Nader on the debate: It isn’t who won, but what won

Ralph Nader, the independent presidential candidate, says on his blog that it isn’t who won (Obama or McCain) but what won:

Militarism won.
Boondoggle star wars won.
Corruption won.
Corporate crime won.
Bailouts for Wall Street won.
Nuclear power won.
Aggressive NATO won.

What Lost?
Peace advocates lost.
Consumers lost.
Workers lost.
Solar energy really lost.

10 Responses to “Nader on the debate: It isn’t who won, but what won”

  1. Zak Carter Says:

    All third party candidates against the bailout need to step up! This is a golden opportunity to showcase major differences at a time when the public is pissed at the washington status quo, and at a perfect time - americans have a short attention span - but its just a short time till election day!

  2. Richgriffin Says:

    Any suggestions on HOW to go about stepping up? I don’t watch or read any corporate media but I get the gist of it is that they are not reporting it objectively.

  3. RobertD Says:

    I enjoy third party watch, and independent political report. But even here, people cannot say who they support?

    It’s so easy to criticize, very hard to be for something. But in the end, being for something, is integral to the process.

    Referencing 3rd parties as if they were a single unit, is a mistake. We are here to get the rest of the news, the mainstream media leaves out.

    I’m very much in favor of Nuclear Power, so I do not support Nader in his quest vilify this clean source of renewable energy.

    Nader is also very much in favor of government control. He’s not against spending $700 billion, only in spending it in the manner we’ve seen today.

    Very few candidates have the opinion that you see voiced by Bob Barr, which is we do not spend $700 billion at all, that we allow markets to work without diverting money from taxpayers, Bob Barr takes a stand, that says the government should not be a major player in the private economy.

    Nader believes the opposite, that the government is the tool to make the economy ‘fair’ for ‘consumers’

  4. Jonathan Says:

    great video featuring the Obama Girl and Ralph Nader

  5. same as it ever was Says:

    The Wall Street Bailout Bill:
    Bush McCain Obama et al.

    The Realignment Of American Politics:
    Anderson Baldwin Carter Choate Clemente Gonzalez Gravel Kaptur Kucinich McKinney Nader Paul Perot Sheehan Ventura

  6. Zan Ozimek Says:

    Nader campaign has blogged a point-by-point response to the debate at Dick Morris’ site - Bob Barr is also up and McKinney is supposed to have a response, too.

  7. Nancy Says:

    “Nader is also very much in favor of government control. He’s not against spending $700 billion, only in spending it in the manner we’ve seen today.”

    I love it when people talk about Nader as if he’s salivating over spending $700 billion just because he thinks we should have socialized medicine and some regulation.

    I’m really not all that much for a bigger government, but the truth is Nader couldn’t dream of spending nearly as much as that corporate puppet government we have in charge now. They pretty much have set the record on that.

  8. g-punk allstar Says:

    Don’t vote for Ralph Nader. He is a false leftist and doesn’t stand up for true left-wing ideals. VOTE MOORE/ALEXANDER 2008

  9. Johnny Says:


    Like has been pointed out, Nader’s not sitting out there just waiting to spend this money. In fact, he’s against a reckless bail out. Don’t say Ralph Nader is not making a principled stand just because you don’t agree with his principles. Also, if you actually read his plans, and the spending he will eliminate, you would realize Ralph Nader would drastically reduce the size of government. Just because Nader supports some regulation and universal health care doesn’t mean he would be a reckless spender, nor increase the scope of government. If you look at his overall platform you would realize Nader would shrink government.

  10. Jonathan Says: article on Nader

Leave a Reply