2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWho here will admit to voting for Ralph Nader in 2000?
And how many are supporting Bernie Sanders this time?
Let me guess a whole lot of people that delvered us George Bush are voting for Bernie. Why not? Egos always trump electoral politocs. Morons never figure this out.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)Bernie is running AS A DEMOCRAT, not a green.
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)I am asking the Bernie fans to show up and admit they were Ralph Naderfans in 2000. Jesus, this ain't rocket science. Here is my guess -no current Bernie fan will admit to voting for Ralph in 2000..
.even though they did. They hate any political party that is not as politically pure as their perfect idea of what our politic should be. Sucks to be them. Truely wish they would spend their time convincing Republicans to become Democrats, instead of splitting Democrats to get Republicans elected. See Maine if you need a clue.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)That gets "confirmed" if no one says they voted the way you're sure they did. How convenient.
Paka
(2,760 posts)and I most certainly did NOT support Nader in 2000. I'm not so foolish as to expect perfect. Every candidate, being human, has faults. I look for those I can live with. Bernie made it very clear from the get-go he would not be a spoiler. There is NO comparison in this election to 2000. Just maybe, Lieberman on the ticket was a downer for some as it was for me. Just maybe a few potential voters couldn't stomach that.
Response to Old and In the Way (Reply #2)
Post removed
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)just as those who would vote for Bernie in the general will vote democrat.
As far as no one admits they voted nader, you sure do not get into the fights I do with the Nader voters here, and there are hordes on them on DU.
However, what people whop want to go all in for Hillary do not realize is that she is following the very same pattern responsible for embarrassing losses; act like you are a GOP too, and that you hate the left as much as the GOP does. Act like you want to please Wall Street just as hard as the GOP does, why, because to paraphrase Truman, given a choice between a fake and a Real GOP, the idiots will always pick the real one, whereas the democrats try to run from their base full speed.
This party has so isolated the base that the only leftward pressure is to make Hillary work a bit harder to please us by reminding her that we could pick Bernie. It is not like Erskine Bowles and the rich donors will not be putting pressure, or whispering to her ear "remember, once you get in, you can get rid of the left once and for all and be the new sort of democrat."
tblue37
(65,340 posts)tblue37
(65,340 posts)too eager to accept Republican support to undermine Gore--even saying in an interview that he'd vote for Bush rather than Gore if he had to choose between the two.
Also, despite the good things he accomplishec in the past as a consumer advocate, even back then there were plenty of horror stories about how he abused the idealism of eager young people to exploit them as workers in his organization, so I was always somewhat concerned about his attitude toward the "little people."
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)and as for splitting Democrats, look in the mirror.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)brewens
(13,582 posts)He actually told me this story. He was at the polls here in Idaho, get his ballot and goes into the booth. Not seeing Nader on the ballot, he turns around and loudly asks, "hey! how come Nader isn't on here?" Freakin' idiot! You could not have paid a bit of attention to Naders campaign and not known that the big issue was his not getting on the ballot in all 50 states! It was one of our mutual aquaintences that convinced him to vote Nader. In that case though, I can pretty much guarantee you that both of those guys would have voted Republican otherwise. Weird I know, but even though Nader may have blown it for us, he did cost a few Republican votes too.
Bernie is like Jerry Brown when Clinton was first elected. I'm for Bernie now but would vote for whoever is our nominee. Brown had a lot of support until he fianlly lost out.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Someone from Missouri called me and offered me a swap. He'd vote for Gore if I agreed to vote for Nader. Said neither of our votes would make any difference. I refused.
I am supporting Bernie. Sorry not to be a great example for your mean-spirited OP.
Response to merrily (Reply #3)
Post removed
merrily
(45,251 posts)It's a shame you can't seem to grasp the full meaning of Reply 1, though.
So, you asked if I voted for Nader only so you could insult me, even if I said no?
Is your real issue that someone besides your candidate had the nerve to enter the primary?
Or is it that Bernie is not a DINO?
Hard to tell.
Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,500 posts)Myrina
(12,296 posts)I was thinking the same thing.
Way to make me NOT want to vote for HRC.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)Will vote for the Democratic Nominee in the general. Sorry to disappoint. And huge difference between wanting a contested primary and supporting a spoiler in the general.
still_one
(92,187 posts)deutsey
(20,166 posts)cascadiance
(19,537 posts)We can play that game too!
n/t
shenmue
(38,506 posts)still_one
(92,187 posts)as a Democrat.
What about those supporting O'Malley, are you going to say the same thing to those supporters
How about this, why not let the Democratic primaries decide who our candidate will be.
Bernie is no third party candidate, he is running as a Democrat.
As far as your last comment about egos is concerned, if the shoe fits, maybe you should wear it
Adenoid_Hynkel
(14,093 posts)The Clinton administration sold the left out on NAFTA, GATT, WTO, MFN for China, "Defense" of Marriage, etc.
Bill and his conservacrat advisors figured they could as far right as they want and the left could do nothing, because what were they going to do - vote for a Republican.
Ralph gave those who were fed up with the DLC and Lani Davis/Dick Morris-style advisors a voice to vent their frustrations.
Gore ran a terrible campaign, listening to those same advisors, culminating in his pick of the rightwing Lieberman. His campaign was a goner, with or without Ralph in the race. And it was only when Nader caused Gore to go populist at the convention that the Democrats closed the gap and eliminated Bush's lead from most of the year.
Nader started the conversation on getting the party back to its roots, which led to Hoaward Dean, which led to 2006 victories and led to Obama.
TM99
(8,352 posts)I had left the Republican party in the 1990's. The Democratic party had gone Third Way. New Dems are not just moderate Republican's that infiltrated their party, it is really a new party unto itself. It is neither fully Republican or fully Democratic. It picks and choose bits and pieces to push a corporatist agenda.
I was not going to vote for Bush. The GOP had moved well beyond the Teddy Roosevelt/Eisenhower Republicans that I grew up with in my family so that was definitely not an option. Gore, as you say, did not convince me that he would be any different than Clinton. And when he chose Lieberman, I went with Nader as well. I don't regret that vote in the least, and I would do it again.
He had a track record on civil rights, economic rights, environmentalism, and the Green party fit my principles and positions that year more than any other.
I voted for Ross Perot as well in 1992. And I will vote for Sanders in the Democratic Primary. I am even registering as a Democrat by the end of the year to be able to do so fully in Arizona. If he does not win, I don't know who I will vote for. I can't see any GOP being the right fit, and I will not be voting for Clinton.
But I am actually hopeful that Sanders can win this. We shall see.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)Gore ran a lame campaign and still won the popular vote and would've won Florida if the statewide recount option had been followed (and the Supreme Court had stayed out of it)...all that despite Jeb Bush purging thousands of African-American Democrats from voter rolls and the deliberately confusing butterfly ballots, among other dirty tricks.
But no, to some it's all about Nader.
"Ralph gave those who were fed up with the DLC and Lani Davis/Dick Morris-style advisors a voice to vent their frustrations."
Frankly, I was tempted to vote for him because I believed his critiques of corporatism and the two main political parties were essentially on target.
However, I voted for Gore because my rationale at the time was that there was no way Nader could win and if he did win in some bizarro-world scenario, he wouldn't have been able to govern.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)and voted Gore/Lieberman who nobody i know that was leftish was excited about voting for. I never blame the Nader voters for the Gore/Lieberman ticket sucking as bad as it did. to this day i still believe Al Gore is highly overrated, maybe it is because of that climate change movie combined with his election being wrongly given to Bush by the Supreme Court which gives him this martyred lefty folk hero status because he sure was considered a bland 3rd way DEM before all that. and what in the flying fuck was he thinking when he chose the vile fucking Lieberman as his running mate?
I lived in a safe blue state at the time so my vote for Nader wouldn't have mattered if i had voted for him.
Adenoid_Hynkel
(14,093 posts)he was the biggest cheerleader for NAFTA, which did untold damage to environmental protections.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)If I was a FL voter at the time I would have regretted it.
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)Today though, I'd vote for Nader.... given the same sort of choice: Bushi-sm vs. Gore's warmed-over corporate Clintonism.
Only Nader.... prophetically... was talking about problems built-in to the political/economic system itself.
That was a conversation we HAD to have and at long last we are BEGINNING to have it.
But we lost 15 years in the meantime.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)But, I could have because I live in Minnesota.
I could have written in Purple Cow for all the difference my presidential vote in Minnesota counts.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)And if you think my write-in Nader vote made a rat's ass bit of difference in blood-red Idaho, I have a bridge...
<a href="http://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotos-g35625-Twin_Falls_Idaho.html#18473100"><img alt="" src=""/></a><br/>This photo of Twin Falls is courtesy of TripAdvisor
Hoppy
(3,595 posts)Why? Because I don't want any more wars.
NCjack
(10,279 posts)can't have a "Bernie" (or better), when can I?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Total ignorance on your part. I'll help you. George bush fucking stole it. Al Gore fucking won it.
You are welcome!
fredamae
(4,458 posts)I did not, never have and never will vote for Nader...
Fact: morningfrog nailed it ....
For What purpose does the OP ask the question?
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Persondem
(1,936 posts)Nader made it possible by costing Gore 2 states. It wasn't just FL.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Don't give bush cover by shifting blame from his illegality.
Persondem
(1,936 posts)Facts are that Nader definitely cost Gore FL and could have cost him NH. Per this article in WAPO ...
"Nader won enough votes in two states Florida and New Hampshire to put either of them in Gores column. Nader won 97,488 votes in Florida, which easily could have swung the election to give Gore the states 25 electoral votes, and there would have been no need for a recount. Even without Florida, adding Naders 4 percent of the New Hampshire vote to Gores 47 percent would have given Gore a 270 to 267 victory in the electoral college."
Notice that line mid paragraph "... there would have been no need for a recount."
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Persondem
(1,936 posts)electoral college results were 271 - 266. Those are the votes that count. Take Nader out and it flips to Gore leaving Bush et al with no chance to steal.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Tsk tsk.
Persondem
(1,936 posts)You are giving Nader a 100% pass which is historical and factual nonsense.
You know what you can do with your "tsk tsk".
Nitram
(22,794 posts)And reluctantly accepting that one of my my heroes, Ralph Nader, helped a right wing idiot gain the presidency.
Hoppy
(3,595 posts)from Clinton.
a kennedy
(29,658 posts)signs, and shouting "Bush and Gore make me want to Ralph"......I was naive, and terribly sorry now for voting that way. Please forgive me.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)Putting this one where it belongs.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)I detest Nader.
JustAnotherGen
(31,819 posts)Kick!
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Therein lies the problem. I voted for Gore, but shit, he didn't even win his home state. Yea, the GOP pulled some election shenanigans (and why weren't we better prepared?), but it really comes down to the simple fact that Gore ran a shitty campaign.
Leith
(7,809 posts)I'm still glad that I did.
I lived in North Carolina at the time - a state that was guaranteed to go red. Nader didn't get enough signatures to make it to the ballot so I wrote the name in.
Aside: a pundit on TV claimed that Nader did not get a single vote in NC. That was yet another lie from a talking head.
Now that I live in the swing state of Nevada, my vote will go to the official Democratic candidate.
I'm not a moron and it was not ego that prompted my Nader vote.
As for Bernie Sanders: I think he is wonderful. This country desperately needs somebody to deliver the message that he does. Still, I know that he will not be the candidate because of how American politics works (and doesn't work). This is probably what the vast majority of posters feel. If his message pulls other Democratic candidates to the left, all the better.
stage left
(2,962 posts)Also, spell check is your friend.
brooklynite
(94,527 posts)...and I still did what I could to get him elected.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Adenoid_Hynkel
(14,093 posts).
lame54
(35,287 posts)LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)Even in 2000 I was sick of Third Way Democrats. Sick of the way they warped the Democratic Party. Sick of the "vote for us because we're not as bad as them" bull that gets us nowhere. When I switched to Green in 2000 I didn't leave the Democratic Party - IT HAD ALREADY LEFT ME and MANY OTHERS.
I voted for Nader in the bluest part of blue state NY so it didn't matter a damn in the final result.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_New_York,_2000.
I have now switched back to Democratic to vote for Sanders in the primary. I think the Green Party is going nowhere at least in what's left of my lifetime.
Where's the ego in voting for who you choose? That statement of yours makes no sense, so don't be calling anyone a moron.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Maybe find someone smart to explain to you how elections work.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)if he were the only person on the ballot. That's Alaska, and I felt perfectly safe voting for Nader.
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)Arnold Yes.
DesertFlower
(11,649 posts)for ross perot? that vote helped clinton.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)A while, over Ralph #%%#%ing Nader.
i MAY vote for Sanders, in the Primary, difference being, it's the primary.
As long as Sanders is running for the (D) nomination, it's a bogus comparison. Once we have a nominee, anyone who at that point refuses to support the nominee- that is when you get into Ralph Nader territory.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)and I'm not sorry. Gore was not going to win in Alaska anyway, and it was refreshing to vote my conscience.
And, yes, I'm supporting Bernie Sanders, but I will vote for Hillary if she is the choice I'm given.
Is this some kind of purity test? Am I in danger of being banned?
joshcryer
(62,270 posts)There were massive voter exchange drives, before social media even had an effect. People in safe states pledging with others in unsafe states to vote Nader (if he got 5% of the vote he would've been eligible for funding), and those in unsafe states to vote Gore.
Nader gave up building the Green Party, and instead focused on building himself up. It's all on him. I consider him the reason the Green Party suffers from obscurity these days.
Liberty Belle
(9,535 posts)He siphoned off just enough votes from the Dems to get Bush elected.
Sanders or Hilary will win the primary, and the party will unite behind the winner. If anything having two Dems in the primary is better for the party - it means we will see Dem debates, not just Republicans grabbing all the airways, and many more people learning about the issues that matter to Dems. It was a mistake not to have a primary challenger for Obama -- if there had been, and the people heard debates on Dem issues, maybe we wouldn't have seen the GOP mid-term takeover of Congress.
I did not vote for Nader, though I agreed with his policies.
My best friend did, but then his cousin, Winona LaDuke, was Nader's running mate in the Green Party and a champion of Native American as well as environmental values.
I did make the mistake of voting third party once when I was young, for John Anderson because Jimmy Carter had mucked up the Iran hostage situation and we had double-digit inflation. The result was Reagan getting elected which nobody thought could happen. I've never made that mistake again.
But I do vote my conscience in primary elections, and then hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils in the general election if my preferred candidate does not win, rather than go third party and have the worst of all options win.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)And I voted in an inconsequential state everyone knew Bush would win, and he won it by 30 points (Kansas)
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Voted for Gore, supporting Bernie, never gave a shit about Nader.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)but I was 16.
And Bernie is my front runner in the primary.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Last edited Fri Jul 24, 2015, 04:08 AM - Edit history (1)
Much to my shame. Not only that, voted in Florida, in Palm Beach County on the butterfly ballot.
I now wear a scarlet H for coming out in support of Hillary Clinton.
I think, however, your comparison is unfair since Sanders is not running as a third party spoiler. He is seeking the Democratic nomination and has said he will not run outside the party.
Reter
(2,188 posts)Thought I voted for Gore.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)Promise not to do it again.