Reply #126: Undemocratic? Pointing out that a vote was dumb isn't undemocratic

[Inland]

Nobody's saying you can't have views or vote how you want. You can. You just have to accept that others will note the consequences of your vote.

For republicans, the consequences are clear enough. They at least got what they THOUGHT they wanted, namely, Bush.

But Naderites cast their votes in a manner that helped Bush as well. That's why it's so crazystupid. We know Naderites didn't want Bush or Gore, but they knew their votes would only get them halfway, that is, they wouldn't get gore but they would get BUsh. They knew their vote

That's why you can't criticize the splinter parties. We don't know them so we don't know whether Bush was their second choice after their nutbag splinter candidate. Therefore their choice to vote for the splinter and let the chips fall where they may might have been consistent with their own values.

But we DO know that Gore was the second choice after Nader===if it wasn't, then that makes the voter the very "no difference" kind of idiot the OP complains of===and since everyone knew Nader was unelectable, the decision to vote for Nader becomes irrational as a matter of electoral politics.

The only Nader voter that could rationally have voted for Nader the purist, ideologically driven activist that would rather be under Bush's thumb than dirty himself by voting for someone who could win. Those people have simply made the values judgment that they would rather hold themselves up as superior while watching the country burn. Thankfully, almost every Naderite has grown up in the last couple of elections and such are few and far between.