The power of the individual and the web

The power of the individual and the web
: On Meet the Press, Ralph Nader is being forced to watch the wonderful Flash appeal on So a few people who created this are being heard on national TV and are confronting the very man they want to confront. Now that’s power.

And, of course, Ralph is deaf to it: “That’s the liberal intelligensia… That’s a contemptuous statement.” He argues that anyone is trying to stop him from running.

No one is trying to stop you. Many are trying to get you to stop yourself, to be responsible, to recognize that you’ve become a destructive self-parody of political ego.

Ralph, you old loon.

: Here’s Nader’s campaign site. Let’s start a GoogleBomb. Here is the election spoiler.

: No blog. No forum. No chance to hear the voters speak on Ralph’s site. He doesn’t care to listen. That’s obvoius.

: NZ Bear just sent me email; noticed the same thing.

Ralph is deaf.

: Nader calls for the impeachment of Bush. “If there’s any better definition for high crimes and misdemeanors than misleading” regarding the cause to go to war he doesn’t know it, Nader tells Tim Russert.

: “We can’t just sit down like The Nation magazine,” says Nader. Russet read Nader The Nation’s editorial begging Nader not to do what he is doing this morning. Bitchslap.

: “Spoiler is a contemptuous term,” says Nader. Yes, Ralph, it is.

  • Micah Sifry, an erstwhile Nader fan, on Nader telling the NYT, “I really don’t deal with the Web. There isn’t enough time in the day to go into virtual reality.”
    Sifry: “That quote should lead Nader’s political obituary.”

  • Ebb Tide

    The Dems have to stop blaming Ralph Nader… they have to start taking responsibility for losing in 2000 without blaming the 3% who voted for Nader, if Gore could not carry Tennesee (HIS HOME STATE) and lost Florida because Nader got 22,000 and some old people Voted for Pat Buchanan by mistake and the 9 people in Maine voted for Nader (or where-ever it was up north)… forget it! Move on, to coin a phrase. Let Ralph Nader run, if the Deaniacs support him, great! Write it off and cut your losses….. I refuse to blame Ralph Nader for the failure of the Democratic leadership in the 2000 election… they have to take responsibility for what the Democratic Party stands for NOW, if anything, and not worry what 3% of the voters did in 2000.

  • Richard Heddleson

    Harold Stassen never hurt anyone by running and neither will Ralph

  • Ann Rogers

    The two political parties are not divinely ordained, nor should devotees howl that anyone defying their candidates is a “spoiler.” There are legitimate issues like corporate control of washington that deserve to be aired, and a ken-doll candidate like kerry certainly won’t carry that banner. maybe nader doesn’t win, but his lifetime of public service has earned him a hearing and america has a proud tradition, including one theodore roosevelt, of third party candidates.

  • JorgXMcKie

    I suppose Nader’s campaign should then lead to new laws or constitutional amendments limiting the candidates for the Presidency of the US to just those who manage to gain the nomination of one of the two major parties? Wow! Let freedom ring. That’s what we need, a limit on who we can vote for. That will certainly make us more free. In fact, why such pusillanimous limits. Why don’t we forbid anyone from running for election unless directly selected by the Republicans or the Democrats? Then we’d be even more free. Wait! We would still have to cast those nasty old ballots. Why don’t we get the major parties to select *all* the candidates for office and then hold coin-flips to decide the outcomes? That way we’d really, really be more free.
    Go Ralph. Lead the way to forcing the Repbulicans and Democrats to relieve us of all that work and slavery of making choices about who should govern us.

  • I don’t think Ralph is deaf. Can’t deny he’s gotten an earful. He’s clearly heard it all, and doesn’t care.

  • Ralph Nader has every right to declare his candidacy. Voters have every right not to sign his nomination petition, not to contribute to his campaign, not to listen to his speeches, not to vote for him. He has done, and led others to do, great things. But helping George win is not one of them. Nor will helping Bush win a second term be one of them.

  • Dave

    The negative reaction from Dem circles regarding Nader is just amazing.
    If Dems truly believe that he will see less support than 2000, there being no rationale for him running other than “ego”, “tone deaf”, etc why do they all seem so worried.
    If I take everyone at their word, then Nader has no support, then he’s no threat, right? Ignore him and let him run.
    So what if Nader is nuts and his ideas are insane. At least he’s got the balls to participate in the democratic process.
    Sounds more like people are worried about Nader, but just can’t bring themselves to admit it?

  • hen

    Nader had far less to do with Bush winning in 00 then the dems give him credit for — exactly how many votes did Nader “take away” from Gore in TN, Gore’s homestate? What about Arkansas, the state of Clinton, the man who Gore called “America’s greatest President”?
    Nader is not the problem. The problem is the dems have put up defective candidates and then try to blame someone else (Nader for Bush, dumb Americans for Bush 1, racists for Reagan, etc).
    Maybe a little bit of introspection is required Representative Cohen?

  • Dems

    DON’T, Ralph, DON’T! Our candidates are so bad they can’t win on their own merits!

  • SM

    You was just as het-up about that Perot feller, right? Hate them “spoilers” all the way round, right cuz? Ain’t never been room for mor’n two parties in these United States. Yessir!

  • Maynard

    Hate Perot? Damn right I do. Not for being a spoiler, spoilers don’t pull in 19% of the vote, but for being a crazy MF and wasting the passion and commitment of the people who might just have formed a viable third party to challenge the two entrenched and increasingly corrupt institutional parties we have now.
    Oddly enough SM, I’m willing to bet that all the Dems out there who are wailing and nashing their teeth over Nader’s entry into the race would be a-hootin’ and a-hollerin’ for joy if Forbes or Buchanan decided to enter as a third party “spoiler” to challenge Bush from the right. I guess it’s only lamentable if it hurts the Dems and not the GOP. I believe that is a perfect example of Hypocrisy in action – and the very reason I am neither a Democrat or a Republican.

  • Joe Peden

    Nader’s entry can only be seen as patriotic: he knows the terminal danger we’d be in should a Democrat win the Presidency. At first light, I’m getting ready a contribution to Ralph.
    With Saddam setting up Bush by faking like he had big stocks of WMD’s, Ralph’s run is only fair play.

  • Bernrd Brandes Award Nominee: Ralph Nader
    There is a venerable tradition of revolutions eating their children, but “unsafe at any speed” Ralph Nader has just upped the ante.
    Just when Christopher Hitchens (“All Against Bush”) was beginning to persuade us that John “Edwards is the right guy to do it”, along comes Ralph Nader, bearing
    meat tenderizer, apparently intent on making the ending of Tennessee Williams’s Suddenly Last Summer look like an ice cream social.
    New Mexico Democratic Governor Bill Richardson was not too concerned about displaying his contempt for Nader: “It’s his personal vanity because he has no movement. Nobody’s backing him.”
    Wrong, Governor Richardson.
    Mr Nader was spurred on by his ardent blogosphere advocates at LET RALPH RUN and was not about to be deflected by such contemptuous terms as “spoiler”.
    But Mr Nader may soon find that, although there has not been a surfeit of left deviationists to kick around for a while, the end of the spectrum that brought us Bush=Hitler has a vocabulary that goes well beyond such rude terms as “spoiler”….

  • “With Saddam setting up Bush by faking like he had big stocks of WMD’s, Ralph’s run is only fair play.”
    So…. Saddam Hussein “set up” Bush simply to spur Nader to run? (Saddam “sets up” Bush and ends up deposed, forced to hide in a sewer, and captured in jig time. Some setup.)

  • disgusted vet

    More to the point, Governor Richardson: Who is backing YOU? What corporations make up YOUR “movement”? Where is any evidence of
    YOUR grassroots? “Personal vanity”, indeed!

  • Actually, I have proposed a different (and somewhat less civil) Googlebomb on my own blog:
    I’ll back whichever of these gains momentum.
    – B

  • John Lacny

    Here’s a much better Google Bomb.
    Andy Stern of SEIU is diagnosing Nader as a malignant narcissist. The definition of a malignant narcissist is as follows:
    “An all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning by early adulthood and present in various contexts.”
    Isn’t it time for a Google Bomb along the lines of the miserable failure efforts of a few months ago?
    Shouldn’t we do something to expose this malignant narcissist?