31/08 06:51 PM (16 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Amen to that... just a giant royal rumble. Technically everyone COULD run all at once... they just wouldnt be able to run under a "party"... but who fuckin cares.
|
|