"Take Action - Help Put Nader/Gonzalez On The Ballot" (votenader.org) - if you are th

[sinfronteras]

From what I can see from this graph, Nader is so far only covered in 16 states thus far. In the remain states he has to get a certain number of signatures in each state in order to get his name on the ballot and has to do that by a certain date. Click on each state to see what the deal is.

http://www.votenader.org/action/

[Auntlily]

Hi, Sinfronteras...please tell me why should I vote for Nader/Gonzalez? I see he's independant but I have not heard enough about what he is offering in his campaign. What info can you provide.

In my HUMBLE opinion...I'm not too fond of McCain and Obama...

[paradise7n]

Hi, I am not against Ralph Nader and the Green Party but am very much against a third candidate being put on the ballot. This is because it detracts from votes that I feel should be cast for either of the candidates that have a chance of winning. Many people who would vote democratic will vote for Nader and therefore take a vote away from the democratic candidate. Nader simply does not have the funding to compete against the two big ones. Therefore, a vote for Nader is just a thrown-away vote. Better to vote for one of the two that you feel is the lesser evil. Just my opinion. :cheerful:

[luvnmysenorita]

Why would anyone "waste" a vote on Nader? He has no chance of winning. What does a vote for Nader truly do? I would not waste the gas to drive out on NOV. 4 to my polling place. But good luck with Nader. He will probably get a few thousand wasted votes.

[sinfronteras]

Hi, Sinfronteras...please tell me why should I vote for Nader/Gonzalez? I see he's independant but I have not heard enough about what he is offering in his campaign. What info can you provide.

In my HUMBLE opinion...I'm not too fond of McCain and Obama...

will be voting for John McCain @ the general election if Hillary doesn't pull the nomination out of the convention or if Hillary is not added to the ballot on the DNC Convention @ Denver. Remember that she just suspended her campaign, she did not concede. She can re-activate her campaign any time. This is why she held on to her delegates.

Now, for those Democrats who will never vote Republican, but can stomach to vote for the Presumptive Democratic Presidential Nominee (Like me), there are other options and Nader/Gonzalez 2008 is one of them.


http://www.votenader.org/issues/
Edit:
Hi, I am not against Ralph Nader and the Green Party but am very much against a third candidate being put on the ballot. This is because it detracts from votes that I feel should be cast for either of the candidates that have a chance of winning. Many people who would vote democratic will vote for Nader and therefore take a vote away from the democratic candidate. Nader simply does not have the funding to compete against the two big ones. Therefore, a vote for Nader is just a thrown-away vote. Better to vote for one of the two that you feel is the lesser evil. Just my opinion. :cheerful:

Should people not run for office if they "don't stand a chance of winning"??? How could we get any change if that happens???
The woman's suffrage party knew it wasn't going to win, the abolition party knew it wasn't going to win, but they fought the fight because they knew it was the right thing to do.
Edit:
Why would anyone "waste" a vote on Nader? He has no chance of winning. What does a vote for Nader truly do? I would not waste the gas to drive out on NOV. 4 to my polling place. But good luck with Nader. He will probably get a few thousand wasted votes.


But this is the kind of view that stifles the development of a political system that moves beyond a 2-party system! How can people ever hope to move beyond a 2-party system if they are not willing to allow other parties/candidates to participate? Perhaps, you are fine with a 2-party system and fair enough. But for those who don't like a 2-party system, the only way to change it is to encourage support for candidates not aligned with the major parties. The 2-party system is very oppressive and paralyzing and the participation of independent candidates is a tiny protest, however small, against that system. In a DEMOCRACY, such participation should be encouraged

[paradise7n]

Should people not run for office if they "don't stand a chance of winning"??? How could we get any change if that happens???
The woman's suffrage party knew it wasn't going to win, the abolition party knew it wasn't going to win, but they fought the fight because they knew it was the right thing to do.


Good point!!! I like that kind of optimistic activist attitude! I feel the same way. BUT, in this precarious time when we so desperately need to get away from the kind of government that the current president has established I think we should wait. We need to at least stabilize before we can take such a stance. :cheerful:

[Auntlily]

Sinfronteras, I really like your point of view. I don't think any vote is ever wasted. I think that people need to start addressing their concerns and if we all just kinda throw a blind over our eyes and be forced to just think of the two major nominees then we really couldn't call this "voting" system that we adopted a "free" vote or a way of the people expressing themselves. Anyhow, I just think that it is cool that in America I'm allowed to vote for whomever I chose, whether they win or not. Atleast I can stand up for what I believe in.