I think DC is one of few pockets where enough like minded people think of his political didacticism as godlike. I find these people tedious even though I align with 93% of their goals. It’s the purity politics and monastic tendencies I can’t stand. He did of course do some long term good as far as safety standards and grass roots advocacy. The all or nothing purity alienated most from him.

Not simply elderly but an old crank; does not resemble the demi-hero that he was 25+ years ago. Now primarily into public-self-validation, when he collects enough energy.

Not a big deal any more.

old

Pied piper of voter destruction.

I liked him before 2000. And then the election. Even now I think of him as an egomaniac jerk.

Anonymous wrote:wait, does he live here?

All I can think is he screwed up the election of 2000

Which is sad, because he actually has done good for the country in the past.

But he has gotten crazier as he has aged.

Myth. This can’t be proven because you’re assuming Gore deserves to get votes cast for Nader.

What? Gore would have been a hugely good and effective president.

Bush lied us into a war and put it on a credit card. Thousands of American kids were killed for — and it pains me to say this — no reason. Americans. Killed. Because Bush and his neocon team had literally no idea how the fricking world works. “Welcomed as liberators” - those god fool morons.

We wasted over a trillion on the Iraq war and the beneficiaries were the DeVos and Cheney families.

And Nader wrought that disaster. That’s why Rove kicked him some money and some ads in that election.

GW Bush was the second worst president in our history.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't paid attention to him in years. I do think he poisoned his legacy in 2000.

I was proud to vote for Nader in 2000. His legacy is certainly NOT poisoned.

+1. I voted for Gore anyway, but after 9/11 I literally thanked God that Bush was President, because I just knew Gore wasn’t the person for the job at the time. He would’ve been the right president during peacetime, but not after 9/11.

Anonymous wrote:I haven't paid attention to him in years. I do think he poisoned his legacy in 2000.

I was proud to vote for Nader in 2000. His legacy is certainly NOT poisoned.

I haven't paid attention to him in years. I do think he poisoned his legacy in 2000.

Anonymous wrote:I used to work at a Nader's Raider organization and had to make cold calls, and would often get yelled at about how he ruined 2000. But that was in in 2005, and I think that the animus has mostly disappeared. He's still around and as of 3-4 years ago was doing lefty events. Every so often you spy him around Dupont Circle. I think everyone on the left in DC acknowledges him as the innovator he was.

This again. He poisoned his legacy in 2000 so badly that no one cares. There were others in the consumer protection movement as well, and much of what he did in the 1970s/80s would have been accomplished even without him.

I used to work at a Nader's Raider organization and had to make cold calls, and would often get yelled at about how he ruined 2000. But that was in in 2005, and I think that the animus has mostly disappeared. He's still around and as of 3-4 years ago was doing lefty events. Every so often you spy him around Dupont Circle. I think everyone on the left in DC acknowledges him as the innovator he was.

Anonymous wrote:wait, does he live here?

All I can think is he screwed up the election of 2000

Which is sad, because he actually has done good for the country in the past.

But he has gotten crazier as he has aged.

This. I'm not aware though if he is even in the public sphere anymore.

wait, does he live here?

All I can think is he screwed up the election of 2000

Which is sad, because he actually has done good for the country in the past.

But he has gotten crazier as he has aged.

Is he liked, hated or just plain forgotten about?

I know he is a bit of a NIMBY and was up in arms about a recent library project.