In the current electoral environment, where Obama and McCain garner 99.9% of the media attention, it should be nothing short of amazing that, as the latest CNN poll shows, Ralph Nader is polling at 6%. [CNN]
Mark this as testament to the fact that a substantial number of everyday people are still in touch with reality — a reality the people with the mikes keep wishing every day they weren’t living in; those so-called “progressive” “radical” “activists” on the left who have uncritically and unconditionally made a Barack Obama win their pet cause since day one.
Ralph Nader needs to poll at at least 10% to be able to participate in the presidential debates. Here’s hoping this happens (I’d actually watch), and that the likes of Obama and his blinded supporters learn something.
That same CNN poll shows Obama and McCain in a dead heat.
As the failed campaigns of Al Gore, John Kerry and Hillary Clinton learned the hard way, genuine leftist movements cannot be taken for granted.
[RELATED: "Obama is Making Me a Naderite"]
[Tarboush Tip: hbb]
Related posts:
- Obama is Making Me a Naderite
- Nader, Obama, and… Can I get a “Palestine” up in here?!
- Results of First KABOBpoll in: Obama Wins
- Okay, Who Hid the Polling Sites?!?!
- Pragmatically Speaking, Democrats Should Nominate Obama
Go Nader! Wooohoo!!!
We love you Nader!
Boxers of briefs or kefiyah?
Izbah Al-Yahud!
Posted by Anonymous | July 3, 2008, 2:19 pmAs the failed campaigns of Al Gore, John Kerry and Hillary Clinton learned the hard way, genuine leftist movements cannot be taken for granted.
Yes, he shouldn’t be taken for granted.
He’s the reason we’ve had 8 years of George Bush.
God, the self-proclaimed “real” “progressive” “radical” “activists” are fucking stupid.
Utterly incapable of learning or critical thinking.
Amazing and sad.
Posted by Anonymous | July 3, 2008, 7:17 pmCome on, don’t be so hard.
Nader is a Palestinian and a true progressive.
Posted by Anonymous | July 3, 2008, 7:35 pmSeriously, QuiQui – I know this won’t get through to you, but on the off chance that there are any Marxists, “Marxists,” “anti-Capitalists” of other stripes, Palestinians/Pro-Palestinians or “radicals” or whatever, that DON’T want to see John McCain be the next President of the United States, here’s the deal:
Are you really so amazingly narcissistic that you think a mainstream American Presidential candidate should be 100% aligned with your political positions? They are running for President of the United States, not President of your co-op, club or mayor of Berkeley.
If they don’t say everything you want, you’re going to support someone who not only has no chance of winning, but the only possible affect he could have is to pave the way for a third consecutive Republican term?
A person who says what you want to hear because he’s pandering to your narrow world view, even though he has no chance of winning?
I guess so.
Embarrassingly childish.
And, btw, Nader is about as Palestinian as Ariel Sharon or George Bush.
Posted by Anonymous | July 3, 2008, 7:56 pmSo you expect us to vote for who? McBama? If we are not voting with our values, then our vote is meaningless.
McCain and Obama will both pursue Bush’s foreign policy and there may be some minor differences domestically. That is not acceptable!
I would rather have McCain win and give the Democrats another 4 years to rethink their message. Look at what the progressive movement has accomplished with the Democratic party in these past 8 years!
I have news for you, 8 years ago a Zionist Jew was running for Vice President. That same Jew was denied support by the Democratic party thanks to progressive activism in 2006.
Screw McBama!
Progress will never happen if Obama is elected. He will tell the progressives who got him where he is to f’ck off, as he is already doing. Are you blind?! Stop making excuses for him!
It’s time for us to grit our teeth, stand our ground and vote with our hearts. Then we can continue to purge the party of Zionist and corporate scum and get an even better candidate in 2012.
Posted by Anonymous | July 3, 2008, 8:14 pmSo you expect us to vote for who?
Obama.
McBama?
Ridiculous. Obama.
If we are not voting with our values, then our vote is meaningless.
No. If your “values” mean you will vote for Nader, then you are voting for McCain. That’s the lesson of the 2000 election.
McCain and Obama will both pursue Bush’s foreign policy and there may be some minor differences domestically.
In Iraq for 100 years or fully withdrawn within 16 months. Great analysis.
Singing about bombing Iran or talking about negotiating with its leaders. Great analysis, again.
Minor domestic differences? Please.
I would rather have McCain win and give the Democrats another 4 years to rethink their message.
Oh my god. Unfuckingbelievable. They will never, ever get around to your narrow worldview – currently polling at a whopping 6% – and that’s AFTER 8 horrific years.
Jesus, there’s really no point.
So a McCain presidency brought on by a Naderite/anti-Obama continengent will have the desired affect of purging the Democratic party of “zionist jews”?
Did you grow up next to a nuclear power plant or something?
Go Nader, the “progressive” “Palestinian.”
I love how you’re cavalierly willing to sacrifice the lives of countless Iraqi Arabs at the faint (read: ridiculous and impossible) hope of purging “zionist” jews from the Democratic party.
How very “progressive.”
Sick.
Posted by Anonymous | July 3, 2008, 8:38 pmWe all know McCain didn’t really mean 100 years of war, but it sure is fun to keep bringing it up.
Let’s be serious. Obama is not going to take US troops out of Iraq, despite his primary season rhetoric. He will leave 40-60,000 troops in place to protect Saudi Oil fields, American interests, to continue “hunting down terrorists” and to threaten Iran.
He will not be the president to simply give up a trillion dollar, decade long enterprise to establish American hegemony in the Middle East, as the Iraq war has accomplished. The Middle East is the new Europe of 1945, and America will be staying for at least another 100 years, one way or another.
Obama has said as much, and the coming trip to Iraq will introduce him to the US commanders on the ground, and Iraqi politicians, who will “convince him” that “a small, limited, but long term US presence is necessary”.
This was the policy of the Bush Administration in March 2003, except they thought they could get back down to this level by Christmas.
You are so naive if you think there is a REAL difference between Obama and McCain on foreign policy. Listen to what Samantha Powers said before she was booted for saying too much. The campaign sent her to Europe where she was telling stunned socialists that there will be no change in American foreign policy, but now Europe will be forced to contribute troops and money.
Obama will not change US foreign policy; he will simply provide a fresh face and a more effective message delivery.
He said last year that he is willing to invade and nuke Pakistan if necessary. This is your progressive champion?
It seems from the outside that a US President can do whatever he wants on the world stage. However, in reality, the course of American foreign policy is dictated by events and static interests – national security, military primacy, global economic liberalization, etc.
Obama will be no different from McCain on foreign policy. I agree with the earlier anonymous on that, even though they are a kook on the rest. Zionist Jews make up half of the Democratic Party, and they will not look kindly on the kind of pogrom he or she envisions.
Posted by Anonymous | July 3, 2008, 8:57 pmBut just back to this for one second:
Then we can continue to purge the party of Zionist and corporate scum and get an even better candidate in 2012.
Right. Naderites are already hated for what they did in 2000 and ever since.
You think if they (you!) manage to do it again, it will make the Democratic party more open to you?
Right.
That’s either so amazingly dumb or a symptom of clinical levels of narcissism. Either way, you are in need of help.
Posted by Anonymous | July 3, 2008, 9:00 pmListen to what Samantha Powers said before she was booted for saying too much.
A) If you got her name right, I might listen to you.
B) She was booted for calling Hillary a “monster” – not for anything having to do with what she said about Obama’s foreign policy.
Posted by Anonymous | July 3, 2008, 9:04 pmListen up, Obama fanboy:
Politico:
For all the chatter about Obama adviser Samantha Power’s calling Clinton a “monster,” another set of remarks made on her book tour in the United Kingdom may be equally threatening to the Obama campaign: Comments in a BBC interview that express a lack of confidence that Obama will be able to carry through his plan to withdraw troops from Iraq within 16 months.
“He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he’s crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator,” she said at one point in the interview.
Power downplayed Obama’s commitment to quick withdrawal from Iraq on Hard Talk, a program that often exceeds any of the U.S. talk shows in the rigor of its grillings. She was challenged on Obama’s Iraq plan, as it appears on his website, which says that Obama “will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months.”
“What he’s actually said, after meting with the generals and meeting with intelligence professionals, is that you – at best case scenario – will be able to withdraw one to two combat brigades each month. That’s what they’re telling him. He will revisit it when he becomes president,” Power says.
The host, Stephen Sackur, challenged her:”So what the American public thinks is a commitment to get combat forces out in 16 months isn’t a commitment isn’t it?”
“You can’t make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009,” she said. “He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he’s crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator. He will rely upon a plan – an operational plan – that he pulls together in consultation with people who are on the ground to whom he doesn’t have daily access now, as a result of not being the president. So to think – it would be the height of ideology to sort of say, ‘Well, I said it, therefore I’m going to impose it on whatever reality greets me.’”
Posted by Anonymous | July 3, 2008, 9:11 pmThis is an argument between two corporate pawns. I agree with the first comment.we need to “vote with our heart, and vote with Nader!” He should totally make that his campaign message
Posted by Anonymous | July 3, 2008, 9:18 pmGo Nader!
Anon,
That’s either so amazingly dumb or a symptom of clinical levels of narcissism.
Nader is himself the ultimate narcissist, so take a wild guess what kind of people vote for him? I’ve been watching Nader since he used to do consumer safety reports on the news. The guy has always had a superhero complex. He’s like Mighty Mouse…. “Hhheeeerrrreee I come to save the daaaaayyy!!!” and his fans are like… guess what? Little kids who believe in Mighty Mouse lol.
Posted by programmer craig | July 3, 2008, 10:50 pmHey come to think of it, maybe that’s what is wrong with Lebanon…. all the leaders have the same personality profile as Ralph Nader… what a depressing though
Posted by programmer craig | July 3, 2008, 10:52 pmPC,
Wow, now that is the best evidence that all Lebanese think alike. I previously thought of Lebanon as a highly factionalized country rife with disparate ideological and confessional threads. It all added up to a byzantine turmoil of conflicting and allying political actors.
Your little comment here may have given me the answer to Lebanese politics: all Lebanese think like Ralph Nader.
That would certainly explain the incredible consumer protections there and extremely safe automobiles.
Thanks PC,
Will
Posted by Will | July 4, 2008, 8:26 amYour little comment here may have given me the answer to Lebanese politics: all Lebanese think like Ralph Nader.
Will, I’m pretty sure if you read more carefully you’ll find that I said “personality profile” not “clone”. I think you’ll also find I said “leaders”, not “all Lebanese”. But accuracy never mattered much to you, did it?
Actually Lebanon’s leaders do remind me a great deal of Ralph Nader. Tehy all view themselves as national heroes and champions of the people, even when they are busy slaughtering the people, and they all like to blah blah blah about how bad everyone else is while pretending like they don’t have any control over “the system”. Only difference is the US is a democracy. The same family dynasties have been running Lebanon forever.
Posted by programmer craig | July 4, 2008, 1:14 pm“Only difference is the US is a democracy.”
Well, kind of… I think the manifold vote-stripping practices of the last two elections should dent that assertion somewhat.
If it’s a “close” race, McCain will win easily… because that’s what the electoral commissioners of each Red state have been legislating about since 2004.
Provisional ballots, byzantine proof requirements, illegal voter list scrubs, mailed ballots simply tossed in the bin, manipulation of queues, removal of voting machines… Greg Palast calculated that Afircan Americans’ voters were something like 12 times more likely to not have their choice of president accurately counted than white voters…
Other than that, I’m amazed that people advocting democracy are actively campaigning against more choice…
Posted by Lowfields | July 6, 2008, 5:28 amThey don’t care about democracy. The Democrats want to continue playing the same old game with the Republicans. Remember Nancy Pelosi’s “100 Hours Plan”?
What ever happened to that? How many of those bullet points did the Democrats actually knock off in the past two years, despite solid majorities? Minimum wage? What else? They could have stopped funding the troops and forced the withdrawal, but they didn’t. The Dems don’t have a problem with the war. Their only problem is that a Democrat isn’t the President to lead it.
Obama will fix that.
Who actually thinks we won’t have 100,000+ troops deployed somewhere killing innocent people by the time his presidency is over? If it’s not Iraq it will be Iran, or Afghanistan/Pakistan, or Sudan, or Asia. That’s just the nature of the American dual party system.
The only way to end that is to start voting for Nader!
Posted by Anonymous | July 6, 2008, 11:19 am“Only difference is the US is a democracy”
Wow Craig the that lone comment is enough to tell me you know so very little of the your own nations Federal government style, that you should return to grade school.
we are NOT a democracy. We are or were a Constitutional Representative Republic, the two are VERY different things.
I wish the ignorant would stop using such ‘feel good’ words.
As for Nader.. Of all those running He is the best Candidate. Not Barr the Fake in my opinion* Libertarian, Not the two main stream candidates , who are already bought paid for and gift wraped. “Obama out in 16 months” He has already distanced himself from that as have quotes from his staff. That was nothing more then a lie, sorry Obama sheeple. McCain is no better himself. I also hope the CPD is disbanded and soon, designed to keep anyone out side of the main power base out of national power. A brilliant scheme yet a sad one.
And anyone who votes for the lesser of evils instead of what their ideals and dreams tell them.. are the true ‘wasters of the vote’ and maybe for a change they should stay home and we could elect a decent president.
Posted by Michael | July 6, 2008, 7:06 pmI wasn’t even thinking of voting for Nader a few days ago, but… why not? what do we have to lose? ZOG will still be running America under Obama.
The best we can even come close to hoping for is a Carter presidency, and that’s the BEST scenario! And what did Carter bring us? Legitimized the Zionist Apartheid State and started sending them $2Billion a year?
Seriously. Why NOT vote Nader?
Posted by Anonymous | July 6, 2008, 10:12 pmMichael,
Wow Craig the that lone comment is enough to tell me you know so very little of the your own nations Federal government style, that you should return to grade school.
we are NOT a democracy. We are or were a Constitutional Representative Republic, the two are VERY different things.
I wish the ignorant would stop using such ‘feel good’ words.
It’s funny, when I was in grade school, the teachers actually taught us what the word “Republic” means: a representative democracy.
What are they teaching kids now? How to roll a joint?
Posted by programmer craig | July 6, 2008, 11:52 pmBy the way, why are there so many western style socialists pimping their obsolete and failed ideology on a blog that is supposedly devoted to Palestinian/Arab issues? You guys figure the Arab world is so screwed up they won’t know what hit em until it’s too late? lol. Arabs seem to like capitalism quite a lot, from what I can tell. More than Americans do, even.
Posted by programmer craig | July 6, 2008, 11:59 pmYes but Arabs don’t use “lol”. That should trump any card you would choose to play
Posted by Anonymous | July 7, 2008, 11:23 amYes but Arabs don’t use “lol”. That should trump any card you would choose to play
Don’t actually know any Arabs do you? Will you let them into your socialist utopia, or do you just expect them to build it for you?
Posted by programmer craig | July 7, 2008, 12:26 pmA better questions is:
“Why is a middle aged white male who had fetish for asian women doing on a blog about arab american youth and why does he continually respond as if he were a prepubescent girl?”
And of course I know Arabs, that is why I read Kabobfest. (Let us hope your reasoning is less perverted than your other hobbies, Craig)
Posted by Anonymous | July 7, 2008, 7:48 pm“Why is a middle aged white male who had fetish for asian women doing on a blog about arab american youth and why does he continually respond as if he were a prepubescent girl?”
You know, the trick with pushing people’s buttons after getting some incite into their personality only works if you correctly identify their “issues”. You’ve missed mine by a mile
And of course I know Arabs, that is why I read Kabobfest.
I thought you just said this was a blog for Arab American youth? So, what ARE you doing on KABOBfest? Please let us know, since you yourself just seem to have said you don’t belong here!
And how do you think I guessed you weren’t Arab from that one line anonymous “July 7, 2008 11:23:00 AM PDT” comment, anonymous? Did I use my Mossad contacts?
Posted by programmer craig | July 8, 2008, 12:01 amAnd PS – if these 30 something bloggers are considered “youth” then there is no way in hell that I am middle aged
Posted by programmer craig | July 8, 2008, 2:04 amObama is about to use your children as militias when he becomes president. McCain is hobnobbing with the Rothschilds which obviously means he is Bush in drag, New World Order, One World Government, and possibly as Nazi as Bush, so while he looks like he would be a great option, or used to look like he was, he’s clearly bomb happy with a bad temper to boot.
You can’t loose a vote you never had, so anyone who votes third party is happily showing people they didn’t like the prefab corporate two major parties. If the number of Nader’s voters add up to being a spoiler to the two major parties, don’t assume they would have voted for either Dems or Repubs. They hated them, so don’t start calling it a spoiler.
Nader’s voters were truer votes for better politics than those choosing a party by whose more popular so they won’t be a spoiler.
Posted by Anonymous | July 25, 2008, 8:38 pm