Regardless of whether Al Gore or Ralph Nader was to blame for "losing" the 2000 election...

[YoungDemCA]

That doesn't excuse these events:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida,_2000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore

Let's not forget who the REAL enemies of democracy are.

[Rex]

1. I blame the group that brought a frivolous lawsuit to the SCOTUS

in hopes they would hinder the democratic process. Anyone that blames Gore or Nader, either purposely likes to defend the BFEE or just lacks the ability to understand what went on.

If there is a third option, I would like to hear it.

[HERVEPA]

2. Sorry. No Nader, no Bush. despite any of the other factors. I don't defend BFEE,

nor do I lack the ability to understand what went on.
Your comment is presumptuous and downright rude.

[Rex]

3. Sorry no 100k Dems voting for Bush in Florida, no recall.

So you really do fail to make your point and only reinforce mine.

[HERVEPA]

7. Nope. My point is if Nader doesn't run, Gore wins.

The number of Dems who voted Bush has no relevancy to that point.

[Exilednight]

28. There's no truth to your claim either. The majority of

Voters who supported Nader were first time voters, and in all likelyhood would have not voted at all had Nader not run.

[riqster]

36. Got supporting facts?

[Exilednight]

40. Just look at exit polling.

If you don't know how to break down exit polling, then I'm sorry.

[riqster]

63. I'll take that as a "no", then.

[Exilednight]

64. Take it however you like. n/t

Edit to add: it's easy to make statements and accusations when you refuse to search for the truth.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

70. Res ipsa loquitur

"In 2000, Voter News Service exit polling showed that 47 percent of Nader's Florida supporters would have voted for Gore, and 21 percent for Mr. Bush, easily covering the margin of Gore's loss." Nationwide, Harvard's Barry C. Burden, in his 2001 paper at the American Political Science Association, "Did Ralph Nader Elect George W. Bush?" (also on the internet) presented "Table 3: Self-Reported Effects of Removing Minor Party Candidates," showing that in the VNS exit polls, 47.7% of Nader's voters said they would have voted instead for Gore, 21.9% said they would have voted instead for Bush, and 30.5% said they wouldn't have voted in the Presidential race..."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/ralph-nader-was-indispens_b_4235065.html

Don't people get tired of litigating and relitigating this?

[Exilednight]

80. I want to see the poll itself, not a blog article

About a poll. Every poll I have looked at, non have ever asked: "would you vote for candidate x if y didn't run."

They will ask if you are first time voter, and if you answer yes they will ask if would have voted if your candidate would not have run. Both questions are suspect at best since they are could have, should have, would have.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

81. Here's the exit poll results from a Harvard Political Science professor for a paper

Here's the exit poll results cited by a Harvard Political Science professor for a peer reviewed paper submitted to the American Political Science Association:



http://rangevoting.org/Burden.pdf


The evidence suggests that if Ralph Nader wasn't in the race 47.9% of his voters would have voted for Al Gore, 21.9% would have voted for George Bush and 30.5% would not have voted at all. (Page 8)


...

Professor Burden published the paper while he was at Harvard University. He has since moved to the LaFollete School of Public Affairs at the University of Wisconsin:

Barry Burden
Title: Professor
Website: http://faculty.polisci.wisc.edu/bcburden/
Affiliated With: La Follette School of Public Affairs
Office: 301 North Hall
Office Hours: Mondays 10am-11:30am
Phone: [phone]
Has Voicemail: Yes
E-Mail: [e-mail]

You can contact him with your questions. I have contacted several academics about their findings and they are pretty good at replying and discussing the fruits of their research.

[Exilednight]

83. That's a paper about the poll, not the poll.

What's the MOE? What's the ACTUAL WORDING of the questions?

I'm looking for the poll that is said to be used, but not having much luck finding it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

84. It's a peer reviewed paper for the American Political Science Association

Paper prepared for presentation at the 2001 meeting of the American Political Science
Association, San Francisco.

The exit poll results from the Voter News Service are on Page 8

http://rangevoting.org/Burden.pdf

Here is Professor Burden's contact information:


Title: Professor
Website: http://faculty.polisci.wisc.edu/bcburden/
Affiliated With: La Follette School of Public Affairs
Office: 301 North Hall
Office Hours: Mondays 10am-11:30am
Phone: [phone]
Has Voicemail: Yes
E-Mail: [e-mail]

You can contact him. He should be happy to discuss/reveal the cited research which underlies his work.




P.S. Exit polls are substantially large samples when compared to pre-election polls so the M.O.E. is comparatively smaller.

[Exilednight]

85. Even peer reviewed papers have a bias when it

comes to subjective data. Exit polls usually do have a smaller MOE due to the fact that it asks something that has already happened, BUT a probability question can fall outside the MOE. Most campaigns, when examining such questions from an exit poll, will double the MOE - which is probably overkill, but no real science behind it. Either way, both claims are suspect at best.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

86. It's really not a claim but an empirical observation...

We can make inferences which are by their nature subjective from empirical observations but empirical observations are inherently objective.

Voter News Services asked Nader voters who they would voted for if Ralph Nader wasn't in the race and 47.9% of his voters would have voted for Al Gore, 21.9% would have voted for George Bush and 30.5% would not have voted at all. (Page 8)

http://rangevoting.org/Burden.pdf

The M.O.E. was most likely 1 or 2%. That's not going to account for a 26% deficit; 47.9% -21.9% =26%

[Exilednight]

87. It doesn't committ those people to turning out to

Vote if Nader was not running. I would argue that the real number to look at is the first time voter that voted for Nader, and that number would push the MOE way out of balance. They may think they may have voted if Nader had not run, but then again most probably supported Nader and registered to vote at a Nader rally. Again, all of this is suspect, but nothing can be proved one way or the other.

[Scootaloo]

34. Should Republicans and Democrats be written into the US constitution?

Make it a real and for-true two-party system?

[Exilednight]

43. Horrible idea. If I had it my way, there would be a

Minimum of 5 parties. If course, if I had it my way, voting would be mandatory (even if you cast a vote for none of the above) and Election Day would be a holiday.

[MaggieD]

52. Exsctly

And spoilers are an enemy of democracy too. Because they are running to throw an election. Not to win.

[Tommy2Tone]

62. Nader torpedoed Gore in Florida

and the rest is shit that happens when we get the courts involved.

[The Second Stone]

76. Also New Hampshire, which would have also carried it for Gore

Thanks Ralph, for giving us the Iraq war.

[CrawlingChaos]

69. Nader took as many votes from Bush as he took from Gore

The spoiler myth is just that - a myth.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

71. Please see Post 70./NT

[CrawlingChaos]

74. Hmmm... not the way I remember it

I'm sure I remember reading that 25% of Nader voted would have voted for Gore and 50% would have stayed home. I'll see if I can dig up anything to support those figures.

One thing's for sure - there were several third party candidates and every single one of them got more than the 500-something votes Gore needed to take the lead.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

75. Supreme Court mendacity was also a factor in the loss...

I also want to point out that it's unfair to Gore to blame him for the fact that 12% of FL Dems voted for Bush* in 00. About the same percentage voted for McCain and Romney in 08 and 012 and Obama carried FL twice. Why? Because there were more of them.


Here's a peer reviewed paper by a Harvard Political Science professor who discusses Nader and Buchanan's effect on the 00 election.
The pertinent info is on Page 9:


http://rangevoting.org/Burden.pdf


IMHO, if all the votes were counted Gore would have won, even with Nader on the ballot... I am from FL so I watched the recount closely and was intimately familiar with the areas with the largest discrepancies...Overlooked is the thousands of spoiled ballots from heavily African American precincts in Duval County (Jacksonville).

[nadinbrzezinski]

100. You should be interested in teh recount done by the Press Sindicate

released on Sep 11, 2001. Something else happened that day, or that would have been a real bombshell.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/the-florida-recount-of-2000/

That article is quite fascinating. Depending on the model, Bush would have still won, but Gore would have taken it as well.

It really depends on the recount model. Fact is, most people are not aware it happened.

As I said, something else happened that Sep day, so for some reason this was buried on the last column of the last page of newspapers if it even made it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

102. The real action wasn't in Palm Beach or Broward county...

The real action wasn't in Palm Beach or Broward county. It was in Duval County (Jacksonville) where there were thousands of spoiled ballots from heavily African American precincts...


I believe it's safe to say that if everybody who voted for Gore votes were counted he would have carried the state of Florida.

At some point you have to throw your hands up in the air, say "it is what it is", learn from it, and hopefully ensure it doesn't happen again.

[nadinbrzezinski]

103. I agree with you

why I say this was a RW coup, and to blame Nader is to ignore that huge elephant in the room.

But over the last few years I have bothered to read all I could into it. I do not expect the DOJ under Dubya to investigate it, but historians have no need to ignore it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

104. There were multiple reasons why Gore lost FL

If all the votes were counted he would have won by several thousand votes...Fractionally it wouldn't have been significant with so many votes cast but he would have won...

The Democrats erred when they argued for a recount in three counties (Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach) when they should have argued for a recount in all sixty seven counties.

The Nader bashing gets us nowhere but it's fair to say if he wasn't on the ballot Gore likely wins... It's also fair to say that even with Nader on the ballot Gore likely wins if all the votes are counted.

[nadinbrzezinski]

105. and what gets me about the Nader bashing

is that there are many republicans who still blame Ross Perot for 1992. The difference, is that the party leaders learned from that error. It was not precisely the lesson I would have preferred, massive cheating and electoral fraud, but they did.

For dems Nader is just an excuse. And that prevents them from actually looking into why Gore's messaging sucked in Florida, Ark, and TN, He managed to win in his home state and ARK, and we would not be having this discussion either.

At this point the BUT NADER are also about Sanders getting into the race. Same shit happened when Obama got into the race, and that is when the BUT NADER posts from mostly the same crew started to appear.

It is predictable and it is lazy

I suspect many of these folks would prefer the Mexican tradition of El Dedazo and El Destape than an actual primary.

Me, I just chuckle at this point... it is like predictable. And it is not healthy for democracy, whatever remains of it.

[One of the 99]

4. Neither was to blame

But Nader and his actions in 2000 do have some responsibility.

[1939]

5. Same as in other threads

"We did everything right, but they cheated that is why we lost."

"The electorate is a bunch of knuckle draggers that is why we lost."

Never can we coldly calculate what was our message, how did we get it out, where did we go wrong.

[yeoman6987]

39. True, but Vice President Gore winning his homestate

Would have made everything else null and void. That was the biggest problem. I don't think any other candidate lost their homestate.

[Scootaloo]

6. 200,000 Florida Democrats voting for Bush didn't help

[HERVEPA]

8. Not relevant to whether Nader cost Gore the election.

Pretty simple concept.

[Scootaloo]

10. It is in fact incredibly relevant, because it answers the question. The answer is "no."

You say you "don't defend BFEE," and yet you ignore their election rigging and their frivolous lawsuits, you ignore the 200,000 Democrats who voted for Bush knowingly, and you claim it was Nader.

That is either a profound depth of ignorance, or a serious dedication to bad propaganda.

[HERVEPA]

11. Your analytical skills are sorely lacking, nay, nonexistent.

If Nader didn't run, Gore would have gotten enough of those votes that the other bullshit the Rethugs did wouldn't have mattered. It's a pretty damn simple point.
And there is clearly nothing in my post that defends the BFEE.

So you show "... a profound depth of ignorance, or a serious dedication to bad propaganda"

You're apparently never going to understand the very simple point, so I'll stop trying to explain now.

You may continue to rant on and be rude.

[Scootaloo]

12. No, they're quite good

The election was "decided" on a count that left Gore behind by 0.003%, Bush 2,912,790 to Gore 2,912,253. Blaming Nader for this is ludicrous. Every single third party on the Florida Ballots got enough votes to make up that gap. You could just as easily rail and rant about the three Socialist candidates on that ballot.

However, if we take all the third parties - Nader's Greens, Buchanan's Reform, and all the others, and we put their votes together in one big pile... they're still only HALF of the number of registered Democrats who intentionally voted for Bush.

Almost as many people were purged from Florida's voter rolls (most of them black and Democrat - 88%) as voted for Nader, as well.

Your "Blame Nader" meme is insensible, false, and whether intentional or not, covers for the Bush enterprise and quisling Democrats alike.

[RiverLover]

14. Impressive analysis Scoot.

Bookmarking. Thanks!!

That Blame Nader meme is so wrong, and so old.

[JI7]

25. i blame Nader for lying and saying Gore and Bush were the same

but it worked for his own goal in wanting Bush to win and Gore to lose.

[Scootaloo]

26. because this was a brand-new sentiment that Nader introduced to American politics?

[JI7]

29. because it was not true

[Scootaloo]

33. But 'the parties are the same" is not a remotely new sentiment in US politics

In fact i'm certain it's been in place since the establishment of political parties.

Acting like Nader is something special because he said the same shit minor party candidates have been saying since wigs were fashionable for men is kind of... dumb.

[JI7]

35. many things aren't new , doesn't mean one has to ignore when others push

bs . especially with the intention of getting someone like Bush elected

[Scootaloo]

50. I think you're trying to shoehorn your own beliefs back in time

I'm certain Nader was trying to get Nader elected.

[JI7]

66. no he wasn't, there is a reason he focused on swing states

in his attacks on gore.

[KingCharlemagne]

27. (Nader) haters gonna hate. What can you do? (Although you are exhibiting the

patience of Job.) Bravo for a highly specific and thereby effective refutation of the "Nader the spoiler" false trope.

No one held a gun to Gore's head and forced him to concede the election either, come to think of it. And those craven, cowardly senators refusing to second a challenge from the House. It's all documented in Moore's Fahrenheit 911.

[Scootaloo]

31. Oh, don't get me wrong, nader can go get fucked...

I'm just sick of seeing this bullshit meme being used to bash the left, when it was 200,000 Reagan Democrat shitheads and Republican cheating that brought Bush upon us.

I could also complain about Gore's campaigning (Lieberman? really, Lieberman?!) but you know, even with that shitty campaign, he did win. Even with the cheating, even with the turncoat Democrats, even with the third-party candidates, final vote talleys after Scotus showed Gore was still ahead by about a thousand votes.

[KingCharlemagne]

38. I hear ya. And America got torture, incompetence on a scale not seen

since the Grant administration, and politicization of the Justice Department. Most of those 200,000 Reagan Dems were and are probably A-OK with the afore-mentioned, come to think of it.

[winter is coming]

44. +1. n/t

[1939]

82. "Reagan Democrat shitheads"

What was wrong with the Gore campaign and message that caused these Democrats to go astray? Finding solutions to that problem are a lot more important to future success of the Democratic Party than ranting about a fifteen year old election. When we lose a race (like the 2014 disaster) we should look at what we can fix in our platform and our message, not just rant about the stupidity of the electorate.

[nadinbrzezinski]

91. But it is far easier to blame the voters

By the way, this is about Sanders. Many of these posters cannot handle a second person in the race. Same shit with some of the same posters happened in 2008 when that other fella jumped in

Silly season is quite predictable by now.

[Rex]

9. And the SAME people here that demand obedience...gee they just let those in 2000

get a free pass...why is that? Why harp on people here, yet give those traitors a free pass? 2000 just a special year for them?

Yeah you and I both know why...a pathetic agenda that over the years most of us see and roll our eyes at.

[winter is coming]

20. I've often wondered why defecting to the Republicans rarely rates a mention,

but it's an article of faith that Nader cost us Florida. I think it's because the Dems who voted for Nader supported someone who claimed that both major parties are the same. It's not the actual voting that's the betrayal; it's entertaining the notion that the difference between parties is small/insignificant.

[JI7]

23. those democrats wanted a conservative so they went for Bush

not sure what is to dispute there.

[winter is coming]

41. Presumably, the Dems who voted for Nader wanted something different, too,

but only the Dems who voted for Nader are blamed.

[JI7]

48. well, there are people who actually think ted cruz and palin

could win a national election and think if they were the candidates obama would have lost easily.

[winter is coming]

49. Don't see what that has to do with my observation

that Dems who voted for Nader are excoriated, while the ones who voted for Bush are largely ignore.

[JI7]

24. those democrats wanted Bush to win and for Gore to lose

[world wide wally]

13. Nader took 20,000 votes from Gore in Florida which made the results close enough for

the Republican. Sec of State and Supreme Court take the actions they did. Since the SC was stacked with Reagan and Bush I appointees, they did what they did to put an official end to American democracy as we once knew it.
End of story

[HERVEPA]

15. Thank you. Yet some people seem unable to digest this simple fact. No Nader, no Bush

[morningfog]

55. That is simplistic thinking. We have no way of knowing what else bush was willing to do to steal it.

The only thing that matters is that Gore won more votes and bush stole it.

[99Forever]

37. Says nobody but you.

Nader votes were not owed to Gore, nor is there any absolute proof they would have gone to Gore. It's simply your speculation, in other words, fantasy.

Fail.

[HERVEPA]

65. Good of you to comment on your own post right in the post

[The Second Stone]

77. He also spoiled New Hampshire

let's not forget he kept Gore from carrying NH, which also would have led to a Bush loss.

[No Vested Interest]

16. I blame Sandra Day O'Connor. nt

[world wide wally]

17. ^Reagan appointee.

[melman]

18. Don't forget Lieberman

When he rolled over for Russert on the question of military votes that was a major blow.

[Bonobo]

32. I was not eager to make him 2nd in command. nt

[Chathamization]

19. Couldn't anyone have checked the ballots in Florida and made a fuss about the butterfly ballot?

What's always struck me as strange are the people who think that Nader voters have blood on their hands, but who didn't support the Gore campaign at all except for spending 5 minutes to vote for Gore in California or wherever.

[True Blue Door]

21. Al Gore didn't lose the election, but he lost sight of his obligations.

If he would have refused to recognize Bush and stayed in the public eye as a President-in-exile, I would have followed him and millions of others would have too, regardless of how the media and the Bush regime reacted.

Not that I necessarily blame him. We were damn lame and cowardly as a Party and a citizenry, and who would stick their neck out and risk their place in history for such a clutch of useless, spineless people?

I saw what Bush was going to do to this country, but enough other Democrats didn't that I guess it's crazy to have expected someone embedded so long in Washington to understand how far out of the mainstream of history we were about to be dragged.

[GeorgeGist]

22. SCOTUS has set the stage for ruin.

[LittleBlue]

30. Gore was a terrible candidate

Had the personality of a wood pile. I recall him being branded as cold, so to prove them wrong he gave Tipper a contrived kiss during a public event. Never seen spouses interact so awkwardly in my life. The horror of that cringy kiss is still burned into my mind.

Terrible, unlikable candidate much like Kerry 4 years later.

[KingCharlemagne]

45. And when the election came down to whom you'd prefer to have a beer with, why

naturally American dumb-ass voters selected "Drunk Uncle" W and his politics of benign resentment over a candidate with all the personality and charisma of a wet dishrag.

[LittleBlue]

51. Yep. That's the way it works unfortunately

We've had hair threads for both of our most prominent candidates. New decade same stuff

[The Second Stone]

42. Yes, Ralph Nader is an enemy of democracy and did everything he could to split the vote

He was no naive waif. He was an experienced political operator who knew exactly what he was doing. I can forgive the chumps who followed him without knowing what they were doing, but not Nader, and not the experienced supporters who knew better. Nader is a very small man who played a pivotal role in world history.

[KingCharlemagne]

46. Why did Gore concede? - nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. Entertaining but my list has

Catherine Harris, who ran that felon list and prevented people from voting, mostly black and Latino, likely democrats, for crimes they were to commit this decade. Either Harris was genius and could see into the future, or that was a crime, for real. Not an imaginary one.

The SCOTUS should have never intervened in a state matter, the top court for elections is the State Supreme Court, not the United States Supreme Court. This minor technicality is quite serious.

Then there is the matter of the 70K democrats who voted for Bush. I guess those were A-ok since they voted for Bush and not the crazy lefty.

Of course let's not forget the Brooks Brothers Riot, all of these folks were aides to Republicans members of Congress, that should have been the real bid hint even to Conservadems who are fixated on the wrong thing.

Should I add all those Jews for Buchanan who voted this way due to a purposely ill defined ballot? Even Buchanan admitted those votes were likely not intended.

I will concede to you that there were enemies of democracy and there was a coup, but your fixation on Nader is quite in the wrong place. On the other hand, those who would like to perpetrate this again, including CIA old tricks, can... because you will not be alert for the actual crimes.

[Art_from_Ark]

56. And then there was the Florida legislature's pledge

to award the state's electoral votes to the brother of the state's governor, regardless of the outcome of the vote counting.

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. Thanks, somehow I forgot that MAJOR detail

I guess keeping this straight all these years over the semi regular three minutes of hate.

[Art_from_Ark]

58. There were so many Republican shenanigans going on in Florida at the time,

it is very hard to keep track of them all

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. And we have not touched on 2004

My head of my registrar is one Mr Vu.... who had a lot to do with THAT mess. We suspect his old tricks are back!

[Octafish]

89. CIA guy put himself in charge of absentee ballots to help GOP...

Charles Kane is the name.

https://books.google.com/books?id=gPdGc6rDHwYC&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89&dq=charles+kane+cia+vote+fraud&source=bl&ots=_fUqsaqBVm&sig=cJHG2WAwAeFlY0LyA5lmhWo8qKY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=I2dPVYKeIMatogTzq4HoAQ&ved=0CDUQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=charles%20kane%20cia%20vote%20fraud&f=false

[The Second Stone]

78. And if Nader hadn't also spoiled New Hampshire, Florida's electoral votes could have

gone to W and Gore would still have had a majority in the electoral college.

[nadinbrzezinski]

99. And if Gore won Arkansas or Tennessee, which he did not

we would not be having this discussion either.

There is a saying in Spanish that applies here. SI mi abuela tuviera ruedas seria bicicleta. You keep ignoring the actual crime even after you have been informed of what that was. At this point we all need to comclude that either this is willful (likely) or you are not able to comprehend the facts of the case. There was an actual, honest to goodness conspiracy. Likely it could have met all elements of RICO, or a state equivalent... you are unable to comprehend this, and that is quite honestly your problem. In your fixation with the only participant in this that had none to do with the actual conspiracy... you are giving a pass to the people who actually committed electoral fraud, at the very least.

Congrats.

[The Second Stone]

59. Perhaps any one of those would have swung a few thousand votes

but Nader was one person who pretended to be progressive, knew his spoiler position and relished it. He specifically stated he wanted to make things worse so they could get better. Had Nader not betrayed all his lifelong allies for whatever he got out of it, the world would have been spared the Cheney presidency. Things got a lot worse, and they did not get better as a result.

You make the point that any number of other dirty tricks might have made a difference too. But those kinds of attacks we face every election. To have one of our own intentionally betray us, out of vanity, vengeance or whatever motivated Nader, and who really gives a shit, makes him a traitor to liberalism, progressivism, and every other ally he ever used.

I wonder if Nader is finished with spoiler politics, or if he and Wormtongue are going to try to take over the Shire again.

[nadinbrzezinski]

60. One of them would have been enough, iike 70K Reagan Democrats

Just that one alone.

Sorry, some of us are not enemies of democracies and remember that third party candidates are on the ballot like every election and remember the relevant facts as to how the coup happened.

Another one that would have swung the election are the thousands of people who were purged. Those were 173,000 names. I guess the department of pre-crime is all innocent.

My problem with these semi regular 3 minutes of hate is that it makes very possible for another coup to happen. And it was a coup. So I guess we also differ in the definition of a few thousand. By my lousy math, just between the RW democrats who voted for bush and those who were purged we are talking about 243,000 who potentially could have swung for the democrats. You are correct, that is just a few thousand.



As I told one of your friends, this might work with your friends, but hardly with those of us who remember.

I will grant you this the ballot that was badly designed, that was the only one were we might be talking of a few thousand, mostly elderly, cannot see well, Jews for Buchanan.

[The Second Stone]

67. Yes, I remember it well, and with the dirty tricks that we see in most elections

But the dirty trick from Ralph Nader and his water carriers is the traitorous betrayal I can't forgive or forget. There are those of us who remember the Nader fanatics who justified it at the time, and those of us who can see it today. The ones who still defend Nader, while trying to distract with accusations of anti-Semitism against elderly Jewish voters are the most shocking. They probably didn't know what they were doing, but the Nader fellow travelers knew exactly what the consequences of their actions would be, and still do today.

And so your arguments may work with your friends, but I will not share political goals with a Nader/Quisling any more than a Frenchman would buy a collaborator a drink. We remember too. Nader/Quislings are all too ready to defend him today, and their defense of Nader is how we spot them.

This is the Democratic Underground, not the Ralph Nader Green Party Underground.

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. Nader was a third party pol

not unlike others. I can tell you this, there are many REPUBLICANS, who also cannot accept that third parties exist in the United States, who cannot forgive Ross Perot for "giving the WH to Clinton." The point you guys make, they actually have more of a point.

And you think I voted for Nader since I understand the history? Is that all you got? Like your friends that is all you got. Those of us who remember, also understand why the three minutes of hate are dangerous. As you said, this is DU... where I am willing to make the wild claim, I know, that 99.9999 percent of members did NOT vote for Ralph Nader.

So that is a cannard you can go stuff in the alternate reality and false narratives you are still trying. The fact is that 243,000 votes that could have swung that election. You blame a few thousand who voted for Nader,. some of whom have never voted for Democrats, so the votes were not there... but somehow you give a pass to Harris and 70K democrats who voted for Bush.

Only when you build sand castles does this work.

And so we can have the proper three minutes of hate, here, the picture of citizen Goldstein.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

72. Another thing the right wing is/was wrong about.

Another thing the right wing is/was wrong about:


"Nader was a third party pol not unlike others. I can tell you this, there are many REPUBLICANS, who also cannot accept that third parties exist in the United States, who cannot forgive Ross Perot for "giving the WH to Clinton."

Charts: "What Perot's Voters Said" That if Ross perot had not been on the ballot today, they would have voted for?... Clinton 38 Bush 38 Other 6 Would not have voted 14


http://www.nytimes.com/1992/11/05/us/1992-elections-disappointment-analysis-eccentric-but-no-joke-perot-s-strong.html

[The Second Stone]

73. Ross Perot absolutely ran to spoil the race of GHW Bush and throw it to Clinton

and did a much better job of it than Ralph Nader. But Nader did his spoiler job well enough. He betrayed everybody he ever worked with to do it. And if you read his statements from the time, which I remember well, he specifically stated that there was no difference between Democrats and Republicans except that Republicans would make things worse more quickly. He knew what he was doing.

And I believe that Ross Perot also knew exactly what he was doing. He ran to spite GHW Bush and then pulled out, and then made accusations that GHW Bush was going to ruin his daughter's wedding (probably was) and got right back in, to spite Bush. And he succeeded.

John Anderson did the same thing to Clinton in 1980. I don't know whether he knew it was going to be a spoiler effect, but it sure had that effect.

George Wallace did the same thing the Hubert Humphrey (and would have against Bobby Kennedy) for Nixon in 1968.

Strom Thurmond did the same spoiler attempt in 1948, unsuccessfully to Harry Truman.

Theodore Roosevelt spoiled William Howard Taft's reelection in 1912 by splitting the Republican vote. It was quite intentional.

You claim to remember, but haven't studied history.

In 2001, the Republicans controlled a number of dirty gambits to steal the election, virtually all of them worked. If any one of them had failed, no Iraq war and disaster in the middle east. If even the weakest one of those efforts had failed, Gore would have been elected. Ralph Nader was the weakest of those efforts, the most traitorous, and damaging third party candidacy in American history. And he knew it at the time. He knew he had no chance of winning. But he did know that he had a chance to tip the balance in close states, and he did tip the balance in two states, Florida and New Hampshire, both essential to Bush getting elected. Bush needed both those states to beat Gore.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/ralph-nader-was-indispens_b_4235065.html

Nader is and was a traitor to liberalism and progressivism and so are the people that voted for him. Yeah, they got to vote their "consciences", but their inability to compromise their "consciences" and insisting on voting for a man who would never come close to carrying a single state absolutely ensured the election of George W. Bush and the worst presidency in American History. We will be cleaning up after the PNAC/Iraq fiasco for the next hundred years.

The suggestion that Nader was some pure innocent is delusional. He is the Kim Philby of liberal causes. His followers and apologists are dupes. Nader and his followers are not Democrats, they elect Republicans and refuse to admit it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

90. Third parties exist

You keep ignoring the real elements of the coup. Which does not surprise me. I guess someday you guys hope to use them too. There is no other explanation.

[The Second Stone]

97. Nice for you to admit that is how they are used

Ralph Nader is a traitor to liberal and progressive causes and deliberately elected Bush. His dupes are still defending it. And you are correct, there is no other explanation for an experienced politician doing what Ralph Nader did.

Being a third party candidate in plurality victory electoral system is a deliberate and effective aid to the candidate whose constituency is not split. Every time. Any experienced politician knows this. The question is do the dupe voters know it? Nader voters elected Bush in New Hampshire and Florida, by splitting the vote. If either of those states had a plurality for Gore, rather than Bush, Gore would have been president regardless of all the other dirty tricks.

[nadinbrzezinski]

98. Nope no admission there

A historical fact. Third parties have existed since parties started in the late 1700's. Due to the system in theConstitution two dominate. Sometimes third parties take over other major parties. Sometimes they become such a pain in the ass their ideology is absorbed by a major party.

But they exist. Your inability to comprehend this and keep going but Nader is yours alone. And it is the same shit, different year that happens in 2008 when that other fella got into the race. This is purely about Sanders and your anxiety. Same shit was tried last time with that other fella.

If nothing else this silly season is following the sane exact pattern.

So please proceed with this silliness

[think]

47. You can't forget current Florida Democratic Chair Allison Tant

The current Florida Democratic Chair, Allison Tant, was a lobbyist for the fraudulent voter purge in 2000 & her husband was a lawyer on the Bush Cheney legal team in the fight after the election. With Democrats like these who needs enemies?

Allison Tant elected chairwoman of Florida Democratic Party

LAKE MARY ­­— In the most bitter and closely fought party election in decades, Florida Democratic leaders elected former Tallahassee lobbyist Allison Tant as their new state chairwoman Saturday.

Tant defeated Hillsborough County Democratic state committeeman Alan Clendenin 587-507 after a sometimes nasty two-month campaign that featured heavy lobbying on her behalf by Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson.

~Snip~

Critics attacked Tant's old lobbyist clients and noted that her husband, Tallahassee lawyer and lifelong Democrat Barry Richard, led the Bush-Cheney Florida legal team during the 2000 presidential recount.


~Snip~

Tant, a former lobbyist and longtime advocate for disabled children, was recruited to run for the post by her longtime friend, Wasserman Schultz. Tant raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for Obama in the last election cycle.

Full article:
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/elections/allison-tant-elected-chairwoman-of-florida-democratic-party/1272419

Democrats in Denial As FDP Chair Allison Tant-Richard IS EXPOSED

from John Russell PLUS 1 year ago NOT YET RATED


February 2013 Tarpon Springs Democratic Club Meeting:

Allison Tant-Richard newly “selected” by U.S. Senator Bill Nelson and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to take the reins as Chair of the Florida Democratic Party in this video comes unhinged in response to a very civil and politely presented question from John Russell, a former registered Democrat.

Mr. Russell, merely asked the newly minted chairwoman and former paid lobbyist for DBT Inc., how she was qualified to take the helm of the FDP given her background and that of her husband.

Ms. Tant-Richard in 1999-2000 was a paid lobbyist for DBT Inc. which was the company commissioned by Secretary of state Katherine Harris under the gubernatorial administration of Republican Jeb Bush to scrub the voter rolls across the state of Florida for the then upcoming 2000 Presidential election featuring Jeb’s brother George W. vs Democrat Al Gore.

History tells us that DBT Inc. was responsible for scrubbing the names of 57,000 African Americans fro the voter rolls leading to the controversial recount which ended in the “determination” made by the U.S. Supreme Court handing the decision to Jeb’s brother George W. Bush.

Interestingly Allison Tant’s husband Barry Richard who also was/is a registered Democrat just happened to be the LEAD ATTORNEY for Team Bush in the landmark election dispute decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. This was all that John Russell was asking FDP Chairwoman Tant-Richard to explain.

Facts matter to most people just not the sycophant members of the Tarpon Springs Democratic Club apparently. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful thing and that is why John Russell’s request for an explanation was so difficult for these zealots to take. This is why they not only acted to silence John but also to physically accost him as the video clearly demonstrates distorted though the images from the ensuing ruckus clearly show. Denial of truth only facilitates the further degradation of what little democracy remains in this country resulting in what can only be characterized as a “CORPORATIST NATION!”

Source:

https://vimeo.com/88703809

Allison Tant was integral in getting former Republican Charlie Crist as the Gubernatorial candidate going as far as to help Crist avoid a primay debate with long time Democrat Nan Rich

Charlie Crist, Allison Tant Preside Over Debacle for Democrats

By: JEFF HENDERSON | Posted: November 5, 2014 3:55 AM

harlie Crist and Allison Tant presided over a disaster for Florida Democrats, even if Crist did come close to beating Rick Scott.

Tant and the Florida Democratic Party let it all ride on Crist -- and it didn’t pay off. Tant and the Democrats didn’t even bother to field major candidates to take on Jeff Atwater and Adam Putnam. Whatever his qualifications for the position, attorney general candidate George Sheldon had not won an election in decades. Sheldon was easily dispatched by Pam Bondi on Tuesday night.

~Snip~

But the short run looks bleak for Florida Democrats. With Scott’s numbers in the tank, Democrats had a prime opportunity to end their losing streak in Florida gubernatorial elections. They cleared the decks as much as possible for former Republican Crist, ignoring Nan Rich’s calls for a primary debate. But even with some major mistakes from Scott, Crist ended up losing the election, by a larger margin than Alex Sink did only four years earlier.

Read more:

http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/charlie-crist-allison-tant-preside-over-debacle-democrats

Props to DUer TheNutcracker for bringing this to my attention:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017224941

[sketchy]

54. This can't be emphasized enough

Jeb should be confronted with this particular part of his history, and required to answer for it.

[Aerows]

79. I voted in 2000 - I think

I was in Florida. Nobody knows whether their vote was counted or not.

That's shameful.

[Octafish]

88. Here's who stole the 2000 election...

Do you know their names, YoungDemCA?

[nadinbrzezinski]

92. They were a large part yes.

Get me some eye bleach though. In clown face paint. Ugh

[Octafish]

93. It was part of a Big Act.

Ass seen on TV.

[nadinbrzezinski]

94. The problem these but Nader guys have

And it was the same act in 2008 when that fella from Ill got in, is that there was a conspiracy. It met all legal definitions. To claim that Nader was part of it they would have to prove that with that burden of proof.


Since they keep ignoring the actual elements of the conspiracy it tells me they would love to use it themselves. Or are simply not interested in actual facts of an actual RW coup. Gore and his lousy campaign and messaging, which lost him his home state and Arkansas has a lot more to do with the success of this RW coup than Nader, a quirky, at times brash, lefty. But, but, Commie!!!! Don't you know?

Anyway this is about Sanders

[YoungDemCA]

95. The Five Stooges

William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy, and Sandra Day O'Connor.

[world wide wally]

96. Those are the biggest enemies of American democracy that we have ever seen

[HassleCat]

101. I Voted for Nader

But I lived in a "safe state," where Gore's vote total was so overwhelming that a few thousand Nader votes didn't affect the outcome. Would I have voted Nader if I didn't live in a safe state? I don't know, but I was (and still am) a big fan of Nader and the progressive elements of his activities. I was active in a PIRG (public interest research group) in college and met him a few times.