Nader in Princeton
October 15, 2004
After studying a little bit of Hebrew (hesed, lehem, hoshek, avon), I went for a walk downtown with Katie (who is in the left picture pointing towards Mr. Ralph Nader) and we saw Ralph Nader. Nader was in town speaking at the University; a group of us went down to try and get in earlier this evening, but they were packed and they were going to put us a room with a TV but that seemed lame, so we left. And then tonight…we randomly ran into him. Pretty interesting. After speaking at the University earlier tonight, he was heading down to the Triumph for some time hanging out with locals. That’s pretty cool if you ask me. Maybe I’ll vote for Nader. Ugh, I don’t know who I’m voting for. I haven’t watched the debates…just heard some sound-bytes. I have friends who are voting for Bush, Kerry and some for Nader. I just don’t know. The war is a pretty big issue for me, so that makes me not want to vote for Bush, and he’s just…I don’t know, there’s something about him. But then…Kerry doesn’t come across as the best man for the job either necessarily. I need to figure out something before my absentee ballot comes from home. But until then, I think I’ll go buy this t-shirt.
Tags: Nader, Princeton, Ralph-Nader
Posted in 
Adam Walker Cleaveland: 
October 15th, 2004 at 1:24 am
A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush, especially in the swing states. Sorry you missed the debates. Bush said he was for the life of children and those unborn, but not those children living in Iraq. Kerry know scripture better than Bush and is actaully a Christian (part of a community) Geez, I almost sound political.
Welker is good. His book on Christ and the Holy Spirit is good. He asks if 300,000 charismatics can be wrong? He says yes. :)
Isn’t biblical Hebrew a blast? I really appreciated studying 20 hours a week for two semesters for something I won’t use nearly as much as those who decide the curriculum say that I will. :)
God’s best in your studies,
Rick
October 15th, 2004 at 8:22 am
Prior to the debates, I was so distressed over my inability to distinguish Kerry’s foreign policy from Bush that I wasn’t going to vote for Kerry, in spite of my extreme disapproval of Bush. (The debates have increased my estimation of Kerry significantly, although he’s still sooooo bland.)
This statement from a bunch of Nader 2000 supporters pushed me over the edge to vote for Kerry. Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Cornel West, Wendell Barry, Michelle Shocked, and Sheldon Wolin just can’t be wrong.
(www.vote2stopbush.com)
October 15th, 2004 at 3:59 pm
I’m sorry guys, but the 700 Club has clearly stated God’s leadings, and that is Bush for another four. Those guys can’t be wrong.
Right?
October 15th, 2004 at 6:22 pm
adam, if you vote for nader and bush gets elected, we will hold you personally responsible!!!!! don’t do it! even ani difranco isn’t voting for nader this year. if we really want a three party system, i’m afraid the only way we’ll get it if is bush wins the electoral college again and not the popular vote–a real occasion to put people up in arms.
sigh.
please don’t do it!!!
October 15th, 2004 at 8:01 pm
I agree with Rick and Jen, DON’T DO IT ADAM!! PLEASE!!
October 15th, 2004 at 9:26 pm
You know there’s always Walt Brown, the socialist candidate from Oregon. If you want information about him go to votesocialist.org The party platform is there and there is a bunch of info on Walt Brown and his running mate Mary Alice Herbert.
Also if you want any more information e-mail me and I’d be glad to help.
Also keep in mind that our country has around 50 political parties and that while many of them don’t have candidates running, several of them do. If you need help finding info on and party or it’s candidates let me know I would be more than glad to help.
October 15th, 2004 at 9:35 pm
Another thought…if Adam lives in a predominantly Republican state and votes for a liberal his vote doesn’t count because most states don’t split their electoral votes, so the votes automatically got to the republican regardless of whether he votes for the Kerry or Nader, and If he votes for the Republican in a republican state or a Democrat in a predominantly Democratic state, his vote doesn’t count any more than it would if he had voted against the mjority because his one vote didn’t change where the electorials went. there are very few states that don’t naturally swing one way or the other…so really your one vote doesn’t make a difference.
That being said, if a third party candidate gets 5 percentage of the popular vote in a presidential election, their party gets similar federal funding in the next election to that of the main two parties, thus giving them a greater chance of becoming elected. To me it seems to make more sense because of this to vote for a third party.
“And, if any third party candidate wins 5 percent of the nationwide vote in November, his or her party will be guaranteed federal funding for its next presidential campaign.” ~pbs.org (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/july-dec00/thirdparties.html)
October 16th, 2004 at 12:16 am
Adam are you more persuaded by personalities or policies?
October 16th, 2004 at 2:28 am
please adam! please! we’re counting on you! wait… where am I?
October 16th, 2004 at 2:37 pm
please don’t…..please don’t…..
October 16th, 2004 at 3:13 pm
So…Im neither a Kerry or Bush fan necessarily, but today I was accosted by Kerry folk up on Nassau Street across from Princeton U. Their approach reminded me of hellfire and brimstone street preachers, condemning the “devil” (George W. Bush and his cronies), and extolling the “righteous one” (Kerry). Apparently, we need to help Bush by giving him the help he needs, by sending him to the “looney bin”. These guys were literally following people down the street and being downright jerky.
Friends, speak your mind…but do with respect…please.
I’m all for freedom of speech and such, but such approaches keep me from even considering Kerry.
October 16th, 2004 at 4:13 pm
Adam, you mentioned an absentee ballot, which suggests you are voting in Washington. Kerry’s lead has been slipping there in such a way that a vote for Nader really could be a vote to ensure Bush’s re-election.
I think voting is about more than conscience; it’s about the effect your action has on the outcome. That’s why sometimes it makes sense to vote in another party’s primary, or to choose the lesser of two evils. Consider that when you vote–and only vote for Nader if your true desire is to have four more years of George Bush.
October 16th, 2004 at 7:28 pm
adam, i’m with brian. if you are still registered in WA, then a vote for nader is too close to being a vote for bush. before the debates, i was thinking ‘anyone but bush’, but after the debates and reading up on kerry and edwards, i’m relieved that we have a decent selection even if it is only a 2 party system.
and steve, i must admit that just about everything wendell barry says i take for truth… i think that a multi-party system is something to work for, but not at the cost of bush exploiting:
-our ability to even dialogue with the rest of the world in foreign policy
-the record deficit he’s made out of a record surplus… nothing fiscally conservative about that.
-his star wars fantasy (missle defense)
-some who uses the word ‘crusade’ and ‘axis of evil’
anyway, BUSH ON MARS IN 2004…
October 17th, 2004 at 8:14 pm
ok - to put an end (sort of) to the annoying a vote for Nader is a vote for the Emperor of the Dark Side argument, just trade votes bro - I already did. Go to http://www.votepair.org/ and they will set you up with someone in Texas who will vote for Nader for you, and you vote for Kerry for them. The one good thing about capitalism - someone is always buying.
October 17th, 2004 at 8:16 pm
kerry voted not to ban partial birth abortion, that’s enough for me.