Ralph Hearts Hillary

http://www.watchingamerica.com/beijingnews000009.shtml
Even though there are other candidates participating in the battle, a common opinion holds that the Democratic nomination will be a clash between a woman and an African American.

After many years of lies, delusions and neo-conservative rule, the American Public can endure no more. [The Chinese characters for neo-conservatives (阴阳失调) stand for Fire-God Faction] Americans no longer wish to live in Bush's shadow, and are looking forward to building a new America. At this moment, two new stars have emerged in the opposition camp. To have two such fresh faces at once is extremely rare in American history. Whether it's Hilary or Obama, both are full of personal charm – which is in stark contrast to the rigidly conservative Bush Administration. And both candidates have toyed with the same message:“It's time to rebuild America's Image.â€

MJ here...Who knows if this article from the Beijing News will bear fruition, but if it comes to pass, then perhaps it WOULD be a good time for Nader to run again. After the Gore debacle I'd guess fewer democrats would vote for him, but republicans who would never vote for a democrat and who are sick of the neocons destroying America would. Remember, during Perot's run it was republicans who were so enthralled with his third party candidacy. Even if Nader didn't win (again!) he would empower a third party movement which might just catch on this time, and to my way of thinking this would be a good thing.

 

I'd rather see Nader campaign for the Green Party than further divide the real opposition to business as usual (Republimocrats.)

 

I voted for Nader in 2000 because we NEED a third party, the progressives NEED a voice in Washington (especially at that time). I didn't see it as "voting for Nader" but "Voting for the Green Party".

I did NOT vote for Nader in 2004 because, as an independent, he was running just as an ego thing, not helping anyone anywhere. Seeing as the Green Party didn't really have a serious campaign, I held my nose and voted for Kerry.

Now that Democrats are FINALLY realizing they don't have to reach as far to the right as possible, I may vote for them in 2008 (depending on who the candidate is). If they nominate another bozo just because polls say "they're electable", if the Green Party has a serious candidate I will vote for them again.

 

Military budget? Nader is talking about pensions?

Why isn't he talking about the environment, global warming, alternative energy, conservation?

Nader made a name for himself as a champion of public safety. He was "Mr Consumer Reports" to me, a walking, talking consumer safety advocate.

Well, I don't consider the military budget and corporate pensions in the same league. I do consider C02 emissions and importation of oil a public safety issue.

Nader is becoming a one-note. If he runs, he'll get even less notice and less votes than the last time. He's had his 15 min.

 

Nader is a far left, Perot was a centrist. There is a big difference.
This is why Nader is not talking about environment and global warming. He wants to approach things as more of a centrist this time and pull votes from both parties instead of wacking off the far left wing of the democrats again. If only some candidate would arise that wacks off the far right wing of the republicans! One of those "elected by god" types.

Personally, I'd like to see a Ventura type centrist, like a Gary Johnson