Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC News)   Nader has nothing better to do while waiting to throw the race to President Bush. So in the meantime he's going to sue Oklahoma   (channeloklahoma.com ) divider line
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

13832 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Mar 2004 at 4:33 PM (12 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



246 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2004-03-22 04:57:49 PM  
Edsel
Ok, I thought REAL HARD about it and I still don't see it. I live in Virginia. My friends and neighbors will carry the 13 EC vote for Bush. My voting for Nader in the hopes that I will have more options in the future will in no way impact the Kerry's inability to capture my state's votes.

/now I'm gonna think REALLY, REALLY HARD
 
2004-03-22 04:58:10 PM  
"Senate President Pro Tempore Cal Hobson, D-Lexington, said Oklahoma's..."

Cal Hobson is my neighbor.

Won't you be my neighbor, too?
 
2004-03-22 04:58:22 PM  
As much as I'd hate to say it, Nads does have a point. I am a semi-educated person in Oklahoma. But,why would I want to vote for a schumk like Bush, or a limp fart like Gore? Let me write in a vote. then, give me someone worth voting for. Like Jello Biafra! Seriously, the only person(s) I would have voted for in 2000 was John Hagelin, or Biafra.
 
2004-03-22 04:58:25 PM  
What song are the neo-cons singing as the dow starts to slide below 10,000?

/off topic
 
2004-03-22 04:59:03 PM  
I have no problem with the Green Party. I have a problem with Nadar. He made it clear to me the day after the election last year that he cares nothing for this country or for that matter the Green Party.

Besides, the Green Party has always lacked at any platform that is not Environmental related.
 
2004-03-22 04:59:40 PM  
Dragon of Avarice

Bi-partisan politics really is the way to go. Having one large party would be even better, but people would never go for it. I can just imagine the outraged cries from people who do not understand the merits of such a system.


Holy shiat, not this fascist bullshiat again. Why don't you go live in North Korea if you love totalitarian parties so much, OK?
 
2004-03-22 05:00:12 PM  
GOSH I wish Fark posters would use a little more restraint in the headlines with the politics and the things and the stuff.
 
2004-03-22 05:00:21 PM  
Nadar isn't green? Wow, my apologies. Seems the Greens did something smart. Again, I apologize.
 
2004-03-22 05:00:54 PM  
SuperSquirrel
All he wants is 15% of the popular vote so that the Green Party gets Federal Funding. Nothing else.

seinfreak
For a 3rd party to be taken seriously and actually heard, it NEEDS federal funding. How else can it compete with the powerhouses that are the Republicats?


well, it doesn't appear the greens want him this time around, either. granted, a lot could change between now, and the end of June (when they do their convention) but as is, Nader is behind two other candidates on the delegate count...by a rather substantial amount.

honestly, i could see voting for nader if you wanted to give the greens (or another party) a chance at federal matching funds the next time around...but it doesn't appear as tho nader is going to even have that going for him.
 
2004-03-22 05:01:17 PM  
boo headline writer.
 
2004-03-22 05:01:21 PM  
*sniff-sniff* Better git the horses to the barn. Flamewar's a-comin.
 
2004-03-22 05:02:33 PM  


Nader is a self-serving ass.

That is all


Ralph Nader is many things, and part of his shtick requries an element of self-promotion. But to go on and call a very active and legitimately concerned citizen a self-serving ass is pretty vapid.

Nader.org


Perhaps you need to see an actual self-serving ass to reaquire some perspective. how about Ed Whitacre ?
 
2004-03-22 05:03:52 PM  
I am an oklahoman and kinda literate, but this and one other state are the only states where we can't vote for a green or a Libertarian...It sucks, man.
 
2004-03-22 05:03:56 PM  
2004-03-22 04:57:05 PM beeferoni

Oh jee-ZUZ are we gonna get into the Nader Stole Votes Lameass Argument again?

When we had the shameful travesty which was the Florida Recount?

Puh-LEEZ. If you want me to leave that out of the picture, kindly leave YOUR part out...
 
2004-03-22 05:06:05 PM  
Perhaps the Green's can hate Nader, but he brought far more legitimacy to the party than it's had in a long time. A Green presidential candidate showing up in the returns ? not this year.
 
2004-03-22 05:06:48 PM  
I'm not from Oklahoma, but I currently reside here and I am counting the days until I leave. You cannot get a tattoo legally in this state. You cannot be "real" porn here, you can only get the spice channel variety. If you want to be cold beer, it can only be 3.2%, anything more must be sold warm. When I first got here, I figured they must have the best schools in the Nation, because they sure aren't putting money into the roads. For a state that doesn't get much snow and doens't use salt when it does, the roads are terrible. PA has better roads than this place. Then to find out, the state's education system sucks also. In my son's school district, the state cut their funding by $9.3 million last year. His schools system has two head football coaches and 6 paid assistants. Do you think any of them were let go? Nope, but my wife, who was a librarian, did. Football is seen as the only way out.

+++goes to take blood pressure meds and drink a 3.2 beer
 
2004-03-22 05:06:56 PM  
he wants is 15% of the popular vote so that the Green Party gets Federal Funding


Nader is NOT running as a Green candidate. He's running as an Independent.
 
2004-03-22 05:06:59 PM  
Nader has never been a member of a political party. He says he made a promise to his father that he would never join one. That is why he usually runs as an independent.
For him to run as the Green candidate in 2000 was unusual.
 
2004-03-22 05:07:07 PM  
In Florida, here's how the votes broke down:
George W. Bush 2,912,790 Republican
Al Gore 2,912,253 Democrat
Ralph Nader 97,421 Green
Patrick J. Buchanan 17,412 Reform
Harry Browne 16,102 Libertarian
John Hagelin 2,274 Natural Law/Reform
Howard Phillips 1,378 Constitution

I'd blame Howard Phillips for throwing the race to Bush since he got more than twice the difference between Bush and Gore.
Nader got half the number of votes that were either discarded or illegally denied voters for 2000.

Keep up the falacy. It makes people almost think that there's a possibility for a 3rd party, but that you definitely should never vote for them.

Wake up
 
2004-03-22 05:07:48 PM  
Parties outside america's two-party system are vital for a thriving democracy.

They will champion issues that are important to americans that dems and reps are afraid to talk about lest they meet some terrible political misfortune.

Third party and independent folks are the true makers of change in american public policy.
 
2004-03-22 05:08:41 PM  
Wake up

Yes America needs to wake up that it's time for a well-organized third (or fourth or fifth) party...

What's YOUR point?
 
2004-03-22 05:08:58 PM  
Stupid Stupid Stupid


/Chris Farley
/ALWAYS refresh before posting. Thank you.
 
2004-03-22 05:09:51 PM  
In the 2000 election (or any other presidential election), all that mattered in selecting a president was how the Electoral College voted. Did ANY of the Electoral College vote for Nader? If there were no EC votes for Nader, then how could anyone be accused of throwing the election to Bush by voting for Nader?
 
2004-03-22 05:09:58 PM  
2004-03-22 04:59:40 PM
pontechango

Holy shiat, not this fascist bullshiat again. Why don't you go live in North Korea if you love totalitarian parties so much, OK?

//

Who said anything about totalitarianism? You are completely misrepresenting the spirit of what I said. This sort of propaganda and smearing should be beneath you. I am just suggesting what is best for the country and its people.
 
2004-03-22 05:10:07 PM  
Nader...

Even his own party isn't backing him. What an attention whore.

My own problems with him go back to "Unsafe at any speed". My Mom, and later myself, had a 1960 Corvair (I'm dating myself here), and there was nothing unsafe about it. Lord knows, if I couldn't crash it, no one could.

He needs to move on, or just pass away. Whatever...
 
2004-03-22 05:10:31 PM  
Well, as for me I still have a grudge.

Where is my damn corvair!

Damned it, on of the few rear engined cars worth having and that asshole put out enough self aggrandizing propaganda to kill it.

Well mr 'your rear engine car is unsafe at any speed', don't you farking dare go after Moller.

I don't know, perhaps he would be a better conservative than bush, bush is one hell of a weak conservative.

So, if you are republican, and are tired of the current retard, I think we have a replacement retard coming up.
 
2004-03-22 05:11:18 PM  
Hey, at least Ralph Nader maanged four appearances on Saturday Night Live, one time as host (1977) back when it was funny, and most of you were in diapers.
 
2004-03-22 05:12:10 PM  
Skeeter1

I'm dating myself here


Why should you be different from the vast majority of Farkers?
 
2004-03-22 05:12:44 PM  
as long as we are in oklahoma:

All the voters are standin' like cattle
All the voters are standin' like cattle
They don't turn their heads as they see me ride by,
But a little brown mav'rick is winkin' her eye.

Oh, what a beautiful mornin',
Oh, what a beautiful day.
I got a beautiful feelin'
Ev'rything's goin' my way.
 
2004-03-22 05:13:17 PM  
The Left sure was clicking their collective heels together when Perot was pulling votes away from the Republicans, but when Nader does the same to them, it just isn't fair!

It's amazing to me how the Corporate Press doesn't give ANY coverage to third parties. If conservative voters ever were exposed to Libertarian, constitutionalist philosophy, the modern, liberal Republicans would lose voters in droves.
 
2004-03-22 05:13:20 PM  
**Applauds for Crackeur and pgoat**

Why is it that no other democracy on the planet is limited to two parties? Voting is supposed to be an expresssion of ideals and perspective, not a bandwagon marketing appeal. "My Dad voted Democrat and so will I."

I refuse to choose the lesser of two evils and I refuse to vote for Ted Kennedy's whiping boy just to spite GW.
 
2004-03-22 05:14:13 PM  
I guess people are still sore about having to wear seatbelts, and, you know, live through accidents.
 
2004-03-22 05:15:17 PM  
Blahbbs: In the 2000 election (or any other presidential election), all that mattered in selecting a president was how the Electoral College voted. Did ANY of the Electoral College vote for Nader? If there were no EC votes for Nader, then how could anyone be accused of throwing the election to Bush by voting for Nader?


Ross Perot didn't get any Electoral votes in 1992, but he certainly affected the national election...

/you're an idiot if you believe what you wrote...
 
2004-03-22 05:16:37 PM  

modern, liberal Republicans


you left out the sarcasm tag
 
2004-03-22 05:17:11 PM  
2004-03-22 05:13:17 PM StrikitRich

Maybe because much of the mainstream press is owned by big money that's staunchly Republicrat...
 
2004-03-22 05:17:23 PM  
skeeter1

Beat me by one (got it right that time) post.
 
2004-03-22 05:17:51 PM  
2004-03-22 05:07:48 PM
the_pgoat

Parties outside america's two-party system are vital for a thriving democracy.

//

I find this to be completely unfounded and misleading. Two party (one, ideally) systems spur a vast amount of work and change. They bring about innovations and enhancements to our lives. They have helped make this country great.


//They will champion issues that are important to americans that dems and reps are afraid to talk about lest they meet some terrible political misfortune.//

Sure, they will "champion" them all right, but when it comes down to it, nothing will be changed. When all is said and done, they cannot take the office of president of the United States because the people have no reason to vote for them.


//Third party and independent folks are the true makers of change in american public policy.//

Examples?
 
2004-03-22 05:18:56 PM  
This is a reasonable lawsuit. Think of all the people of Okla. who will be denied the right to vote for Pbsaurus because he doesn't want to play the crooked signature collecting game that's been fixed by the parties. Forget about the stupid Presidential campaign, Ralph, and focus on this issue.
 
2004-03-22 05:19:39 PM  
Hobson also said that write-in candidates spoil ballots after the primary.

by spoil, does he mean make it not look presentable? or does he mean 'dirtying' it with a non repub/dem candidate?
 
2004-03-22 05:20:22 PM  
StrikitRich: It's amazing to me how the Corporate Press doesn't give ANY coverage to third parties.


Well, maybe if third parties managed to do some serious grassroots work and became more than a statistical blip, then the "Corporate Press" might start paying attention.

Typically, when third parties manage to become more than a statistical blip, they get coverage...Anderson, Perot, Nader as examples...
 
2004-03-22 05:21:03 PM  
Two party (one, ideally) systems spur a vast amount of work and change.

Ummm, one ideally?

Like Iraq?

Like the Soviets?

Like China?

Please tell me I'm misunderstanding something here. Please.
 
2004-03-22 05:21:47 PM  

If there were no EC votes for Nader, then how could anyone be accused of throwing the election to Bush by voting for Nader?

In Florida, here's how the votes broke down:
George W. Bush 2,912,790 Republican
Al Gore 2,912,253 Democrat
Ralph Nader 97,421 Green
Patrick J. Buchanan 17,412 Reform
Harry Browne 16,102 Libertarian
John Hagelin 2,274 Natural Law/Reform
Howard Phillips 1,378 Constitution

if Nader was NOT running, then where would those voters have gone ? the majority would not have vtoed at all, the rest would have sent their votes to other people. It is not hard to nonjecture that Al Gore would have aquired probably 10,000 more of these votes than GWB.

thus, Florida probably would have gone to Al Gore in that case (even with all the vote counting foofoorah). With Florida's EC votes, Gore would have been President.

no, I don't really want to debate this imaginary scenario. Nader did run, and the election went to Bush.

There were other states where a similar analysis holds true.

The same will not happen this year, so it is just idle chit-chat and hypothetical at this time.
 
2004-03-22 05:21:57 PM  
Two party (one, ideally) systems spur a vast amount of work and change.

One, ideally? As in, say, Iran? I don't see a whole lot of change, especially in Congress. I think you're just used to the status quo. So, unless my candidate is guaraunteed to win, I should vote for his opponent? What if I vote my conscience, rather than what my union leader tells me?

Ok, let's put the two parties asside, can we at least get 50% to 75% of registered voters to show up and do something?? It's sooo hard to not be apathetic to this political environment....
 
2004-03-22 05:22:34 PM  
how does someone who's greatest life achievement was writing a book that got the Yugo banned qualify for President? Thats his only claim to fame. Its not even like that took a lot of brain power, everyone knew the Yugo sucked ass. 3rd party candidates are fine, but I am officially ABN Anybody but Nader...
 
2004-03-22 05:23:31 PM  
They have helped make this country great.

It's a good thing what you say isn't Law, DOA...

and don't forget about the plethora of parties that we've had in the past...from the Whigs to the Know-Nothings...THEY made this country great.

THEY brought "about innovations and enhancements to our lives."

A one-party system is like some military dictatorship. And it oughta be...
 
2004-03-22 05:25:23 PM  
Dragon of Avarice

Bi-partisan politics really is the way to go. Having one large party would be even better, but people would never go for it. I can just imagine the outraged cries from people who do not understand the merits of such a system.

I'm with you!
It worked for Nazi Germany, it worked for the Soviet Union, and by golly, it'll work for us!
 
2004-03-22 05:27:37 PM  


Bi-partisan politics really is the way to go. Having one large party would be even better, but people would never go for it. I can just imagine the outraged cries from people who do not understand the merits of such a system.


troll
 
2004-03-22 05:27:53 PM  
And don't forget the SOCIALIST party...Eugene Debs...the man never got to be president and went to jail...but he sure influenced a lot of Americans...

Dragon of Avarice...you're either a fool or a troll...
 
2004-03-22 05:28:04 PM  
Well, I'm somewhat literate and in Oklahoma (go Pokes!) and Nadar didn't even manage to get on the ballot last time...and that was with the backing of the Green Party. He's in for a long haul if he thinks he can suddenly change the way Oklahoma handles elections.
 
lbn
2004-03-22 05:29:51 PM  
"Freedom of choice" apparently lost on submitter.
 
Displayed 50 of 246 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report