Nader: Obama Ignores Me and Other Progressives

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Nader may not have any chance of winning an election, but every time he runs, it brings attention to the need to toss out the two party system. Until that happens we'll never get a decent president

Zach of PA 9:37PM March 02, 2010

Nader is a total nerd! Obama is wise to ignore him - Nader represents no-one but himself.

mickmacguy of NJ 1:29PM May 04, 2009

I saw an intersting documentary on Ralph Nader. I liked his community aproach in the 1980's. It seemed to be the most effective. I wish he would use that aproach again and stop running for Presidant.

Phil Zacher of FL 1:13PM May 04, 2009

Obama ignores Nadar because Nadar has nothing relevant left to say.
Nadar's political fights have devolved into ego trips. He spends his life on quixotic presidential runs because he craves attention and contributes nothing to the national political debate.

AxelDC of VA 5:36AM May 04, 2009

Well Ralph maybe he ignores you because right after the election you went on the Fox News network and were the first to say well we will have to see if Obama is an Uncle Tom or not. Why would he meet with someone that would have the audacity to say that after such a historic election? Even Fox's Shepard Smith called you out on air and made you look like a bitter old moron. And this is coming from me, a progressive. Your campaign's have become a massive joke not to mention you are solely responsible for the election of George W Bush. Without your canadicy in Florida we would not be in the situation we are in economically, globally, and in Iraq. You sir have been enemy number one in helping to bring this country to its knees. Stop hurting America sir. Sit on the sidelines and stop helping to elect Conservative nuts.

Tim of CA 1:49AM May 04, 2009

Naderism may yet be a workable serum for Obama's venomous bite.

smoke detector of CA 2:34AM May 03, 2009

Policies aren't meant to be "sold" or packaged for political purposes. That kind of thinking is what kept slavery around 90 years after it could have been abolished. It's what kept women disenfranchised, labor unions illegal, and segregation the law of the land. None of these issues were pioneered by mainstream parties because nobody in power felt they were politically viable options.
I'm urging a campaign to get Ralph Nader seriously considered for the SUpreme Court. Most people don't like him personally, but you'd have to agree that the country would be better off with someone like him on the bench. Speaking truth to power and defying corruption are good things. We need to be active and insist not on doing what is right for Obama... but insist that Obama do what's right for the country.
www.justicenader.wordpress.com

Brian of NY 1:20AM May 03, 2009

If his complaints about the Democrats in power are valid, his strategy for influencing them (and policy debate) is ineffectual. For all the faults of the two-party system, there are enough Republicans that people are scared into sticking with Democrats and a third party is counter-productive. A better strategy would be to stay a semi-independent faction of the Democratic Party and pressure Democrats in the primaries. Though I was never a John Edwards fan, his (conveniently adopted) progressive positions did create pressure on Hillary and Obama.
I recommend the Greens fold themselves into the Democrats which will in fact give them more leverage (in the more concentrated pool of primary voters) as they field primary candidates for races at all levels. As much as I admire the work of Nader, I think he needs to set ego aside and acknowledge the personal controversy around him has rendered him not the best spokesperson for his causes. He can continue to comment but shouldn't be a candidate himself anymore; the stigma associated with him will prejudice the judgment of those he wishes to reach.

Sr Anonymous of NY 8:10PM May 02, 2009

Nader's right about one thing. He's making it so no one has no where else to turn but to him (only because he's president-for now) but his policies are doing everyone in and since those demmy-dummines back him up, citizens are powerless and feel there's no one to turn to until 2010/2012.
News is finally coming out on taxes, everyone's beginning to realize buma's all about taxes coming out their ears but like Nader said, he's turned his back on the people. Eventually that "turn of the back" will be that "stab in the back".
If now one else is brave enough to confront him, let Nader, someone has to. It won't change his arrogance or defiance of Americans but at least he'll get put in his place for once. He knows he's destroying the nation but it would sure be nice for someone to tell him directly to his face.

Timmy of NH 2:38PM May 02, 2009

Ultimately the reason Nader would run in 2012, if he does, would be the same as why he ran in 2000, 2004 and 2008: corporate control of government for its own benefit to the detriment of ours.
In the almost inconceivable event that Obama and the corporate-owned Dems fundamentally changes that dynamic, I'm pretty sure Nader wouldn't run.

Brian of NY 2:37PM May 02, 2009