Cheat Sheet
The Best In Brief
Dems Tried to Bribe Nader?
How scared of Ralph Nader were Democrats in 2004? According to Nader, then-DNC chair and current Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe offered to help fund Nader's campaign if he would agree not to campaign in 19 swing states. In a statement, McAuliffe did not deny the charges, saying through a spokeswoman that he was "concerned that Ralph Nader would cost John Kerry the election" in a similar manner to the 2000 contest. Nader said he turned the "inappropriate" offer down, adding that "if you don't immediately say no, it's like taffy, you get stuck with it." Despite his stand against McAuliffe, Nader happily accepted thousands of dollars at the time from wealthy Republicans who hoped he would steal votes from the Democratic candidate.
Partner Sites: Expedia| Hotels| Hotwire| Urbanspoon| Vimeo
There is a huge difference between taking contributions from republican citizens and being offered money by the head of the democratic party not to campaign !!
What Difference would that actually be. Taking money from repug political activists who disagree with everything you stand for so that you can take votes away from a democratic candidate who basically agrees with your positions and refing to take money from a paied democratic activist who basically agrees with your platform to run your campaign in states where you can take votes away from repug candidates who disagree with every ideal you hold.
Wow Ralph Nader we salute you for your ethics 5 years ago for helping to re- elect bush and cheney with out you we never would have gotten rid of the Clintonistas and gotten Obama elected. what an ego!!!!
Bribe Nadar? Better than shooting him as many wanted to do after his arrogance ushered 'W' into office in 2000. This makes perfect sense and was probably the wisest thing that idiot Terry McAuliffe ever tried. Too bad he failed. Then again, failure is Terry McAuliffe's stock in trade. The real mystery here is that McAuliffe can raise a dime to run for anything after his incredible incompetence in his losing efforts for the Democrats.
Nader used to be so admirable but his huge self-indulging ego is mind-boggling. What an ass, and believe me he's certainly smart enough to know how he f*cked things up election-wise, so his denial and innocence-act is nauseating.
Look at how much misery he brought to the World, enabling the Bush/Cheney near-decade.
I place no credibility in anything Ralph Nader says. The man is driven by personal ego, and it gave us 4 years of George W. Bush.
While I fully support a third, fourth, or seventeenth party being able to run (I am registered NPA) that was NOT the election to be making a point. Many, many people's lives were at stake but Nader cared only about not stepping down to prove something. He knew he would be giving the election to Bush, and if he didn't know then I guess that makes us even luckier that he will never have a chance at winning. How can someone be so selfish? I believe there are times when one must put the well-being of one's country above making a political point, and if Nader can't see this then I don't feel bad for him for a second about being "bribed." Somehow his idiocy takes away from the disgraceful act the Democrats attempted to commit.
I have to stick up for Nadar.
Gore lost because of Gore. He underestimated the maliciousness of the GOP, overestimated his own popularity, and completely missed that half of this country would fall in love with a "windshield cowboy".
Furthermore Nadar's platform is FAR from identical to the Dem.s. Nadar doesn't really see any difference between the DNC and RNC-they are both owned by big money, big corporations.
This user is no longer registered.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.