The only thing Nader is good for these days is confusing democrats to vote for him. I'd love to see him on the ballot but really overall he just doesn't matter.
This election will not be a good one for Democrats if Nader drains many votes from them. Historically, presidents who get a second term make their most unpopular decisions during the second term because they can't get re-elected anyway. What will Bush do if he gets re-elected? He could effectively overturn Roe v. Wade through executive order, start a war with Iran or Korea or China, release pseudo-scientific studies declaring homosexuality to be a mental illness, continue to chip away at the Bill of Rights,
effectively overturn Roe v. Wade through executive order
And through the Republicans into political disorder? Though the religious right is one of Bush's constituancies, there are still more people who either belive that 1. it isn't the government place to say, right or wrong and 2. that women should have the choice. Please don't argue with me because I'm halfway between banning and number 1, but leaning towards the latter, and I really don't care what strangers think on this.
If you begin to seriously challenge RvW, you lose the next election. This one will be close and neither has decided to make abortion a big issue. Why? Because it's a lose-lose situation. Washingtonites don't like polarizing issues, that makes everything too clear. They talk about stuff that doesn't matter. Like stuff that happened in the military 25 years ago. Guess what. I don't if Kerry exagerated or Bush defected, this is here and now.
Despite popular misconception R's and D's are more alike than different. That's why I support the third party.
Don't talk to me about the president and anything that you've listed. The congress has more of a say on those anyway. I want real issues. Not psuedo-party beliefs that will never enter the realm of public lawmaking.
Dammit. I left rant lock on. It's so close to backspace. Sorry.
If you begin to seriously challenge RvW, you lose the next election.
That goes back to a major point of my original post. Presidents who go a second term don't have to worry about losing the next election. I guess I assumed wrongly that everyone knows this but... here in the U.S. no one may hold the office of the presidency for more than two consecutive terms.
So to recap: if Geourge Bush remains in the Whitehouse then he can reward his rightwing, conservative constituents whose hottest button is abortion
The point I was trying to make was the if you do challenge it, your *party* loses the next election. But I do agree with you that a 2nd term president has a lot more leeway than the 1st. I guess my main point is that as president your actions reflect on the party and will impact the next elect whether you are in it or not.
"Flattery is all right -- if you don't inhale."
-- Adlai Stevenson
Nader is just an attention whore (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Nader is just an attention whore (Score:0, Troll)
Re:Nader is just an attention whore (Score:2)
And through the Republicans into political disorder? Though the religious right is one of Bush's constituancies, there are still more people who either belive that 1. it isn't the government place to say, right or wrong and 2. that women should have the choice. Please don't argue with me because I'm halfway between banning and number 1, but leaning towards the latter, and I really don't care what strangers think on this.
If you begin to seriously challenge RvW, you lose the next election. This one will be close and neither has decided to make abortion a big issue. Why? Because it's a lose-lose situation. Washingtonites don't like polarizing issues, that makes everything too clear. They talk about stuff that doesn't matter. Like stuff that happened in the military 25 years ago. Guess what. I don't if Kerry exagerated or Bush defected, this is here and now.
Despite popular misconception R's and D's are more alike than different. That's why I support the third party.
Don't talk to me about the president and anything that you've listed. The congress has more of a say on those anyway. I want real issues. Not psuedo-party beliefs that will never enter the realm of public lawmaking.
Dammit. I left rant lock on. It's so close to backspace. Sorry.
Re:Nader is just an attention whore (Score:2)
That goes back to a major point of my original post. Presidents who go a second term don't have to worry about losing the next election. I guess I assumed wrongly that everyone knows this but... here in the U.S. no one may hold the office of the presidency for more than two consecutive terms.
So to recap: if Geourge Bush remains in the Whitehouse then he can reward his rightwing, conservative constituents whose hottest button is abortion
Re:Nader is just an attention whore (Score:1)