Exclusive "New third Force to announce in White House Race"

[Joe Ryan]

Check the link for details of a new candidate who is set to join the race for the White House later this week.

http://www.news3online.com/index.php?co ... 49ueR31k2b

[artvandelay]

[KingKane]

That should read "tord fource".

[junketman]

Actually the third candidate can often decide who the president is. A right wing candidate such as Ross Perot cost Bush Senior the presidency and could draw off right wing fundamentalists, who are unsure about McCain and Palin's religious credentials.

A left wing candidate cost Gore in 2000 and possibly Kerry in 2004, so Obama must hope he has a big enough lead for a left wing candidate not to impact him which I think if those dumb supporters who keep backing Nadar had the sense not to go with Nadar this time shouldn't. Even so Obama is looking like having a big enough lead that a third candidate shouldn't make a difference.

[jdckelly]

Imagine it, excellent video that.

[ManOfReason]

Funny, but I think the title of the topic makes people think this is another of those Ron Paul posts. Probably putting people off reading it.

[Van Damme]

Actually the third candidate can often decide who the president is. A right wing candidate such as Ross Perot cost Bush Senior the presidency and could draw off right wing fundamentalists, who are unsure about McCain and Palin's religious credentials.

A left wing candidate cost Gore in 2000 and possibly Kerry in 2004, so Obama must hope he has a big enough lead for a left wing candidate not to impact him which I think if those dumb supporters who keep backing Nadar had the sense not to go with Nadar this time shouldn't. Even so Obama is looking like having a big enough lead that a third candidate shouldn't make a difference.

If democrats had an ounce of decency they would all vote Nader

[junketman]

Actually the third candidate can often decide who the president is. A right wing candidate such as Ross Perot cost Bush Senior the presidency and could draw off right wing fundamentalists, who are unsure about McCain and Palin's religious credentials.

A left wing candidate cost Gore in 2000 and possibly Kerry in 2004, so Obama must hope he has a big enough lead for a left wing candidate not to impact him which I think if those dumb supporters who keep backing Nadar had the sense not to go with Nadar this time shouldn't. Even so Obama is looking like having a big enough lead that a third candidate shouldn't make a difference.

If democrats had an ounce of decency they would all vote Nader

Perhaps you are right but Nadar voters must have learned by now that (a) voting Nadar is a waste of a good vote because he will never get into the White House and (b) voting Nadar usuallly delivers the White House to the Republicans.

Weren't the Republicans trying their best to get Nadar into the race in 2004? They know he draws votes away from the democrats. I hope he has the cop not to run this time. If it wasn't for him Gore would have been elected and we know for certain there would have been no Iraq war and perhaps no 9/11. If Nadar had any decency he would stay out of the race and allow a true alternative to the Republicans, ie the Democrats win.

[Squire Allworthy]

Actually the third candidate can often decide who the president is. A right wing candidate such as Ross Perot cost Bush Senior the presidency and could draw off right wing fundamentalists, who are unsure about McCain and Palin's religious credentials.

A left wing candidate cost Gore in 2000 and possibly Kerry in 2004, so Obama must hope he has a big enough lead for a left wing candidate not to impact him which I think if those dumb supporters who keep backing Nadar had the sense not to go with Nadar this time shouldn't. Even so Obama is looking like having a big enough lead that a third candidate shouldn't make a difference.

If democrats had an ounce of decency they would all vote Nader

True Nader is a much better candidate than Obama. Much sharper intellect. The dumb thing to do is waste your vote on someone who is of dubious merit. If the Democrats were really concerned about democracy they would have introduced run off voting (transferable). They haven't. WHY? Because if they did all this crap about wasted votes would become nonsense and people may then vote in larger numbers for the likes of Nader, Bar and McKinney. The two party system suits the Democrats just fine.

[junketman]

[quote=Squire Allworthy]

Actually the third candidate can often decide who the president is. A right wing candidate such as Ross Perot cost Bush Senior the presidency and could draw off right wing fundamentalists, who are unsure about McCain and Palin's religious credentials.

A left wing candidate cost Gore in 2000 and possibly Kerry in 2004, so Obama must hope he has a big enough lead for a left wing candidate not to impact him which I think if those dumb supporters who keep backing Nadar had the sense not to go with Nadar this time shouldn't. Even so Obama is looking like having a big enough lead that a third candidate shouldn't make a difference.

If democrats had an ounce of decency they would all vote Nader

True Nader is a much better candidate than Obama. Much sharper intellect. The dumb thing to do is waste your vote on someone who is of dubious merit. If the Democrats were really concerned about democracy they would have introduced run off voting (transferable). They haven't. WHY? Because if they did all this crap about wasted votes would become nonsense and people may then vote in larger numbers for the likes of Nader, Bar and McKinney. The two party system suits the Democrats just fine.[/quote:usz6ox39]

It isn't crap about wasted votes. Those who voted Nadar in 2000 cost Gore the election. I am certain there would have been no Iraq war, high oil prices, and possibly 9/11 and subprime crisis if Nadar didn't stand. The US would have moved to more environmentally friendly policies. Instead the last 8 years has been a godsend to the Republicans with the environment, US workers and the world economy suffering. So please spare me about how Nadar had no impact. The guy is always the greatest friend the Republicans have at election time, he also is a first rate idiot who craves attention. Fine lobby for change. But why piggyback on the election coverage to publicise himself.

He is clearly too dumb to recognise that when he puts his name in the hat, the changes are the Republicans will win, when he could support in his eyes the lesser of two evils which are the democrats.