Who blames Nader for 2000, I don't

[cooolandrew]

I was listening to Bernie Sanders a week back on Thom Hartmann and he was sayhing he thought Nader was responsible for Gore's loss. Well Democratically Nader can run, can be critical of both parties, the onus is really on Democrats or Republicans to prove otherwise. So 2000 wasn't Naders fault even if he was funded by dubious sources he is entitled to run. It's down to the voter to decide the truth. Always agree with Bernie but on this one he confused me.

From what I have read of Nader he has been reponsible for some very positive things for America and with so little done for Americans by government, it's easy to understand how he has a cynical view on both parties. I don't think he ran as a spoiler more as a form of protest which, once upon a time was his democratic right.

Nader '' I didn't lose the election Gore lost the election for me''

[JCMach1]

1. Haven't seen this flamebait thread in awhile-- actually, it was his fault

If you look at the professional polysci studies that were done after the election, he peeled away critical support from the democratic candidate...

http://www.electionstudies.org/

and

others...

[cooolandrew]

3. That isn't Naders fault, that is an uninformed electorates fault. You really can't blame him...

... he had his right as citizen to oppose both parties and he did. If Gore was losing votes to Nader the responsiblity was on him to pursude those voters otherwise.

[Bucky]

105. Yes, it was his right to run. That doesn't absolve him of his part in the tragedy

Blaming Nader entirely is silly of course. The lion's share of the blame lays with the corrupt Florida voting officials and the flip-flopping Supreme Court members who decided Bush's right not to be elected president trumped the rights of all Floridians to have their votes counted.

As long as we're blaming, you can even dollop a portion of earned scorn onto Gore for running a pretty crappy campaign and a national news media establishment for jumping on the smear bandwagon. But somewhere in all that mix, I think Nader played a crucial role in drawing the vote totals close enough to make Bush's theft of the election swallowable to enough people to matter.

The only person in that entire fiasco I hold blameless is Pat Buchanan. :P

[Proud2BAmurkin]

106. Exactly. That's like saying if Obama or Hillary or Edwards decided to go 3rd party

because they couldn't get enough support of a major party that it wouldn't be their fault that the RePUKE won. Nobody said Nader wasn't "entitled" to run just that he has the blood of thousands on his hand because he did.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

2. I blame Satan

first, then Nader.

[iamjoy]

4. I Do Blame Nader

and not just for the votes he got. For attacking Gore's left tendencies while Bush was going after the right. IT's hard to win when you're constantly being outflanked on both sides.

Of course he has the right to run. Of course each candidate must earn their votes. Of course, technically Gore won. But Nader helped set the stage and create the environment in which Gore would ultimately lose

But, what is worse, Nader acts like he really believes there would have been no difference between Gore and Bush.

[stevedeshazer]

5. I blame Republicans.

That is all.

[cooolandrew]

8. Exactly there was a lot of manipulation of votes and that was the crime, to me Nader he was...

... a protest candidate, which I can't see any objection in it.

[CK_John]

6. A miser and his matching FEC funds shall not be parted. n/t

[cooolandrew]

10. Well, I don't know the details of that part but Nader being responsible for seat belt laws...

... by campaigning for their use, tells me he isn't a person of complete dishonest repute. Seat belts save lives around the world every day and I can't have hard feelings for someone that has helped in that.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

15. Now there's a goofball post.

If T is R,
then O is L,
leaving L.

[CK_John]

20. Why? Matching funds are the only reason he runs.

[hfojvt]

37. I loathed seat belt laws, long before I loathed Nader

If he had something to do with them, then that just gives me another reason to hate him. He's responsible for the Bush administration AND seat belt laws.

[H2O Man]

7. Legalize Lonnie Anderson's hair.

We should not blame Lonnie for Dick Cheney's hair-do in 2000.

[Webster Green]

9. Gore won in 2000!.....He wasn't allowed to serve, but he won.

Kerry won in 2004, but he wasn't allowed to serve either.




Nader isn't the problem. Fascists and riggged elections are the problem

[Merlot]

28. AGREED! Nader is used to hide the real reasons

Rigged election. Voter purge. Supreme court. Stopping the vote count. Storming the offices.

Can't blame those on Nader.

[upi402]

11. Gore lost his own state. Neocons cheated him. Supreme Court corrupted.

Nader should have done this, shouldn't have done that... true!

But he IS right that corporate money controls both parties.

[leftofthedial]

12. he was a stooge for the coup

they used his ego to play him

no nader in florida? no contest. no bush

[cooolandrew]

13. I have my doubts on that I judge Nader by his history and he's done a lot for Americans.

I am firstly for the Democrats but don't see the participation of more parties in the process as a negative thing. If they had more competiton there would be far less corruption really. As in business competition is healthy compared to consolidated corporate power likewise in politics.

[hfojvt]

39. that might have been true before 2000

I had a fair amount of respect and affection for him before that, but after he worked so hard to elect Bush even after so many people warned him that what he was doing was helping to elect Bush. That one action - campaigning for Bush, certainly negates and then some, any good work he may have done.

[Bucky]

107. Thank you. That's the perfect description of his role in the mess.

He was a useful idiot, little more. That's a shame since Nader is usually so nonidiotish. I thought the differences between his documentary and Gore's was instructive. Gore's documentary was about how we can better meet our responsibility to the world. Nader's documentary was about Nader.

[texanshatingbush]

14. Sorry........but I blame him......

Elections have consequences, and Nader chose to risk splitting the vote for the Democratic candidate and putting the Repukes in the driver's seat.

There IS a difference between the Reich Wing--as we have seen for the last seven years--and the Democrats, and Nader was willing to take the VERY PROBABLE risk putting of the Reich Wing in office--for what? Personal hubris?

Any student of American politics today knows that having a large campaign treasury is essential to winning (not the way it SHOULD be, IMO, but the way it IS). Nader did not have that, could not compete with the Big Boys, yet he was willing to throw us all on the gaming table and place his paltry bet in a high-risk strategy.

He lost.....and WE lost, opening the path for our subsequent loss of: civil liberties, the war on Iraq, national integrity, and unbiased civil institutions (the now-outdated "justice is blind" concept). Oh, and now "E Pluribus Unum" needs to be changed to "E Unus Pluribum" to reflect the corrosive effects on this country of the so-called "Uniter" and his handlers. It will take generations to overcome the fiscal and moral damage done to this country by Karl Rove and PNAC. I blame Ralph Nader for helping to set those forces loose.

[SammyWinstonJack]

16. I so agree with you!

:applause:

[cooolandrew]

17. Yes, there is a difference but that was for Dems and Republicans to prove...

... Naders message must of resonated for him to get votes he didn't make them vote at gun point. So in analysis it was for the Democratic party to fight their corner. I think Nader was wrong in his opinion but I feel he was entitled to say it and to run on it, as much as I do disagree.

[hfojvt]

43. He has a right to campaign for Bush

I would not argue against that. However, it does not make sense to pretend to be a friend of the environment, peace, consumers, and the working class, and then turn around (?) and campaign for Bush.

[cooolandrew]

19. Well, true democracy,is about more than 2 parties I favour Democrats but am tolerant of any party...

.. in the process 2 messages for a country 300 million people is just illogical.

[CK_John]

25. True democracy is a mob. We are a representative democracy. So he should

build a party structure and work to get on the ballot instead of coming out of the woodwork every four years with his tin cup to collect matching funds just like LaRouche.

[DFW]

18. Nader was at least the facilitator

Whatever good he did in the past, people close to his campaign
in 2000 told me off the record that he was in it for the ego
trip and nothing else. He didn't even join the Green Party for
Pete's sake! And all his "there is no difference between Bush
and Gore," well everybody who still believes THAT one, please
raise your hand.

OK, I mean raise your hands NOW, so I can see them , please.

What are you, all amputees or something?

OK, no hands. Nader was at best grandstanding to see his name
in the headlines, and at worst lying through his teeth so he
could get back on TV. What did we ever do to him, neglect to
erect a statue of him in Golden Gate Park, or something? Sure,
we all appreciate what he did on behalf of the American consumer.
That's not enough?

What would it have cost him to tell his supporters a week before
the 2000 election to vote for Gore, or even vote their conscience?
He still could have been a hero and gotten his point across. Instead,
he insisted on carrying his "no difference" charade through to the end.
Well, he and his supporters got one of the two between whom there was,
according to Nader, no difference.

Even if you don't support Al Gore, if you still want to tell me there
would have been no difference between Al Gore and what we got instead,
well, I'm sorry, I don't have a generic name for a hallucinogen that powerful.

[cooolandrew]

22. I don't agree with his postion but agree that he can be a candidate as much as Gravel can..

... and Gravel says he feels he can't win but wants to put out his message in the debate.

[hfojvt]

44. And Gravel is running where?

In the primary where he will not cost Edwards the election (unless he wins the primary). If Gravel runs as an independent to help elect the Republican candidate, then he will be just as big an a$$hole as Nader. Except that, unlike Nader, he does not have the fame and reputation to do nearly as much damage.

[undeterred]

21. Nader is nothing more than a Penis Fish.

[cooolandrew]

23. Well, it wasn't for Nader to pullout of the race it was for us to work harder for Gore really.

[Oddball]

34. Work Harder?

Remember Boxer's maxim, "I will work harder."

He got made into glue. If the Farm is rigged, it doesn't matter how hard you work.

[NoPasaran]

29. Is a Penis Fish anything like a Dickhead?

If so I agree with you.

[undeterred]

47. No, its worse.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=6459766&mesg_id=6459766

[omega minimo]

57. No, it's more like a Scape Goat

[Bucky]

109. I was scared to Google for "penis fish" for a few seconds, fearing what I would find

It was with great relief (which my penis and I sighed in stereo) that I saw the name of Cecil Adams there to assure me of the facts in what a penis fish is. But our relief was short lived. In 2000, the Straight Dope at first tossed off the idea that such capable upstream swimmer could exist. But in 2001 he corrected his earlier skepticism:

Dear Cecil:

This is in reference to your column "Can the candirú fish swim upstream into your urethra?" (May 19, 2000). I recently heard a talk by a visiting scholar who was researching the candirú. The speaker was collaborating with a South American medical doctor who completed a candirú removal operation in 1997. The fish had entered the (male) patient's urethra, had been stopped by the urethral sphincter (if that's the right term), and had turned at a right angle and burrowed into the scrotum. The fish had died, and the subsequent relaxation of its spines facilitated removal. A photograph of the removed fish and part of the affected area (!) was presented. According to the speaker, the patient claimed the fish had swum out of the water up his urine stream. I thought this might be of interest.
--zut, via the Straight Dope Message Board

Cecil replies:

Zut alors! I'll say it's of interest. In my original column I expressed skepticism about Willy-in-the-willy, noting an absence of firsthand or even secondhand accounts. And now here comes a guy who's got eight-by-ten glossy photographs. I've been in contact with Paulo Petry, the scientist you heard, who related the following astonishing tale. WARNING! Gross-out quotient: high.

Petry is an expert in neotropical ichthyology and vice president of Bio-Amazonia Conservation International, a not-for-profit conservation group. While working in the Amazon city of Manaus, Brazil, he noticed a hubbub in the press about Anoar Samad, a urogenital surgeon who had performed the world's first confirmed removal of a candirú from a human penis. What's more, Samad had a live patient and a dead fish to prove it. The world needs to know about this, Petry decided. Herewith an except from an article the two are coauthoring with fish physiologist Stephen Spotte:

On 28 October 1997, one of us (Samad) attended a 23-year-old man from the town of Itacoatiara on the Amazon River who sought medical attention with obstruction of the urethra, having been attacked by a candirú. Prior to being attended, the patient remained untreated for three days and was only administered medication for pain. By the fourth day the patient presented with fever, intense pain, scrotal edema , and extreme abdomen distention from urine retention. Surgical removal of the fish was considered, but rejected in favor of endoscopy . The patient was anesthetized with 5% lidocain and the procedure was performed. The fish was grasped using an alligator-clip attachment on the endoscope and removed in one piece. Fortunately the fish was dead, and decay was beginning to soften its tissues. Tension on the spines had relaxed in death, and they no longer gripped. Had the candirú been alive, its removal would have been more difficult and resulted in greater trauma to the patient. The fish penetrated the victim's urethra while he was standing in the river urinating, actually emerging from the water and entering his penis, filling the entire anterior urethra . He reported trying to grab hold of the fish, but it was very slippery, and it forced its way inside with alarming speed. The candirú's forward progress was blocked by the sphincter separating the penile urethra from the bulbar urethra. With the passage blocked, the fish had made a lateral turn and bitten through the tissue into the corpus spongiosum, creating an opening into the scrotum. Perfusion of the urethra with sterile distilled water prior to endoscopy induced further immediate and pronounced scrotal edema, making it evident that the opening had allowed the perfusate to enter the scrotum. Although the patient had remembered the fish as being small, after extraction it measured 134 mm (51/2 in) , with a head width of 11.5 mm (7/16 in). . . . Some coagulated material was removed, revealing a wound on the bulbar urethra of 1 cm in diameter and associated with a small amount of local bleeding. Although the patient suffered immediate trauma, no long term effects of the attack were noticed 1 year after the incident.

Petry insists this is no joke. The operation is well documented, with photos, a videotape of the procedure, medical reports, and of course the fish, which was donated to an Amazon research institute. (The species couldn't be identified precisely due to decay. I can't decide what's worse: having a live fish inside your penis or a rotting dead one.)

"The description of the case follows exactly what the patient said," Petry tells me. "According to him, he was standing in the water thigh deep, urinating with his penis out of the water yet close to it. The fish jumped and entered his urethra. He repeated the same version more than once when asked to describe the incident to Dr. Samad."

Research by Petry and Spotte found no indication that the fish is particularly attracted to urine. Petry adds, "The only way that the fish could enter the urethra is while it is expanded during urination, otherwise I don't think it could move in." And here you thought the worst thing you could do was pee on the third rail.

--CECIL ADAMS

[edhopper]

24. I don't blame Nader

just the people who voted for him :-)
Seriously, there were many events, both consciously corrupt and accidental, that lead to Smirky McChimp being installed. Nader's candidency was one of them.
I need to ask though, has Nader accepted that he was wrong when he said there would be no difference between a Gore and Bush Presidency. I mean, talk about ridiculous statements.

[MilesColtrane]

26. Nader's contention has always been that there is no difference between..

the two major parties. And, that only the most heinous candidates being elected, with their disasterous policies, will be enough to snap the American voter out of complancency.

...and how's that working out for him?

[Kazak]

27. I don't blame him for running,...

I blame him for not dropping out.

[moondust]

30. Exactly.

And for falsely claiming there is no difference between Dems and Pukes. That may apply to a few individuals like Lieberman and Zell Miller and some DLCers but they are more the exception than the rule.

[Midlodemocrat]

31. Gore won in 2000. Without Nader, there wouldn't have been an issue

that ended up with the SCOTUS selecting that asshat to serve.

Nader's heart is in the right place, but he cost us the White House.

[Orsino]

32. It may be partly his fault that * "won"...

...but it isn't his fault that * is a corrupt fool. Most of the blame should go to the broken electoral process that allows candidates like * anywhere near government.

Nader might have made the best prez of any of 'em. While I could wish that he hadn't run in 2000, we need many more candidates like him.

[Oddball]

33. I Blame Nader.

Nader made it close enough for Bush to steal in Florida. Yeah, Nader has a right to run. He also has brains to understand the situation and make a decision that is best for the country. After 6 years of the Bush Crime Family, illegal wars, lies, detentions, the Patriot Act, etc., it is clear that Nader did what he did for reason's other than the good of the nation. Yes, Gore would have been better than Bush, or Nader for that matter.

[indie_voter]

35. I do. Not for running

But for the way he conducted his campaign. Bush and Gore were not the same choice.

ETA: But thinking about it, he didn't know this debacle was going to happen. I voted for Gore, I was upset with the outcome, but never imagined this kind of disaster.

[yorgatron]

36. is this GREENunderground.com all of a sudden?

nope.

it's still democraticunderground.com

you wann kiss Nader's ass,do it elsewhere :grr::mad:

[indie_voter]

48. No. I don't. I think Nader needs to take responsibility

And I don't think he has.

As I said, I voted for Gore and would do so again (I'm hoping he runs).

Nader was wrong about Gore, as I said, they were not the same choice. But he couldn't have known how Bushco would destroy this country in this way. Yes, he knew it would be bad re; Supreme Court, etc, but this goes beyond anything at least I ever imagined could happen (and I was one of those who didn't want Gore to concede, and cried when he did)

We have a constiutional crisis right now. The only solution in my opinion is impeachment.

So while I blame Nader for not seeing the warning signs of an conservative court and supply side economy (a la Reagan) and stepping down and for the way he characterized Gore, I can't blame him for running, that is his right as an American.

I'm not saying he was honorable or right. But those who voted for him also were gravely wrong and they should have seen the differences between Gore and Bush but instead followed blindly behind Nader.

[Kahuna]

45. Why wouldn't you think that two oilmen in the white house, control

of the entire government by repukes and a majority repuke Supreme Court would be a disaster????

Not picking on you, per se, but these were the considerations in that election. Only @#$@!# nazis would think that all of the above would be cool and peachy. :eyes:

[indie_voter]

50. MHO, there is a difference between what I thought could happen and this

I lived through the Reagan years, voted against Reagan and Bush sr. I was 2 years too young to vote for Carter, I wish I could have.

I certainly expected a mess in that mold (Supreme court, economy, etc), but not this, never this. Not a total destruction of our country. I don't know if we'll ever recover our standing in the world?

As I said, I voted for Gore, hoping he runs again, he is the rightfully elected president of our country.

As I also said in my original post, Nader was wrong in saying Bush and Gore were the same, I thought he was wrong then and now.
However, I can't say he was wrong to run, because that is his right.

He ran a dishonest campaign I thought and he didn't step down when he should have. Nader should take responsibility for his role, to my knowledge he hasn't.

[BlooInBloo]

38. I blame the narcissistic holier-than-thou jackass fuckwipes who voted for him...

... Just like lieberman - I don't blame him, rather I blame the fuckwipe electorate.

[omega minimo]

58. How do you feel about the "the narcissistic holier-than-thou jackass fuckwipes"

who don't vote at all?

or "the narcissistic holier-than-thou jackass fuckwipes"

who voted for Bush?

or "the narcissistic holier-than-thou jackass fuckwipes"

who play strategists and consultants and hobble Democratic candidates with phony acts that backfire because the public smells the phoniness?

or "the narcissistic holier-than-thou jackass fuckwipes"

who annointed Bush president?



The vitriol in your condemnation makes you look like another NaderHater who want to focus on the scapegoat and avoid the bigger picture.

[BlooInBloo]

59. They're all awful too, and I'm just as vocal about them, in the appropriate threads.

[omega minimo]

63. Oh, so in NaderHater Flamebait threads there's only one agenda

How "appropriate" :eyes:

[BlooInBloo]

67. I tried to make it clear - I have nothing whatsoever against Nader.

[omega minimo]

72. "NaderHater" is a catchall term for the shortsighted, vengeful, confused folks

who ANGRILY fixate on Nader/voters as the key to what happened in 2000.

Who make it PERSONAL. As if exercising the right to vote includes other people breathing down your neck in the voting booth.

I wonder how many NaderHaters don't even vote? :think:

[BlooInBloo]

79. I have no idea.

[in_cog_ni_to]

40. GORE WON THE ELECTION. I blame the SCOTUS for stopping the recount.

Nader just made the whole thing WORSE by making the vote count close enough to steal.:(

That's all water over the damn dam anyway. We are where we are and our National NIGHTMARE will be over in 1 1/2 years. I cannot wait.

[Kahuna]

41. Delete dupe.

[Kahuna]

42. Nah, you can't blame him. The blame belongs to those who voted for him

KNOWING that they would be giving control of our entire government to repukes (who had already demonstrated that they were dishonest and power-hungry). And for giving control of the Supreme Court to bush appointees. Now that was really idiotic. We could live with the consequence for 3 or 4 decades! And finally, for letting two oilmen in the White House while knowing full well that they would start an oil war. Yep! The voters who did not vote for Gore are responsible for what has transcended in this country. Whether they voted for Nader or Bush, they are all responsible.

[indie_voter]

51. I totally agree. It's the Nader voters I blame the most.

After the debates between Bush and Gore, it was clear Bush was an imbecile. Voting for Nader was irresponsible. I wished Nader had stepped down and endorsed Gore (like many were trying to convince him to do), but he didn't.

The people who voted for him however, what in the world were they thinking?

[Joe Fields]

46. You asked "Who blames Nader..?" I do, and a whole lot of others.

Nader alone isn't to blame, but he can share in a big part of the load of people to blame. Nowadays he's nothing more than a pompous gasbag.

[flyarm]

49. from Fla here..yep it was his fault..and i won't argue this one again!!

this is again flame bait...and should be locked..we have beat this one to death!

fly

[flyarm]

52. in 2004 almost all nader's money came from reich wing groups! n/t

[magellan]

53. I blame the SCOTUS

Nader had as much right to run as anyone else, and those who voted for him had that right as well. If Gore and Bush** had been the only two choices on the ticket, the Repugs still would have manipulated/purged votes and SCOTUS still would have put Bush** in office.

Did Nader's presence on the ticket make it easier for the Repugs to steal votes? Probably. But neither that nor where some of Nader's campaign funds came from means he was in bed with the GOP. Perhaps used by the GOP as much as he used them, but I've seen nothing to suggest he was anything but a legitimate candidate.

The ongoing failure of the Dems to recognize and fix the election fraud and campaign finance issues further proves the point. They appear to want a scapegoat rather than work on true reform of systems that can also benefit them. So be it.

[indie_voter]

54. The SCOTUS kinged Bush. Shameful moment in our history

I have to agree, Nader had the right. And while the voters had the right to vote for him, I do think they need to take responsibility for their actions. They bought in to the horrible media sliming of Gore, which Nader also facilitated. The stupid "Gore invented the internet" nonsense which was so easily disproved it wasn't even funny. To this day I wish Gore had said in the debate where it came up, "IDIOTS!! I didn't say that." Okay, maybe in a nicer way. LOL

The Nader voters followed Nader without critically thinking. It was clear Nader didn't have a shot at the presidency and by voting for him they were giving it to Bush. Of course, that wasn't the way it happened, and Gore won. But still. It was an appalling lack of judgment.

I'll concede, most people didn't realize we'd be where we are today, I didn't. But they did know the Supreme Court would turn more conservative and the economy would be in trouble.

I just can not understand why, after 8 years of doing well under Clinton, enough people went Nader/Bush to make it easy for Bush to steal the election.

Gore made some mistakes, but the media was against him. He was fighting an uphill battle from day one.

I hope he runs again for me, but I would completely understand why he wouldn't want to go through what he went through in 2000 ever again. So my fingers are crossed that Wes Clark throws his hat in!

[magellan]

64. So people shouldn't vote for a candidate

...who doesn't have a shot at winning? Even if that candidate is the only one they feel they can, in all good conscience, vote for?

I have to disagree. Strategic voting -- the "lesser of two evils" vote -- doesn't work in a two party system. It's at least partly responsible for the current political crisis; hand-in-hand with money interests, it negatively impacts the idea of who's a viable candidate. We keep putting too many questionable people in office simply because "the alternative is unthinkable", when we should be demanding better candidates if we feel the ones on offer are sub-standard. And we do that by not making sacrificial votes for a candidate simply because s/he isn't "the other guy". The Democratic Party has been moving inexorably to the right through this kind of voting.

If the election system was fair -- if we drained the swamp and everyone voted their conscience on ballots that weren't subject to theft, for candidates who were there not just because they were tapped to run but because they were actually worthy of running -- then we'd start to see more genuinely qualified progressive leaders who'd unstintingly put their oath and this country before personal/political interests. Because this country is, by and large, truth-loving and progressive and tired of corporate influence in our government.

I don't expect to see this change in my lifetime.

Still, I'm voting for Kucinich in the primaries next year, even though he hasn't got a chance in hell because the DLC won't fund or support him. At the moment, he's the only candidate I can vote for in good conscience, and I'll be re-registering from independent to Dem to do so.

I hope Gore decides to run because if he doesn't then it's unlikely, from the looks of things now, that I'll be able to vote in '08 at all. He had my vote in 2000.

[Kahuna]

81. "Good conscience????" How is it good conscience to give control of

the country to to oilmen? How is it good conscience to give control of the Supreme Court to the religious right? How is it good conscience to give control of our entire government to the repukes who had already demonstrated by their dogging of Bill Clinton, that they would do anything to gain power? That just doesn't make sense to me. The consequences of letting bush into the white house were just to great.

[magellan]

85. Do you deny that many who voted for Bush** did so with good conscience?

Regardless of whether you or I agree in OUR good conscience with their reasons? You're trying to take the democracy out of democracy, I'm afraid. There will ALWAYS be those who vote out of ignorance or stupidity or just plain hate. That's why the founding fathers gave us the electoral college -- so the "vast uneducated rabble" wouldn't have more voice than the "educated elite". Unfortunately the electoral college hasn't kept up with the changing and expanding populous. If I'm not mistaken, the last time it was tinkered with was in the 19th century.

Strategic voting will not correct the failings of the electoral college. All it's succeeding in doing is moving the Democratic Party further and further to the right. Look how many moderate Dems were elected in '06. Look at what the Dems are AFRAID to do -- impeachment for starters -- because they've got '08 to consider and don't want to imperil their majority. Look at which Dems are getting all the party backing in the '08 campaigns are already: moderate, hawkish Dems.

You continue strategic voting if you like. I don't pretend to have any control the way others vote. But I do control my own vote, and I see what strategic voting is doing to the party, and I'll be damned if I'll play a part anymore in what ultimately amounts to voting against my own interests.

[NoGOPZone]

55. So do I

Blantantly political behavior by a supposedly neutral party. The ruling has deserved the criticism it has received and I expect history will be even less kind.

[magellan]

66. If this country ever learns from the history of the past six years

...it can't help but improve. Drastically.

Welcome, NoGOPZone. :hi:

[Uncle Joe]

56. I believe Nader was primarily a red flag to the Mass Corporate Media's sword.

I blame the MCM more than anyone including the Wicked Witch of the East, and the felonious five. Had the mass corporate media not sold out the American People by trashing and slandering Al Gore for the better part of two years beginning in March of 99, primarily because he empowered the American People when he championed the internet, Al Gore would have won in a landslide. Had the MCM; many of whom would later go on to cheer lead us in to a war with Iraq based on lies, reported that race with at least a grain of journalistic integrity instead of camouflaging Bush's obvious shortcomings, Nader, Harris and the injustices would never have come in to play.

Also it wasn't Fox "News" that did the most damage to Al Gore with slander after slander and enabled Bush to power, their people would never have voted for Gore to begin with. It was people, networks and newspapers such as Frank Rich, Ceci Connelly, Maureen Dowd, Tim Russert, and the G. E. owned network of NBC, MSNBC, Broder, the Washington Post, the New York Times etc. etc.

P.S. Here is another Nader quote when he appeared on a morning show recently, when asked about the 2000 race, I believe it was Couric but I don't remember for sure.

Interviewer's Question Do you believe you cost Al Gore the 2000 race?

Nader "Al Gore won the race and he knows it."

The interviewer changed the subject real quick after that exchange.


P.S.S. For a historical refresher on the Mass Corporate Media's behavior during the run up to the coup of 2000 check out the Daily Howler's website and google "War Against Gore or "2000 Debates".

http://www.dailyhowler.com/

[omega minimo]

60. Who blames Nader? Folks who'd rather not think through all the factors that made Bush pResident

Folks who think that other people's votes are somehow owed to THEM personally.

Folks who blame other people who actually bothered to vote, rather than think at all about the impact of all the NON voters.

Folks who would rather have a scapegoat than fix problems.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

61. I ABSOLUTELY Blame That Narcissistic,Selfish, Deceitful,Dishonest, Ignorant Piece Of Absolute Filth

Unquestionably.

What a piece of shit he is.

[HardRocker05]

74. riiiight, blame nader instead of the major dem screw-ups or repuke dirty tricks, which btw, dems

dems should have *done something* about, instead of just saying, "nothing to see here folks, bush won fair and square." look at it this way, when you tell america that nader stopped the dems from winning the presidential election, you're saying that the democratic party is so pathetic that one independent wacko can stop them from winning. yeah, that's a great advertisement for the democratic party.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

75. My God Nader's Such An Egotistical Ignorant Deceitful Selfish Narrow Minded Piece Of Absolute Shit.

Such an absolute piece of filth he is. God what a dumb fucker that Nader is.

[Madspirit]

80. OMC

Not your most eloquent post OMC but quite accurate...<g> I agree.
Lee

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

62. Neither do I. He ran for president. He lost. Gore lost because he moved right.

And, in doing so, lost the Green votes - most of which would have gone to him.

If anyone's to blame, it's the "moderates" who voted FOR Bush.

[557188]

70. Bingo

I voted for Nader because I didn't like Gore's right wing agenda. The last straw for me was naming Lieberman as the VP. That lost Gore the election.

ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS cover your fucking base. If you lose your base you lose the election. Don't expect your base to stick with you when you run to the right and name Joesph fucking Lieberman as your fucking Vice President.

[Selatius]

65. I find it funny people mention Nader more than Katherine Harris or the SCOTUS on that list.

Nader was a "useful idiot" at best to these Neocons who stole the election. It was Harris and the SCOTUS that bent and twisted the laws to their own benefit.

[Kahuna]

82. That is because it should have been expected that with bush's brother

being the govenor of Florida, some dirty tricks would be in play. On election night when Florida was called for Gore, I told my election watcher group to not celebrate yet. I KNEW something foul was going to go down in FL. When you have bush telling you that his brother guaranteed him that he would win Florida, that was pretty much a heads up.

[HardRocker05]

68. dem whiner election strategy: stomp feet and demand that all competition quit the race. i'm sorry,

it is time for dems to grow some ovaries, stand up for their principles, and start taking responsibility for the fate of their party and this country. for too long they have sat passively by, whining and complaining, and hoping that somehow victory is going to fall into their laps. look at the extent to which BushCo had to destroy america before people elected dems; if dems don't get their shit together and start acting like a party that deserves to run this country, they will find themselves back out of power very soon. whining that it's all Nader's fault really doesn't inspire confidence in the electorate; if nader wasn't addressing important issues that the dems were ignoring, he wouldn't get any votes. it's that simple.

[Bluebear]

69. Could you get "whining Dems" in there a few more times? nt

[Madspirit]

78. Actually.....YOU'RE whining...n/t

[Kahuna]

83. Nader voter strategy, throw the election to the facists, give control

of the government and courts to the repukes and then bitch the loudest about why the Dems are doing something about it. :eyes:

[Alexander]

71. Nader is one of many people to blame.

Nader lied his ass off, claiming Gore and Bush were the same and that he wouldn't campaign in swing states (like, say, Florida).

Nader isn't the only reason Bush is in power, but he's certainly no friend of ours.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

89. The swing state thing is a myth

started by Michael Moore in 2004 to cover his ass for backingt Ralph in 2000.
Moore claims he abandoned the 2000 campaign when Nader broke this nonexistant promise.

Which is bullshit on two counts:
1. Nader never made this pledge
2. Moore continued to campaign for Nader til the end (i was at the DC rally days before the elction where Moore spoke)

[nadinbrzezinski]

73. I don't but that is becuase people don't want to undestand

that the nader voters were not lost to Gore, they were never there. Those folks would have staid home, period

Gore never reached them, PERIOD

Who I blame, the USSC

[libodem]

76. I blame him and have no respect for his interference

We might have honey bees and no war if it weren't for that selfish egotistical son of a bitch. Flame on, baby, flame on.

[lutefisk]

77. He made his case in 2000, then hurt it by staying in too long

There was nothing to gain by staying in and he should have gotten out before the election. The simple fact is: if Nader would have stepped aside Al Gore would have become President and the world would have been spared a tremendous amount of death and suffering (since 2000, and well into the future).

Nader has done a lot of good, but there is just a bit of the "kook" aspect to him that allowed this to happen. Screw you Ralph.

[deutsey]

84. I blame the disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of FL voters and

voter intimidation by Bushies; the Supreme Court decision; and the lapdog corporate press.

IMO Nader's impact was negligible and the emphasis some place on his role in 2000 only serves to distract our attention from those who actually hijacked the election.

[Vidar]

86. The election was bought & paid for. The results had nothing to do with Nader.

[mudesi]

87. Those who voted for Nader would NOT have voted for Gore, anyway

When people blame Nader, what they are really saying is that they don't believe in Democracy at all. Nader had every right to run and every voter had a right to vote for him or for somebody else. Deriding Nader is deriding Democracy itself.

The fact of the matter is the people who voted for Nader would not have bothered to vote at all had he not run. He was the "throw away" vote, if you will. He had absolutely no impact whatsoever on the results, because while it may be true that a typical Nader voter would identify him/her self as "liberal" or "progressive", that voter somehow had reason not to vote for Gore, (whatever the reason was).

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

90. I wouldn't have voted, but for Ralph

I was fed up with 8 years of Clinton-era capitulation, triangulation, broken promises and blatant right-wingery

Gore, on his own, in the laast 6 years has been outstanding. I think he learned a lot from the 2000 "loss"
I'd vote for him in an instant now. He's my choice for the democratic nomination

[mudesi]

92. Exactly. The idea that Nader took votes away is hogwash

A vote for Nader in 2000 was a vote for "nobody" because Gore and the Democratic party did not make a convincing enough case for a sizable portion of the population who identify themselves as liberals. It wasn't as if these people (like yourself) would have voted for Gore if there was no other choice, they would have simply stayed home.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

97. It was the first campaign I got involved in

Here was a guy who was addressing my issues. No more b.s. about "free trade"
I got so tired of Clinton acting like anyone opposed to corporate exploitation of sweatshop workers was a xenophobic isolationist. All the propaganda about a "global village" and other Thom Friedman-esque lies couldn't hide the fact that this was a continuation of reagan/bush policies to screw the world's workers.

Nader got it, spoke the truth, didn't engage in stunts like a 5 minute convention kiss, wasn't controlled by armies of Al From clones diluting his message into nothingness.
People I had a lifetime of respect for from Chomsky to Patt Smith got involved.
For the first time in my life, I cared about politics.

And theoften overlooked effect is that Ralph gave the Dems a wakeup call.
From now on, they know to listen to their base. Dean got it. That's why he's DNC chair and why we won in 2006.

Now the battle is whether or not to go back to the focus group-tested garbage of the Clintons and their rightwing advisors.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

88. Gore has no problem with Nader...

even said that it was his responsibility to convince people to vite for him and that he didn't make the case in 2000.
Gore and Nader are on good terms. Ralph showed up for a screening of Inconvenient Truth.

I think it's time to drop this petty grudge some have against Ralph. It really goes to extreme lengths, such as accusing him of being a secret Republican agent. Anyone who's spent any time around the guy (I have) knows how laughable that theory is.

[AtomicKitten]

91. I blame the 5:4 Supreme Court judicial coup d'etat.

And Nader claiming there was no difference between Gore and Bush was pretty lame too.

[skipos]

93. I blame him for his Gore=Bush lie

and I blame anyone who believed it.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

98. Pre 9-11 Bush and Gore were too similar

They agrred 40-something times in one debate

[Snotcicles]

100. He never said Gore=Bush he said that the Democrats and Republicans

were in bed with big corporations. And the way they vote to take care of them is the same.
The way most of them voted on the Iraq invasion, bankruptcy bill, NAFTA, the Patriot act and on and on and on. Guess he had something there.

[skipos]

108. Here are some quotes for you.

E: You said during your campaign that it didn't really matter if Al Gore or George W. Bush won the election.
Nader: That's right.
http://www.emagazine.com/view/?696

Nader on Bush and Gore...
"They're like Tweedledum and Tweedledee. We'll have a hard time distinguishing them in Washington."
http://www.timesrecord.com/website/archives.nsf/56606056e44e37508525696f00737257/8525696e00630dfe852568e70054a979?OpenDocument

Nader concedes one difference between Bush and Gore.
"The only difference between Bush and Gore is the velocity with which their knees hit the floor when corporate interests come knocking"
Ralph Nader, Oct. 31, 2000, on ABC News Nightline.

Nader claims Gore is WORSE...
Martin was especially struck by a Portland speech where Nader said that Gore was "more reprehensible" than Bush because Gore "knows so much and refuses to act on his knowledge."
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0418,levine,53179,1.html

Nader says Gore would have had us in Iraq.
Nader said that a Gore presidency "wouldn't have been any different in terms of military and foreign policy."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4304155/

Nader on Gore's environmentalism.
"Gore talks environment. In one area after another, he has betrayed the environmental movement."
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/103000-03.htm

[Bucky]

110. "knows so much and refuses to act on his knowledge". The irony is unintended, of course.

I'd have a good laugh about that, if I wasn't so bitter.

[Obamarama]

94. How many times does this tired discussion need to be hashed out? OF COURSE HE IS TO BLAME.

Now, can we quit hashing out the 2000 election and start focusing on winning 2008?

[mudesi]

95. Can you explain why?

Why would the typical Nader voter in 2000 all of a sudden decide to vote for Gore, when they clearly had decided already that Gore was not worth their vote? Had Nader not run, Nader voters would have stayed home.

[Madspirit]

96. Maybe

Maybe they've now seen how fun it's been living under a theocrat.
Lee

[Obamarama]

101. Then Nader voters truly WERE stupid....

If you stay home and throw away your vote, that's not a protest of sorts...it's called stupidity.

[Skittles]

99. there were many factors that led to that theft/loss

but that election would have been won without Nader

[Raine]

102. I blame him

I always have and I always will. :mad:

[Party Line]

103. Not only is he responsible...

...for the loss of the 2000 election, he is also responsible for the war in Iraq.

[Snotcicles]

104. And Hurricane Katrina. nt

[Hippo_Tron]

111. I blame Nader for lieing to the American People, telling them that Bush and Gore were the same