Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Would a progressive third Party help the Democrats more than the Republicans? [View all]coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)59. The lesson I derived from 2000 is that our votes really don't matter, as the SCOTUS
stopped the ballots from being counted. Why bother voting if the SCOTUS is going to stop ballots being counted?
That's called a "bloodless coup d'etat" and Ralph Nader had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
156 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Would a progressive third Party help the Democrats more than the Republicans? [View all]
kentuck
Nov 2012
OP
Yes, of course. Votes for Bush in 2000 caused Al Gore to not be seated.
AnotherMcIntosh
Dec 2012
#151
Fuck third parties. Look what happened when the Repukes allowed the Teanutters to take over.
Tarheel_Dem
Nov 2012
#2
Extreme Republicans. I despise extremists and zealots, no matter what their political stripe.
Tarheel_Dem
Nov 2012
#8
Before Pres. Obama, I didn't think I could despise "SOME" liberals as much as I do. But it is.....
Tarheel_Dem
Nov 2012
#13
Is it even remotely possible, in your mind, for the Democratic Party to change in such a way...?
kentuck
Nov 2012
#20
I don't think nuttery should be encouraged. We're all living with the effects of that.
Tarheel_Dem
Nov 2012
#46
Tell it to Jill Stein, or as I like to call her Ms. 0.03%. Your insults are as ineffective as a....
Tarheel_Dem
Dec 2012
#134
I don't think the Republican Party is in any danger of becoming "obsolete"
Art_from_Ark
Dec 2012
#147
Hey dion! You wanna fight? At least you're not showing me scary pics today.
Tarheel_Dem
Nov 2012
#116
currently we have the xtreme right wing repubs, center-right dems. might be room for liberals nt
msongs
Nov 2012
#3
I think third and fourth parties are more likely and more likely to be helpful
Blasphemer
Nov 2012
#9
Another excellent point. In all honesty, I think today's Green Party is a front organization for...
Tarheel_Dem
Nov 2012
#17
What we need is reform of the system so that non-corporate voices can run and be heard.
woo me with science
Nov 2012
#19
in unusual circumstances like in the state of Vermont or the city of San Francisco where the
Douglas Carpenter
Nov 2012
#22
2000. Ralph Nader directly caused Al Gore to not be seated. NEW HAMPSHIRE NH NH
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#27
The lesson I derived from 2000 is that our votes really don't matter, as the SCOTUS
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#59
I note now four other people have agreed that Nader directly caused Gore to not be seated.
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#76
no, the first step comes before the final step. You'all keep missing that thingydingy. Without Nader
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#87
except that Tennessee is hard red state, while NH loves the environment, Gores #1 issue
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#115
It is a fact that a major progressive third Party would cause the election of a Republican President
Douglas Carpenter
Nov 2012
#35
if we are talking about a right-wing populist candidate - of course that would benefit the Democrats
Douglas Carpenter
Nov 2012
#51
The SCOTUS stopped the ballots from being counted. Had they been counted, Gore
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#60
because YOU are looking after the election itself. A month later. Nader won it for Bush in NH
graham4anything
Nov 2012
#66
Nader received 97,488 in Florida in 2000.According to the official Bush tally they won by 537 votes
Douglas Carpenter
Nov 2012
#69
Gore received more votes in Florida than did Bush, even when Nader is
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#92
that's besides the point. The Leftist Parties in fascist controlled Europe were executed, jailed
Douglas Carpenter
Nov 2012
#41
Um, 1 in 5 American children currently lives in poverty. Still think the Dems are looking
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#61
1 out of 5 children living in poverty is a "red herring"? OK, if you say so. - n/t
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#89
Actually, channeling my inner rat-fucking Karl Rove, I might just do that. It would
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#62
I think this simple fact escapes many of us. They are openly trying to co-opt Skinner's brainchild.
Tarheel_Dem
Nov 2012
#117
Um Gore actually received more Florida votes than Bush, but the SCOTUS refused to
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#64
That would have been a moot point if Nader hadn't drained away another 95,000 votes.
pnwmom
Nov 2012
#97
That assumes that the people who voted for Nader would still have bothered to vote and
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#98
I would love if there was a Social-Democratic Party that could vie for power. But here in America
Douglas Carpenter
Nov 2012
#52
At which point, if they want to ever win anything again they will have to recapture the left.
TheKentuckian
Nov 2012
#80
Branding. Anyone voting TeaPubliKlan currently is not going to vote Democrat
TheKentuckian
Dec 2012
#140
So be it. Against my council but the movers and shakers will do what they will
TheKentuckian
Dec 2012
#145
I am a Moderate. But I am ok with Progressives holding office, even at higher levels than
bluestate10
Nov 2012
#122
Ask the Israelis. Coalition building w/ multiple parties allows the Ultra-Orthodox ....
Hekate
Nov 2012
#54
I find it amazing that you call yourself one of the most Progressive on DU, yet you don't see that
bluestate10
Nov 2012
#123
I also proposed removing the 435 seat size limit on the U.S. House, which would correct the problem
Ken Burch
Nov 2012
#126
Because it's much harder to unseat an incumbent, especially when they're fighting
jeff47
Nov 2012
#107
There often is a lot wrong with the democrat's message, but at some point people make
bluestate10
Nov 2012
#127
Nader took 97,000 votes in FL. If Gore got 1% of those, he would have been President.
bluestate10
Nov 2012
#124
Seems to me that influencing through "intra-party" would have more results than the entire US
libdem4life
Nov 2012
#100
Yes, in that it would cause the Democratic party to replace the Republican party.
jeff47
Nov 2012
#105
The problem is that the Third Parties are so far Left or far right that they don't appeal to
bluestate10
Nov 2012
#131
"Centrists" really would prefer it if we would just "go with the flow" and allow the
Romulox
Nov 2012
#110
Kentuck, I have a question for you and others from the far Left. You have to look back to answer.
bluestate10
Nov 2012
#128
I'm not really sure how post politics Gore can be counted as one and the same as the guy in the frey
TheKentuckian
Dec 2012
#141
Curiousity question for those who claim Nader caused Gore to lose......
socialist_n_TN
Dec 2012
#143
Or, the Democratic Party could move left and negate the need for a third party.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Dec 2012
#144
A shiny dishonest distraction. Doesn't fundamentally change the system. Just a power grab
patrice
Dec 2012
#152