All Because I Voted For Ralph Nader

The term "spoiler" is political bigotry, "third" parties should not have to speak from a segregated debate. Democrats and Republicans are as different as Coke and Pepsi, I drink orange juice, soda is unhealthy. End the myth, seek the truth. Two parties is one party away from a dictatorship. Vote Nader 2008 for change we can see. The song "All Because I Voted For Ralph Nader" was written and composed by Tom Neilson. Video editing by Andy Schuler.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• ralph
• nader
• matt
• gonzalez
• 2008
• election
• third
• party
• open
• he
• debates
• ballot
• access
• civic
• participation
• power
• freedom
• spoiler
• myth
• constitution
• rights
• independent
• green
• libertarian
• socialist
• democracy
• republic

[m0nkey13]

Rather cowardly to blame this on a person who earned his votes honestly. This is America and I will continue to vote for the person I deem best suited for office. The two party system we have is backed by corporations, the Supreme court has recently given corporations the rights of people and the man who speaks out against these atrocities is ridiculed. People who vote for the lessor of two evils deserve what they get.

[brainsplatty]

@m0nkey13 I agree. The musician is using sarcasm to try and get this point across. People who blame Nader have no idea or don't care what democracy is. The two-party system is one party away from dictatorship. The Democrats are no better than Republicans when it comes to silencing the voice of the people. See: Ralph Nader vs. Democratic National Committee

[MaxTallon]

I never understood the claim that Nader spoiled the the 2000 election: because of one simple fact. The democrats got more votes than the republicans - they won - and the victory was stolen from them. Democrats? That's a good one - they've continued with the Bush Doctrine and extended the Patriot Act - maybe they can find some way of blaming Nader for that, too.

[brainsplatty]

@MaxTallon I agree. It's just sore loser talk blaming someone else for your own short comings. According to that logic, it should be Naders' fault that Obama is president (who by the way put more troops in the Middle East than Bush ever did, but it's justified now somehow.), and who's fault was it they lost in 2004? In a democracy, the only way a vote can be "stolen" is if the system is rigged. In that respect, the Democrats are the actual thieves.

[0613162k]

º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨ „ø¤º°¨

¨°º¤ø„ Vote „ø¤º°¨

¸„ø¤º°¨Nader ``°º¤ø„¸

ø¤º°¨¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¨°º¤ø

[blackcatsoda]

Lets give the NObama a run for his millions!!!!

VOTE NADER/GONZALEZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[mongoose704]

@MaxTallon Entitled to Nader's votes that is.

[mongoose704]

@MaxTallon Democrats believe that Al Gore was entitled to his votes. Imagine that: Democrats crying about entitlements.

Some might try to say that about Nader but he has never been about entitlements. He has always been about corporations being held responsible for the damages they inflict on property and people, and individuals taking responsibility for their votes and being the watchdog our government refuses to be. He is more about personal responsibility than most republicans.

[RickyMcGinnis]

@jps9901 Does that make it right? of course not. The only way to change anything is to show people there is a real desire to change the system. Claiming that one party is a spoiler, and any other party isn't, seems discriminatory to third parties. Why isn't the Republican party a spoiler? or maybe the Democrats spoiled it themselves by not fighting back against smear campaigns.

[brainsplatty]

@jps9901 A two-party system is 1 crappy system and deserves to be spoiled. If the Democrats truly wanted to avoid the spoiler phenomena they could easily do something about it (like implement instant run-off voting or proportional representation), but they sometimes benefit from "spoilers" as observed when they welcomed Ross Perot. This limited form of voting is just one more agreement they have with Republicans.

[jps9901]

@RickyMcGinnis As far as the platforms go, if the Dems are for it, you know the Reps are against it. Changing things is difficult, but you are really naive if you think 3rd party makes a difference. Due to our voting method, only a two party system can exist. It's a fact. The BS about "If everyone honestly..." will never happen. 3rd parties ARE spoilers and there is no democracy.

[RickyMcGinnis]

@jps9901 On everything? I hardly see any democrats or republicans questioning the drug war, or the war powers act. If everyone voted for who they honestly believed would be the best president, maybe we wouldn't have this problem. But hey, voting for corporate mouth pieces would change it, right?

[jps9901]

"Democrats and Republicans are as different as Coke and Pepsi," If you honestly believe this than you are either not paying attention or an idiot. They disagree on just about everything. I get it that you don't want to be stuck in the two party system and I hate it too, but everyone who voted Nader could have stayed home and gotten the same result. You may end up with the candidate you really didn't like.

[jps9901]

You know this a a first past the post system, you saw the polls showing how far Nader was behind, yet you stupidly checked his box anyway. You can dream of getting people not to vote tactically all you want, but it will never happen unless you get rid of first past the post voting. Don't get me wrong, I agree that this is silly, but as long we have this system, Nader will always be a spoiler and you need to accept that.