Nader Supports A Martin O’Malley 2016 Run

Posted by | November 13, 2014 14:18 | Filed under: Politics Radio Interviews Top Stories


Ralph Nader believes the Democratic Party blew it in 2014, and they are making a mistake with an early “coronation” of Hillary Clinton.

Well to sum it up, the Democratic Party is unable to defend the Republic from the worst Republican Party in history. The Republicans are as extreme, more extreme as they’ve ever been…If you run away from your own President, you better run to something that stands for something that people can support you on. But they ran away from Obama and were trying to embrace and blur the differences with Republicans…The only interesting thing is that the wishy-washy candidates in the Democratic party for the Senate lost and the ones who weren’t so wishy-washy like Ed Markey and Al Franken, they won going away. So that’s the lesson.

…it’s very bad for the Democratic Party to start a coronation of Hillary Clinton that early. Very bad. Because what happens if she stumbles and there’s no one else known to take her place? There’s going to be at least 10 Republican candidates for President. Governors, Senators, you name it, it’s going to be very very competitive.

…So I’m for a Governor O’Malley of Maryland following through on his declaration to others, including me in a meeting I had with him about a year ago, that he was not intimidated by Hillary Clinton and he’s going all the way for the Democratic nomination.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.

12 responses to Nader Supports A Martin O’Malley 2016 Run

  1. mea_mark November 13th, 2014 at 14:51

    I would take O’Malley over Clinton but not over Warren. He should definitely run. The democratic party needs to really look at the issues and not just run someone who we think can win. We need a candidate that embraces winning issues that people care about. It is time to start talking about the issues and find out who really stands for what.

    • burqa November 13th, 2014 at 17:08

      I don’t think O’Malley can attach himself to anything having to do with “winning” after his lieutenant governor got a facefull of GOP knuckles from a guy who’s never been elected to anything in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans 2-1.
      I disagree, mea_mark. I think any of the names being floated as possible contenders would pretty much be for the issues the majority of Democrats are for. We damned well better win, if for no other reason than a couple Supreme Court seats should be up for the next president to select nominations for. We’ve got to win back a Senate majority and we’ve got to win the presidency.

      Were I to pick a fave potential candidate, it would be former Va. Senator James Webb. Love the guy and admire him like none of the other leaders in the clubhouse. But he won’t win the primary or the general.
      Everyone else seems to be, but I’m not so sure Hillary will run. Not sure why, unless it is a guess she’s had enough of it all.

      • eyelashviper November 13th, 2014 at 17:38

        I welcome as many candidates as possible in the primaries, to get the message out that the Dems are the only rational party. The issues need to be pounded into the minds of voters, along with the contrast of the Goper opposition to all good policies.
        Webb would be very appealing to many, as he is no hack, and people are yearning for people like him.
        Primaries with Warren, Sanders, Webb, Malloy, et al would be a real boost to the party and would certainly drive the reich wing completely bonkers.

  2. mea_mark November 13th, 2014 at 15:51

    I would take O’Malley over Clinton but not over Warren. He should definitely run. The democratic party needs to really look at the issues and not just run someone who we think can win. We need a candidate that embraces winning issues that people care about. It is time to start talking about the issues and find out who really stands for what.

    • burqa November 13th, 2014 at 18:08

      I don’t think O’Malley can attach himself to anything having to do with “winning” after his lieutenant governor got a facefull of GOP knuckles from a guy who’s never been elected to anything in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans 2-1.
      I disagree, mea_mark. I think any of the names being floated as possible contenders would pretty much be for the issues the majority of Democrats are for. We damned well better win, if for no other reason than a couple Supreme Court seats should be up for the next president to select nominations for. We’ve got to win back a Senate majority and we’ve got to win the presidency.

      Were I to pick a fave potential candidate, it would be former Va. Senator James Webb. Love the guy and admire him like none of the other leaders in the clubhouse. But he won’t win the primary or the general.
      Everyone else seems to be, but I’m not so sure Hillary will run. Not sure why, unless it is a guess she’s had enough of it all.

      • eyelashviper November 13th, 2014 at 18:38

        I welcome as many candidates as possible in the primaries, to get the message out that the Dems are the only rational party. The issues need to be pounded into the minds of voters, along with the contrast of the Goper opposition to all good policies.
        Webb would be very appealing to many, as he is no hack, and people are yearning for people like him.
        Primaries with Warren, Sanders, Webb, Malloy, et al would be a real boost to the party and would certainly drive the reich wing completely bonkers.

  3. tiredoftea November 13th, 2014 at 15:03

    Ralph makes good points about Dems cowering and losing while strong progressive Dems did well. That only tells part of the story as the populist message is tamped down by the DCCC and DSCC to “appeal” to red state voters. Perhaps with Sen. Warren’s appointment to the Senate policy committee, they will learn the lessons that will lead to winning 2016 House campaigns.

  4. tiredoftea November 13th, 2014 at 16:03

    Ralph makes good points about Dems cowering and losing while strong progressive Dems did well. That only tells part of the story as the populist message is tamped down by the DCCC and DSCC to “appeal” to red state voters. Perhaps with Sen. Warren’s appointment to the Senate policy committee, they will learn the lessons that will lead to winning 2016 House campaigns.

  5. mmaynard119 November 13th, 2014 at 16:29

    Nader promised the support of all 5 political followers to O’Malley.

  6. mmaynard119 November 13th, 2014 at 17:29

    Nader promised the support of all 5 political followers to O’Malley.

  7. burqa November 13th, 2014 at 16:59

    I used to like Nader a lot, but then it seemed he got to believe his own press too much and morphed into his image, and then became sort of a parody of himself. Now he reminds me of John McCain, who has fallen for the same thing and now seems to look for any issue to show everyone he’s still a “maverick.” Same with Nader, who just wants to be this crank contrarian on the Left who doesn’t have anything but grumpiness and a pile of unsold books in the hallway by the front door to offer.
    I’m not saying I don’t like the guy, but after his previous meddling I just don’t think he has anything positive to offer any more.
    He’s gotten to be like those argumentative people you meet who say to you, “Tell me what you believe and I’ll tell you where you’re wrong, whatever it is.” Nader does the same thing, but tosses in some doo-dads
    about corporate money and stuff….

  8. burqa November 13th, 2014 at 17:59

    I used to like Nader a lot, but then it seemed he got to believe his own press too much and morphed into his image, and then became sort of a parody of himself. Now he reminds me of John McCain, who has fallen for the same thing and now seems to look for any issue to show everyone he’s still a “maverick.” Same with Nader, who just wants to be this crank contrarian on the Left who doesn’t have anything but grumpiness and a pile of unsold books in the hallway by the front door to offer.
    I’m not saying I don’t like the guy, but after his previous meddling I just don’t think he has anything positive to offer any more.
    He’s gotten to be like those argumentative people you meet who say to you, “Tell me what you believe and I’ll tell you where you’re wrong, whatever it is.” Nader does the same thing, but tosses in some doo-dads
    about corporate money and stuff….

Leave a Reply