Thread: Ralph Nader

I'd vote for him because he isn't one of the other three.

Originally Posted by 5

I'd vote for him because he isn't one of the other three.

Did you not read his stance on Illegal Immagration???? He is no better than the other 3

Originally Posted by PatrioticSandra

Originally Posted by 5

I'd vote for him because he isn't one of the other three.

Did you not read his stance on Illegal Immagration???? He is no better than the other 3

Is he part of the CFR? Does he support the NAU?

I don't think he supports the SPP however I will concede that he is a socialist which I don't like but he doesn't 'yet' appear to be a globalist.

5 wrote:

I'd vote for him because he isn't one of the other three.

A snake is a snake, regardless of whether it's spotted, blotched, stripped, or solid. Nader is no better than the other three snakes where illegal immigration and border security are concerned. Slithering in yesterday instead of 6 months ago definitely doesn't make him better.

Nader supports Amnesty:
http://www.betterimmigration.com/candid ... rpage.html

[quote]AMNESTY: LONG WORK PERMITS FOR MOST ILLEGAL ALIENS -- supports

This is what Mr. Nader has to say about amnesty on his website under "Immigration":

"There is no evidence that an amnesty for those already present and working constitutes an attraction to would-be immigrants outside the country: again, even from Mexico the immigrants constitute a relatively small percentage of the poor population of that country. We must leave aside the fiction that everyone in the world seeks to live in the United States: people love their homes and leave them, at great risk, only as acts of desperation when their previous way of making a living has become impossible. We in the United States have a special responsibility to those who have come here since it so often been our own government and corporations that have ruined the livelihoods and homes of immigrant workers, and to those in foreign lands that they will not have to make the same choice themselves. Changing these policies is the best way to limit further immigration to levels that are in the interests of both the U.S. and poor nations, and an amnesty for those who are already here is the least we can do as reparations to those whose lives our government has directly or indirectly wrecked. "

This is different in significant ways from what he said in his June 21, 2004, interview with Pat Buchanan for The American Conservative.

In that interview, Mr. Nader said:

“Ralph Nader: This is very difficult because you are giving a green light to cross the border illegally. I don't like the idea of legalization because then the question is how do you prevent the next wave and the next? I like the idea of giving workers and children--they are working, they are having their taxes withheld, they are performing a valuable service, even though they are illegally here--of giving them the same benefits of any other workers. If that produces enough outrage to raise the immigration issue to a high level of visibility for public debate, that would be a good thing.â€

I think it's funny also when he gets in as he will pull votes probably from all of these candidates, the left mostly, and they don't like it. MSM anchors were visibly annoyed by him. ...

Perhaps none of them will get any nominations...perhaps none of them will get in and we'll have no president...something tells me it would be better than having one of them in.

When I see Ralph Nader claiming to be in the race for President...It brings back memories.
Does anyone remember the TV Show Laugh In? Pat Paulson (a comedian) would announce HE WAS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT...He was serious.
Nader...Is he serious?

Originally Posted by PatriotofPast

When I see Ralph Nader claiming to be in the race for President...It brings back memories.
Does anyone remember the TV Show Laugh In? Pat Paulson (a comedian) would announce HE WAS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT...He was serious.
Nader...Is he serious?

I remember Pat Paulson. He was imitating Ralph Nader wasn't he?

If you ask me, it is rediculous for another person who does not have a chance in a million of winning to get into this, which will just further the chances of Obama winning.

I wish we, who are against illegal immigration could get on the same page together and stand behind a candidate. I think we all wish that.

We are ALL going to lose unless we can face the harsh reality that by going in different directions we will get NOWHERE very fast.

If there's any hope for this kind of unity which would give us a very strong chance of victory, I hope it will happen and show itself soon.

At this point, it seems as though coming together will take nothing short of a miracle. We need a candidate who the majority of the American people will be able to relate to and understand clearly, even those who are not as focused in on the problems as we are, because we cannot do it alone either.....even if we do come to some agreement. We will need the majority or even the entire Republican Party behind us as well those who are so much wanting a third party.

It's just the harsh reality of the situation. Otherwise, as I said, we will all lose and so many bad decisions will be made for our country and so much of it, if not all of it will be impossible to repair.

I believe that we must try to find a way to come together, as quickly as possible if the opportunity presents itself, otherwise we may as well prepare ourselves for four years of "ranting" .....if they will even allow us to "rant".

So some people would vote for Nadar instead of Ron Paul!? Even though Ron Paul would close the border and end anchor babies! I am at a loss. I thought your main concern was illegal immigration. I don't understand all of this. I think at Numbersusa I don't have to hear all this nonsense so I'll just stay there.