Ralph Nader on the 2012 election

Apparently, Ralph Nader only sees one man in the race who offers any semblance of hope for the country.

Ron Paul.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/ralph-naders-grand-alliance/

Good for him, I say, although reading that has me thinking it sounds more like he is choosing Paul as a lesser of evils rather than a full-on endorsement, in labeling the current Obama-led Democratic party as more Republican than as true liberals.

Not his perfect candidate, but it makes sense in that there are a lot of issues the two would agree with considering that Ron Paul wants to cut back government on just about everything, including what Republicans hold dear, such as military spending, corporate welfare, and the war on drugs, in addition to what many Democrats hold dear.

I like Gary Johnson better than Ron Paul, because he less concerned or has a less restrictive stance on some social issues. The big stuff, they are pretty similar. I also think that I just know more what to expect from him, Paul is bit ... unpredictable or something... to me. I'm not convinced that Johnson has a good chance to win the primary. He's like Rudolph, all of the other republicans laugh and call him names. They never let poor Rudolph join in any reindeer games. Or debates as the case may be. But maybe for the right time right place we need someone like that.

With Paul in the race, I think there is only room for one libertarian type republican. I can totally understand where Nader is coming from, that more of a libertarian influence from a republican candidate would attract more voters from the other side (democrats) than some (most) of the other people in the race this year.

I wish that as a country, we would fight less about controversial social issues and make them the primary focus and deal more the important things like the economy we would be in a better place. It's just like that whole fight over the budget was more about the minor funding of Plan Parenthood than cutting enough money somewhere that would actually make a difference. It just feels like diversions to me. Wave a few social issues around and that is what people focus on, totally ignoring the big things that are bigger problems. I don't know maybe I'm falling in the same trap, since it the social stuff that I like better about Johnson. I just feel like this campaign year is going to be really ugly. I'd rather debate things like the economy, taxation, foreign policy, education that at least there can be some resolution between sides than things like abortion, sexuality, evolution that people have such extreme positions on that its a fight that really goes no where, like threads on those subjects here. 100 pages of posts and all you end up with is no one can agree, people insult each other, and random pics because people are tired of the same s*** different day.

Paul/Nader 2012?