Ralph Nader, Howard Dean to Debate, Associated Press Reports

[Pink Spider]

Does anyone think that Kerry will have the courage to debate Ralph personally? I think not.


Ralph Nader, Howard Dean to Debate, Associated Press Reports

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a_9a8Eo3mkZU&refer=us

July 1 (Bloomberg) -- Independent U.S. presidential candidate Ralph Nader and former Democratic contender Howard Dean will debate on July 9 before a studio audience, the Associated Press reported.

The 90-minute debate will be sponsored by National Public Radio's weekly show ``Justice Talking,'' and correspondent Margot Adler will moderate, AP said.

Dean has been asking his supporters not to vote for Nader. Dean is urging them to stay within the Democratic Party and support Senator John Kerry from Massachusetts, AP reported.

Dean said in a statement he wants to hear Nader talk about why he wants to run for president. Many Democrats believe it is Nader's fault that Bush beat Al Gore in 2000, AP reported.

In a statement, Nader said the debate would offer a chance to discuss how to revive U.S. democracy by giving voters more choices than a ``two-party corporate duopoly,'' AP reported.

(AP 7-1)

[Guitar Shark]

LOL! Who cares?

[Pink Spider]

Apparently Kerry and the rest of the DLC, if they're bothering to send out their attack dog.

What's Kerry got going for him besides the fact that he's not Bush?

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by Pink Spider
What's Kerry got going for him besides the fact that he's not Bush?

He is electable.

[Pink Spider]

And that's what's wrong with this country.

Strom Thurmond was electable. What's the big deal?

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by Pink Spider
And that's what's wrong with this country.

Strom Thurmond was electable. What's the big deal?

Actually, what's REALLY wrong with this country is the fact that an idiot like Bush is also electable. Go figure.

[Pink Spider]

"Because Kerry is electable", "because Kerry is not Bush" aren't exactly the best reasons to vote for Kerry. You know, you need something valid like this: Kerry is a war supporter, Nader is anti-war. Kerry supports NAFTA, Nader supports fair trade. You know valid reasons why Kerry should get anyone's support. That's all I ask for.

[Guitar Shark]

They may not be the "best" reasons from your standpoint as a Nader supporter. However, they are the "best" reasons from my standpoint as a Bush hater. Nader has ZERO chance of ousting Bush. Nada, zip, zero. In fact, Nader's only possible role in this election will be as a spoiler. This is why any "debate" between him and Dean is pointless.

Kerry/Edwards have a realistic chance of beating Bush. Even if I didn't like their positions on all issues, they'd still get my vote for that reason alone. And even if we had a viable third-party candidate system in this country I wouldn't vote for Nader anyway, because he's way too liberal for my more moderate political views. It doesn't get any more "valid" than that, no matter what kind of spin you want to put on it.

Vote for Nader if you want, but don't complain if we get another four years of Bush as a result.

[Satan]

Originally posted by Pink Spider
You know valid reasons why Kerry should get anyone's support. That's all I ask for.

Junior will pack the Supreme Court with fascists for decades.

And that's about the ONLY valid reason. But considering it was BCE appointed judges who put the Chimp in office, that may be reason enough. But that sure as Hell doesn't mean Kerry gets off easily. I'll probably be MORE critical of him than I am of the BCE, Because I expect them to act like fascist idiots.

[Big Train]

Is this NOT a fucking job interview?? Cause he is electable is he fucking weakest reason I have ever heard for a candidate. For that reason alone Bush should win. If the Democrats don't think their man can beat Dubya on his own, then fuck him, he doesn't deserve the spot.

I think Nader is an interesting guy although I don't think I would vote for him. He is a bit extreme for my taste. HOWEVER, he deserves the chance to debate and roll with the big boys, as does any other party that wants to come along and talk. It is a job interview, bring in ALL the applicants.

The reason Nader SHOULD run is to get the 5% vote they need to get federal matching funds, which to me is the real reason both parties are worried about and the Dems have the extra worry of not pulling it out because of precious swing votes. If Nader runs and gets that 5%, next time around they WILL be there for the debates and their is nothing the the Republicans, the DNC or Mr. Civil Liberties Michael Moore can do about it. Check out Ralphdontrun.org to see how Mr. Moore would like to contain your freedom of choice in the name of democratic party hypocrisy.

[Pink Spider]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark


They may not be the "best" reasons from your standpoint as a Nader supporter. However, they are the "best" reasons from my standpoint as a Bush hater. Nader has ZERO chance of ousting Bush. Nada, zip, zero. In fact, Nader's only possible role in this election will be as a spoiler. This is why any "debate" between him and Dean is pointless.

Kerry/Edwards have a realistic chance of beating Bush. Even if I didn't like their positions on all issues, they'd still get my vote for that reason alone. And even if we had a viable third-party candidate system in this country I wouldn't vote for Nader anyway, because he's way too liberal for my more moderate political views. It doesn't get any more "valid" than that, no matter what kind of spin you want to put on it.

Vote for Nader if you want, but don't complain if we get another four years of Bush as a result.

I didn't know that you were one of the moderate fence sitters, AKA neo-liberal or a conservative Democrat. That explains a lot. My mistake.

"Vote for Nader if you want, but don't complain if we get another four years of Bush as a result."

Only if you don't complain that we'll still be in Iraq because those contractors paid off the Democratic party also.

[Satan]

Originally posted by Big Train
Check out Ralphdontrun.org to see how Mr. Moore would like to contain your freedom of choice in the name of democratic party hypocrisy.

Once again, Michael Moore is not a member of the Democratic Party. Naturally the Busheep obsessed with bashing him can't seem to grasp that reality, clinging to the FAUX News created myth that "only terrorist sympathizing liberal Democrat communists can possibly have a problem with our wonderful appointed by God Himself pResident"

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by Pink Spider
"Vote for Nader if you want, but don't complain if we get another four years of Bush as a result."

Only if you don't complain that we'll still be in Iraq because those contractors paid off the Democratic party also.

Your premise is flawed, but it's a deal regardless.

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by Big Train
Is this NOT a fucking job interview?? Cause he is electable is he fucking weakest reason I have ever heard for a candidate. For that reason alone Bush should win. If the Democrats don't think their man can beat Dubya on his own, then fuck him, he doesn't deserve the spot.

I think Nader is an interesting guy although I don't think I would vote for him. He is a bit extreme for my taste. HOWEVER, he deserves the chance to debate and roll with the big boys, as does any other party that wants to come along and talk. It is a job interview, bring in ALL the applicants.

The reason Nader SHOULD run is to get the 5% vote they need to get federal matching funds, which to me is the real reason both parties are worried about and the Dems have the extra worry of not pulling it out because of precious swing votes. If Nader runs and gets that 5%, next time around they WILL be there for the debates and their is nothing the the Republicans, the DNC or Mr. Civil Liberties Michael Moore can do about it. Check out Ralphdontrun.org to see how Mr. Moore would like to contain your freedom of choice in the name of democratic party hypocrisy.

Oh, go vote for Bush and leave us alone.

[Satan]

Not to get back on topic or anything, but.... When will this be on the radio, and does NPR have a live streaming feed?