Posted on 05/24/2004 12:50:09 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:15:29 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Ralph Nader's presidential campaign is urging Democratic contender John Kerry to condemn a new political group, the National Progress Fund, which is running ads telling Nader supporters that voting for the consumer advocate would help President Bush.
"We would like to see a clear message from Mr. Kerry that he opposes this effort against Ralph Nader," said Nader campaign spokesman Kevin Zeese. "If we don't get it, we will feel that he deserves credit for it."
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Yes. I daresay. :)
I love how Ralph Nader and John Kerry are "progressive", but George W. Bush is "radical".
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
- Inigo Montoya from The Princess Bride
Haven't you heard? They are no longer "liberal," they're "progressive." You must be a "neocon."</"Where do they come up with this crap?" sarcasm>
;o)
I think John Kerry and his supporters should spend a great deal of time wooing the Ralph Nader supporters. Explain precisely why someone who is a dyed-in-the-wool Nader supporter should feel perfectly comfortable casting a vote for Kerry. In what ways will President Kerry govern exactly the same as Ralph Nader?
So far the only issue where I've heard Kerry take a firm stand is: Kerry is not Bush. Well, Nader is also not Bush. Is Kerry promising to rape businesses with confiscatory taxation and oppressive regulations? Is Kerry promising to pull all our troops from Iraq immediately and unilaterally? Is Kerry promising to pay more attention to the environment than to job creation?
Ralph Nader's supporters are very passionate and care deeply about certain issues. John Kerry should explain to those people precisely why they should abandon Nader for him.
The Republican Party is often dismissed as the "Stupid Party", all too often with some justification. Of late the Democrat Party is doing a fine job as the "Stupider Party".I still like this formulation (I forget who said it):
Elections in America are most often between the Stupid Party and the Evil Party.
"Progressive" implies there is a goal to progress to?
Does anyone know what the "progressive" agenda is and what their goals are?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.