Reply #127: Way to ignore all of the other evidence and problems that I have pointed out earlier

[MadHound]

Facts that do indeed show that it wasn't Nader who cost Gore the election in Florida, but Gore himself. Or did you miss that little point about the 600,000 votes Gore pissed away in Florida in order to please his corporate masters at BP.

Oh, and while you are citing a poll that Nader cites(by the by, do you have the original poll?), I am using information direct from Al From and the DLC, folks who have every reason to scapegoat Nader, yet they fail to do so.

Oh, and what about that Votescam thing that Palast handed to Gore on a silver platter? Got any explanation for why Gore failed to call Bush on this issue of disenfranchisement, or is it all still Nader's fault:eyes:

For your information, and as I've shown on this thread with a plethora of evidence, Nader was not a factor in Gore's loss, period. And Nader didn't "willfully set out to cost Al Gore the 2000 election" he set out to make the point that we're living under a two party, same corporate master system of government. That is the hard truth of the matter, and the sooner the Democrats wake up and realize this, and correct it, the better off we'll be. Besides, it is Nader, or anybody else's Constitutional right to run for any office in the land. Do you favor that right, or only favor it win it helps out Democratic candidates, ala Clinton and Perot '92?

Thanks for once more proving my point that Democrats would rather scapegoat Nader and blame the problems of the world on him, rather than doing the hard work of identifying the substantial problems that existed and still continue to exist in the party in order to correct them and bring about a stronger party. It was many of these same problems that continued to haunt Kerry in '04, unltimately costing him the election.



Good job there, your head is firmly implanted in the sand like all of the rest of the good Dems:thumbsup::eyes: