RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


Thank you, Ralph Nader voters, for this war(5 posts)

Thank you, Ralph Nader voters, for this warContinental
Mar 18, 2003 6:44 PM
The great majority of people who voted for Ralph Nader are strongly opposed to this military confrontation with Iraq. These people were unwilling to face the reality that they had a choice between two alternatives in the 2000 presidential election. If they would have been pragmatic, there is no doubt that Al Gore would be president. Al would have probably led an effort to lift sanctions against Iraq, avoiding war, and giving Saddam the means to build his military and attack at the time and place of his choosing, which is apparently what the peaceniks consider just and moral policy.

These same people, and others with a similar thought process, are now confronted with another clear choice between two alternatives, those represented by President Bush and Saddam. Again they foolishly looked to a third non-viable option, Chirac and peace protests. In the same way that Nader voters actually supported Bush, the
Chirac cohorts are actually supporting Saddam. Fortunately, these dupes did not affect the decision process in this case.

I have every confidence that the ultimate outcome of this war will be an increase in liberty, justice, and security. I am sure that the Nader voters want this outcome. It is a beautiful irony.
Your confidence isn't particularly inspiring. . .czardonic
Mar 18, 2003 7:02 PM
. . .given your facile and specious reasoning.

But here is a real irony for you. Remember those Palm Beach Democrats in who mistakely voted for Buchanan instead of Gore? Turns out that Buchanan is stridently anti-war (on Iraq), while the Democratic party has offered little resistance.
You're so right...hycobob
Mar 19, 2003 5:33 AM
The Democratic Party has offered little resistance; its just been the Deomocrats who have offered it. Can anyone here offer a quote from a former Republican President against policies and actions made by a sitting US President? We can't get Bill and Jimmy to shut the hell up!
what about Perot?DougSloan
Mar 19, 2003 8:07 AM
If not for Perot, Clinton might not ever have been elected. What then?

Third party candidates screw things up for everyone. We could "what if" it forever.

Doug
Move to France...jose_Tex_mex
Mar 19, 2003 11:07 AM
... we elect by a plurality here in the good ole USA. If you do not like that, or if you prefer the majority of the vote, try moving to France...

BTW - Nearly 50% of the US did not vote. It was Gore's to lose and he did exactly that. Stop crying over spilled milk.