Should Nader have his own subforum?

[Alonzo]

Should Nader have his own subforum? On the one hand no one posts anything about him. On the other hand I recently saw him polling 6% and we already have one for Barr, who seems to have a lot less support than I expected.

[cronic]

HUH, :dork:
I thought Nader threads was supposed to go in political humor wasn't it?

[Mia]

Why not? The site's name is 'democracy forums'. Perhaps it's correct to show all of the choices we in this free nation enjoy ;-)

[Buck Laser]

Nader should be there, I would think....

HE IS RUNNING FOR THE SAME OFFICE.

I am hoping this list will grow as third party candidates are nominated, and subsequently added?
There are about a gazillion candidates for president...constitution, prohibition, white citizens, LaRouchies, etc... even a sometime poster on DF. Where does one draw the line? A better case might be made for Nader than for those down the line, though.

[Mia]

In light of seeing him polling 6% I'll make a poll on it. No one seems to post anything about him or endorse him though.

Are you saying nomoredems-reps is a no one? :ponder:

[Alonzo]

There are about a gazillion candidates for president...constitution, prohibition, white citizens, LaRouchies, etc... even a sometime poster on DF. Where does one draw the line? A better case might be made for Nader than for those down the line, though.

That's the point. I could list tons of people, and I could list no one but Obama and McCain. I don't think either one is the best solution, and I'd like a middle ground that excludes most of the candidates, as no one discusses most of them, and includes only the ones that have actual discussion.

Seeing the lack of response for the Barr section, despite all the libertarians we have, I'm not sure if there's a point in a Nader one.

Are you saying nomoredems-reps is a no one? :ponder:

Are you looking for something lately? I don't know why you'd think that's what I intended.

[Mia]

It was just a joke! :love:

[Alonzo]

Ah, sorry. My mistake then.

[Pookie]

Pookie for President!!

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f381/PookNSaav/Pookiesig.jpg

[Alonzo]

Pookie for President!!

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f381/PookNSaav/Pookiesig.jpg

Pookie would eat my rats, so no pookie election forum! :fight:

[4Reaganomics]

No, he should not have a subforum

[Osborn F. Enready]

Why shouldn't Nader have a subforum?!?

Is he running for the office of president? Yes.
Is he a valid candidate for the office? Yes.
Is he going to be on some ballots in November for that office? Yes.

Why shouldn't he? Are you people scared of competition?

[PatrickHenry]

Put him on...

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

No, he should not have a subforum

And why not ? Afraid you might learn something or your party will look corrupt if
Nader gets a chance to go head to head whith them?
Kinda like R.Paul. The media would not even give him the same questions as the
others! And he still had a better responce than the corporate cookie cutter candidates.

[Osborn F. Enready]

I still see no sub-forum for Nader?

I am not a Nader supporter, but its obvious if he is in the race, he should have a subforum, correct? (assuming this site is not trying to spread bias through its moderation and forum creation?)

Whats up admins?

[Osborn F. Enready]

It seems like the YES votes won.....

Where is his sub-forum?

[Alonzo]

I told mia, in another thread though, that I'd create it later today when I move Paul. I'm out for the moment though.

I just hope people actually post in it more than the Barr one.

[tecoyah]

Wouldn't a conspiracy forum serve the same purpose?

[4Reaganomics]

You can create the sub-forum, it won't make Nader anymore relevant

I guess after the Green party has its convention in July will be stuck with a sub forum for their candidate as well as the other third party buffoons who poll at .02%.

[Alonzo]

A few people were asking for it so I started a thread to see if people wanted it. More said yes than no. If you don't want it then people need to speak up.

Currently the poll is 4-2 and there seems to be a 50/50 split with people in this thread. The way I see it is more people want it than not, and most people simply don't care.

If a bunch of people oppose it then speak now, and voting too might help. Otherwise I see no harm in adding a sub forum. If most people simply don't care, but seem strongly want it, and it's such a non-invasive thing, I don't see the harm.

How many of the yes people will be using it? Currently no one has posted a thread in the Bob Barr forum besides me.

[firefox]

I voted "no" simply because he's not running a real campaign this time around. If this was 8 years ago, i would have said "yes."

[4Reaganomics]

I don't mind it being there. I just don't understand why you want to go out of your way to creat a sub forum nobody will use Zo. Don't appease these Libertarians who simply want the forum their to back up their whole "there are other candidates" repetative rhetoric.

and the whole, if people gave Ron Paul more time in the media

if people took third party candidates seriously and didn't see it as a wasted vote


but then we see the Bob Barr sub-forum and realize just how irrelevant third party candidates really are

[Alonzo]

Well, it seemed to be a split opinion here so I discussed it with staff. After doing so I added it. I get the feeling that I just made a forum that will remain basically unused, but it doesn't interfere and it's non invasive. Hopefully, at the very least, it will show we are open and welcoming to members of all political views.

[firefox]

Nooo!!! JK I'll just ignore it.