If Ralph Nader does not get into the debates - Truth To Power Bulletin Board

  Truth To Power Bulletin Board
  Ralph Nader for President
  If Ralph Nader does not get into the debates

profile | register | faq

Author Topic:   If Ralph Nader does not get into the debates

Concerned Voter posted 10-01-2000 03:24 PM PT (US)
If Ralph does not get into the debates, what he should do, is that he should hold a series of town meetings across the country. This would give him a chance to circumvent Gore and Bush, get his views to a even wider public. If these town meeting go wonderfully, and enough people are convinced of Nader's views, then Gore and Bush are going to get a big suprise on Election Day. I think that Nader will get people to televise it.
Brian posted 10-01-2000 08:33 PM PT (US)
This is a good idea. I wonder why the California Nurses Association or the Electricians Union didn't stage a debate.
That would probably look biased.
I would guess the Nader people tried to get
some civic/community groups to stage debates and they couldn't pull it off.
eoghan44 posted 10-01-2000 11:59 PM PT (US)
From the viewpoint of an outside observer, I think these large rallies with 10,000+ is the best thing Ralph has going right now. No other politician in America is able to pull that off --and that says something about the motivation of Nader voters, if not our absolute numbers. The rallies represent the best working opportunity to sow the seeds that can result in a great harvest somewhere down the line.
Every oak started out as an acorn.
Nader now has a nucleus of people who share a common desire for 'progressive' policies and change --and that's the most important thing: having a clear message which sweeps like a wildfire across the prairie and can't be ignored. Although, the Republicrat party and the corporate mass media are certainly trying their best to ignore the Nader campaign!
Jack posted 10-02-2000 06:00 AM PT (US)
Seems like the commercial [though expensive] + the rallies are the best things that have been done. The town meetings probably wouldn't reach enough people fast enough, and they would not get televised----the crucial medium for taking advantage of the great p.r. op that they ultimately are all about.
I wonder what became of the Internet ideas I heard rumblings of earlier---- a simulcast during the debate? I think that it would be great for Ralph to do a simulcast[or immediately post-debate] where he critiques and responds to what the Corporate Candidates are saying. Maybe do it like Mystery Science Theatre -style [is that what that show is called where they banter and make jokes about the cheesy movie playing....?]. Maybe even invite the other 3rd party candidates over to sit in and heckle too! I think it could be a hilarious p.r. stunt if enough people tuned in so that it wasn't just preaching to the choir [we'd get some well-deserved/needed yuks out of it, but perhaps it wouldn't do a lot to advance his cause this round].
I've asked this before, but why don't The League Of Women Voters sponsor an ethical debate? They are the founders of the debates, and it would be a killer statement to invite the entrenched party + the 3rd party candidates and let the entrenched candidates show their butts by not showing! I would think that would make a powerful statement that not many other entities could match----but I would like to see some other entities stand up and try, rather than merely staging token debates between 3rd party candidates where they fight with each other rather than the primary opposition----and it further instills the image of them not being on the same tier as the Corporates.
Akicita posted 10-02-2000 09:30 AM PT (US)
I agree--but I think Ralph needs to change his emphasis immediately. He's spending 50 minutes of every hour speech talking about all the problems in america caused by the other parties, and how dark and oppressive it is (and yet he describes THEM as the "drab and the dreary"). Mr. Nader is under the genuine impression that he is spreading the "politics of joy and hope", yet he's getting more dismal in his message. He needs to start telling us what HE would do about the problems; we alreayd know baout the problems!
Nader has GOT to start talking about what he's already done, and what he will do, to get voters interested. Anyone in this forum could repeat Nader's criticisms of the System, but how many of us could describe what Nader's social security plan is, or his education plan, or the actual steps he'd take to reduce poverty? He talks about them well, but he has to start saying what he will do if he were president.
eoghan44 posted 10-02-2000 12:22 PM PT (US)
Jack,
I think it's an excellent idea for Ralph Nader to try to get an invitation from the League of Women Voters to debate all the other national candidates.
The League of Women Voters, after all, was the last legitimate independent (and traditional) sponsor of the presidential debates before the debates were hijacked by the Republocrat party (in association with the mass media) following what they perceived as a threat to the one corporate party system: Perot.
Nader should point out how the corporate party has manipulated the laws and customs of America in order to deprive the American citizenry of real choices and real input into the political process. People just don't realize how much of their freedom has been stripped from them in the past several decades by the corporate monster --because they've been conditioned to value nothing but money by the corporate America, and people who value nothing but money are easily manipulated and corrupted, especially when they are barely making ends meet with what would appear to be (but isn't really) a decent wage.
Let Ralph Nader appear at real events and address real problems even as the Commission on Presidential Debates (almost sounds legitimate, doesn't it?) stage some sort of stylized nonsense with Gush and Bore. Imagine a country in which the major candidates are presented to the public through a Kabuki Ritual: that's us. And we better start paying attention to those men behind the curtain!
(Apologies to the Japanese, who do not select their national leaders through a Kabuki Ritual, or no longer, anyway).
I'm going to watch the 'Presidential Debate' because I think it's a wise dictum to 'know thy enemy'. One of these two Jokers is going to sit in the oval office for the next four years --so we might as well prepare now for whatever social damage is on the way. I hope the 'Presidential Debate' fuels our determination to establish an alterative to the corrupt one party system in this country.
Of course the best way for the truth to come out would be if Ralph Nader appeared at a televised debate with Gush and Bore. But the Republocrat party knows this, and that's why I don't think Gush and Bore will ever appear at a debate with Nader: they are too frightened of the prospect of having to deal with the truth!
nadercrusader posted 10-02-2000 07:07 PM PT (US)
Jack,
I LOVE that Mystery Science Theater idea. It sounds hilarious and I'm laughing already. So, do you think it should be Nader, Winona, and Michael Moore making the wisecracks?

Hop to:

Contact Us | Ralph Nader for President 2000 [nader2000.org]

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000a
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Author	Topic: If Ralph Nader does not get into the debates
Concerned Voter	posted 10-01-2000 03:24 PM PT (US) If Ralph does not get into the debates, what he should do, is that he should hold a series of town meetings across the country. This would give him a chance to circumvent Gore and Bush, get his views to a even wider public. If these town meeting go wonderfully, and enough people are convinced of Nader's views, then Gore and Bush are going to get a big suprise on Election Day. I think that Nader will get people to televise it.
Brian	posted 10-01-2000 08:33 PM PT (US) This is a good idea. I wonder why the California Nurses Association or the Electricians Union didn't stage a debate. That would probably look biased. I would guess the Nader people tried to get some civic/community groups to stage debates and they couldn't pull it off.
eoghan44	posted 10-01-2000 11:59 PM PT (US) From the viewpoint of an outside observer, I think these large rallies with 10,000+ is the best thing Ralph has going right now. No other politician in America is able to pull that off --and that says something about the motivation of Nader voters, if not our absolute numbers. The rallies represent the best working opportunity to sow the seeds that can result in a great harvest somewhere down the line. Every oak started out as an acorn. Nader now has a nucleus of people who share a common desire for 'progressive' policies and change --and that's the most important thing: having a clear message which sweeps like a wildfire across the prairie and can't be ignored. Although, the Republicrat party and the corporate mass media are certainly trying their best to ignore the Nader campaign!
Jack	posted 10-02-2000 06:00 AM PT (US) Seems like the commercial [though expensive] + the rallies are the best things that have been done. The town meetings probably wouldn't reach enough people fast enough, and they would not get televised----the crucial medium for taking advantage of the great p.r. op that they ultimately are all about. I wonder what became of the Internet ideas I heard rumblings of earlier---- a simulcast during the debate? I think that it would be great for Ralph to do a simulcast[or immediately post-debate] where he critiques and responds to what the Corporate Candidates are saying. Maybe do it like Mystery Science Theatre -style [is that what that show is called where they banter and make jokes about the cheesy movie playing....?]. Maybe even invite the other 3rd party candidates over to sit in and heckle too! I think it could be a hilarious p.r. stunt if enough people tuned in so that it wasn't just preaching to the choir [we'd get some well-deserved/needed yuks out of it, but perhaps it wouldn't do a lot to advance his cause this round]. I've asked this before, but why don't The League Of Women Voters sponsor an ethical debate? They are the founders of the debates, and it would be a killer statement to invite the entrenched party + the 3rd party candidates and let the entrenched candidates show their butts by not showing! I would think that would make a powerful statement that not many other entities could match----but I would like to see some other entities stand up and try, rather than merely staging token debates between 3rd party candidates where they fight with each other rather than the primary opposition----and it further instills the image of them not being on the same tier as the Corporates.
Akicita	posted 10-02-2000 09:30 AM PT (US) I agree--but I think Ralph needs to change his emphasis immediately. He's spending 50 minutes of every hour speech talking about all the problems in america caused by the other parties, and how dark and oppressive it is (and yet he describes THEM as the "drab and the dreary"). Mr. Nader is under the genuine impression that he is spreading the "politics of joy and hope", yet he's getting more dismal in his message. He needs to start telling us what HE would do about the problems; we alreayd know baout the problems! Nader has GOT to start talking about what he's already done, and what he will do, to get voters interested. Anyone in this forum could repeat Nader's criticisms of the System, but how many of us could describe what Nader's social security plan is, or his education plan, or the actual steps he'd take to reduce poverty? He talks about them well, but he has to start saying what he will do if he were president.
eoghan44	posted 10-02-2000 12:22 PM PT (US) Jack, I think it's an excellent idea for Ralph Nader to try to get an invitation from the League of Women Voters to debate all the other national candidates. The League of Women Voters, after all, was the last legitimate independent (and traditional) sponsor of the presidential debates before the debates were hijacked by the Republocrat party (in association with the mass media) following what they perceived as a threat to the one corporate party system: Perot. Nader should point out how the corporate party has manipulated the laws and customs of America in order to deprive the American citizenry of real choices and real input into the political process. People just don't realize how much of their freedom has been stripped from them in the past several decades by the corporate monster --because they've been conditioned to value nothing but money by the corporate America, and people who value nothing but money are easily manipulated and corrupted, especially when they are barely making ends meet with what would appear to be (but isn't really) a decent wage. Let Ralph Nader appear at real events and address real problems even as the Commission on Presidential Debates (almost sounds legitimate, doesn't it?) stage some sort of stylized nonsense with Gush and Bore. Imagine a country in which the major candidates are presented to the public through a Kabuki Ritual: that's us. And we better start paying attention to those men behind the curtain! (Apologies to the Japanese, who do not select their national leaders through a Kabuki Ritual, or no longer, anyway). I'm going to watch the 'Presidential Debate' because I think it's a wise dictum to 'know thy enemy'. One of these two Jokers is going to sit in the oval office for the next four years --so we might as well prepare now for whatever social damage is on the way. I hope the 'Presidential Debate' fuels our determination to establish an alterative to the corrupt one party system in this country. Of course the best way for the truth to come out would be if Ralph Nader appeared at a televised debate with Gush and Bore. But the Republocrat party knows this, and that's why I don't think Gush and Bore will ever appear at a debate with Nader: they are too frightened of the prospect of having to deal with the truth!
nadercrusader	posted 10-02-2000 07:07 PM PT (US) Jack, I LOVE that Mystery Science Theater idea. It sounds hilarious and I'm laughing already. So, do you think it should be Nader, Winona, and Michael Moore making the wisecracks?