(Ralph) Nader recounted a recent meeting with editors at The Washington Post, who he said told him the paper wasn’t covering his campaign because he had no chance of winning. According to Nader, he replied: "Then why are you covering the Nationals?"
over 3 years ago
duck
7 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
of course he has no shot at winning
if they don’t cover him. Not that I’m a Nader fan, but any third party nominee has almost no chance of winning because they don’t get equal publicity… whether they can afford it or not. It’s one of the many things wrong with what the system has evolved into.
Kevbo: [to George Sherrill] George, you look a lot like Vin Diesel...
Flatbill: Let's get somethin' straight... Vin Diesel looks like me.
-From "The Making of Orioles Magic"
Politics in the country is so fucked up
because of the two party system
"This world extends way beyond this little field of dreams we're dancing in and I want to see that world"
Perot had a shot in '92
If he hadn’t pulled out in July, I think he could have finished second. He didn’t come back until Oct. 1, and finished with 19% in a race where the winner was at 43%.
"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Official Sponsor of Camden Chat GameThreads
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
