The Daily Ping

We've only had four major designs over our 11 year history.

February 5th, 2004

Ralph Don’t Run

In the 2000 election, I voted for Ralph Nader. I’m not ashamed or afraid to admit it. I wasn’t in a swing state, in addition, so I was able to vote with my conscience. But I was saddened to read that Ralph was considering running – again.

The great Flash presentation at Ralph Don’t Run says it all. Recently, Ralph was on NPR discussing the site and, in what I thought was a fit of poor judgment, he said that the Ralph Don’t Run site was a form of “censorship” by “liberals.” What?

Ralph, you represented a lot of very liberal people in 2000, and a lot of other people who simply liked what you had to say. (My mom voted for you!) But in 2004, there is simply too much at stake. The reason I don’t want to see you run this year is because you can easily play the role of a spoiler – and, no matter whose side you’re on, that’s not a great thing.

I do agree with what Ralph has said regarding our two-party system. I wish we had more. But 2004 is not the year in which we need to make this change. Tell you what, Ralph. Make yourself useful this year and back the Democratic candidate. Do what you can to get on his cabinet, or at least get recognized by him. Doing that will mean a lot more to me, a supporter of yours, than conducting a giant folly by running for President.

Posted in Politics

FROM: Matt
DATE: Thursday February 5, 2004 -- 12:14:00 am
Censorship and Liberals go hand in hand. The best thing Nader has said in years.

DATE: Thursday February 5, 2004 -- 7:54:39 am
I used to really, really like Nader... until the 2000 race where it seemed his sole purpose was to get Dubya elected by siphoning off Gore supporters. Bah humbug.

I hope he leaves the political scene and concentrates on consumer advocacy for a few years.

FROM: Ryan [E-Mail]
DATE: Thursday February 5, 2004 -- 9:25:30 am
Censorship and Liberals go hand in hand.

Only as much as censorship and conservatives go hand-in-hand.

There are pro-censorship forces everywhere, no matter political leaning.

Back to the Ping at hand, though: what about Henry Calitri?

FROM: Ryan [E-Mail]
DATE: Thursday February 5, 2004 -- 9:29:41 am
Incidentally, Ralph Nader running wouldn't even be an issue if we would get rid of the current voting system, which pretty much ensures a two-party system. If we had Instant Runoff Voting, we wouldn't have to worry about silly things like "spoilers" (see this Flash presentation for an example with candidates from the 2000 election.

FROM: Chris [E-Mail]
DATE: Thursday February 5, 2004 -- 9:51:32 am
I'm with Ryan, Instant Runoff Voting is an idea whose time has come. However, because of its potential to dilute the power of the two major parties, it will not happen as long as we have close to parity between democrats and republicans. If one party can get veto proof control of the federal government and hold it for maybe 8 years - I think the minority party at that point might have incentive to support something like this.

FROM: Ryan [E-Mail]
DATE: Thursday February 5, 2004 -- 11:08:43 am
Chris -- the IRV site I was reading earlier mentioned that the Democrats should support IRV because of what happened in 2000 and that the Republicans should support it because of the influence the Reform Party had in 1992. Not sure that either of those are compelling enough reasons for them to want to support such a drastic change, but it certainly makes sense to me.

FROM: Ace High
DATE: Thursday February 5, 2004 -- 1:27:19 pm
The term Liberal only became a perjorative after the liberals made common cause with left wingers. With Nader calling people expressing opinions about him he does not like "censorship" he is diplaying attitudes similar to those in socialist dictatorships. In the 1960's the only people who used liberal as a pejorative were leftists who sympathised with marxists like Mao, Castro and Ho Chi Min.

FROM: Greg
DATE: Thursday February 5, 2004 -- 2:35:57 pm
From the subject of this Ping, I thought we would be talking about the Wiggum boy.

The two party system sucks. It sums up what's going on with our society in general, you must be one way or another. There's no middle ground. Politics is x-treme!

FROM: Matt
DATE: Thursday February 5, 2004 -- 4:40:49 pm
People are jackasses who say that he ruined the 2000 election. In my book he actually made it tolerable. Just because Bush won doesn't mean that Nader ruined the election for Gore. Nader and Gore are two completely different candidates, and to say that we should only have a Democrat and Republican running would make nary a difference. What we should have had in 2000 was more people backing Hagelin, Buchanan, Browne and Phillips. At least those four guys actually bring new ideas to the table.

FROM: Ryan [E-Mail]
DATE: Thursday February 5, 2004 -- 4:53:28 pm
I miss seeing those four guys on TV (well, except for Buchanan).

On the topic of third parties, I was surprised (and somewhat pleased) to turn on PBS last night and see a special about inner-city kids that were being taught about business and given internships on Wall Street. The woman that taught the initial course looked familiar, and sure enough, it was Lenora Fulani, the first black woman to ever appear on the ballot in all 50 states when she ran for president under the New Alliance Party in 1988.

FROM: Matt
DATE: Thursday February 5, 2004 -- 6:05:06 pm
That sound like a cool special. I think inner city children should be taught about capitalism faster then they already are! just kidding, but that does sound like an interesting special as does this Lenora Fulani. 1988, not just a year for great hip-hop and hardcore!!

FROM: Jamie
DATE: Friday February 6, 2004 -- 2:56:40 am
Got an opinion? Why not share it with Nader at
there's a quick survey you can fill out to tell him if you think he should run or not.

Hey, at least you gotta respect him for thinking about it and listening to opinions.

Incidentally, the black voters deleted from voter rolls by Jeb Bush dwarf the miniscule Nader vote. 2000 was all about manipulation by the RNC and had nothing to do with Nader.

If you thought it was a mess in 2000, though, you should check out the situation with the new electronic voting machines. Learn more here:

In short, they're full of security holes, don't leave a paper trail, are manifactured by some pretty shady companies and have failed repeated security and accuracy tests.

Unless something is done it will be so easy for either side to say blow a circuit breaker in an voting station and 'lose' all the votes from an area, not to mention the risk of hacks or manipulation from the manufacturers.

Want to do something about it?


FROM: Chris [E-Mail]
DATE: Friday February 6, 2004 -- 9:46:42 am

You've got to stop smoking crack. Jessie Jackson Himself went to FL and did not find a single, not one, voter of any color that had been illegally removed from the voter rolls. Yes, some blacks were removed, because they were CONVICTED FELONS. Jesus, its 2004 - you lost the damn 2000 election, get over it. And quite frankly, if John Kerry is the best you can do this year, you are going to lose again. Lieberman was the only guy in the race with a good shot at beating GW (assuming Iraq doesn't become another 'Nam over this year, and the economy stays decent).

And I agree about the electronic voting machines - no way should they be used anywhere.

FROM: Matt
DATE: Friday February 6, 2004 -- 10:30:56 am
Chris- the only other voice of reason in the posting.

I agree with Jamie on the whole voting maching shadiness. There has been voter fraud for hundreds of years and some incredible books written about it, but that hasn't made a lick of difference in our nation. When you have a bunch of old fart democrats in Florida who can't read a ballot, which leads to voter machines that are manufactured by some bigwig rnc contributors, then you have an even bigger fucked up problem.

Face it, voting in America really doesn't make a lick of difference. The two parties have their golden boys picked out from day one. Thpse golden boys usually support the military-industrial machine, and all is well in the world.

FROM: Paul
DATE: Friday February 6, 2004 -- 11:24:14 am
Man, Matt, can you admit that both Republicans and Democrats suck at using voting machines and ballots? Because it's true, and the system is really broken.

Ultimately the system needs to change, I do concur.

FROM: Mike [E-Mail]
DATE: Friday February 6, 2004 -- 2:45:26 pm
Chris, you honestly believe that Lieberman is the only Democrat with a shot at beating Bush in '04? I can't see how a man who couldn't gain more than a small percentage of votes in the primaries could possibly retain those Democratic votes in the presidential election, let alone steal some Republicans away from Bush. And why didn't his powers help in '00 as a candidate for Vice President? I'm not saying Lieberman as VP hurt Gore's chances, Gore hurt himself by distancing himself from Clinton among other things, but Lieberman certainly didn't help the Democratic ticket pull in many votes.

I voted for Nader in 2000 because I was confident Gore would win Maryland...had it been projected as a close state race, I would not have voted for him. And I don't blame Nader for giving Bush the White House, though I do hope he doesn't run this year. I hate saying that because it's good in the long run for a third party to become more prominent each and every election, and that's why Nader got my vote. This time, for what my beliefs are and what my concerns are, there's too much at stake for the potential for Nader to get votes that otherwise would have gone to the Democratic nominee. That said, if Nader runs and it looks like a Democrat will lock up the electoral votes for Maryland, I'll vote Nader again.

And god only knows what the real results were in Florida in '00. That was such a clusterfuck of a mess that we'll never know and possibly never could have known. If a full recount could have even been possible, it might have proven Bush to have won by a larger margin than he did...or maybe Gore would have won. But I don't think it's fair to chalk up the problems in one sweeping generalization to incompetent 'old fart Democrats.' If anything, voter apathy/voter turnout is the biggest problem I see with the system.

FROM: Matt
DATE: Friday February 6, 2004 -- 3:31:30 pm
The most intelligent quote I have ever heard in my life had to do with our nations two party system. It was uttered by one David Martin and said "A nation with two real choices is only one better than a communist nation."

FROM: Matt
DATE: Friday February 6, 2004 -- 3:34:36 pm
NO I can't admit that both Republican's and Democrats suck at using voting machines, because the only real problem that I know regarding ballots problems happened in Florida in 2000 to a bunch of geezer democrats. It's quite a shame that the states solution was to get a bunch of shady Republican funded corporations to provide voting machines. You think those votes in Florida will be legit this time????

FROM: dave
DATE: Friday February 6, 2004 -- 5:44:45 pm
While I would never vote for Nader (I believe his main motivator is his ego) I have read compelling evidence that his presence in the race helped boost the vote totals of some Democratic Senate candidates, especially in Washington state where I believe it was so close it took a few days to get an accurate count.

And I don't know anything about this Jesse Jackson business, but the first chapter of Greg Palast's The Best Democracy Money Can Buy makes a pretty strong case that there was a systematic purging of voter rolls in Florida.

What is this then?

The Daily Ping is the web's finest compendium of toilet information and Oreo™® research. Too much? Okay, okay, it's a daily opinion column written by two friends. Did we mention we've been doing this for over ten years? Tell me more!

Most Popular Pings

Last Week's Most Popular Pings

Let's be nice.

© 2000-2011 The Daily Ping, all rights reserved. Tilted sidebar note idea 'adapted' from Panic. Powered by the mighty WordPress.