General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Sic semper Naderus. (A response to the recent pro-Nader posts) [View all]nyquil_man
(1,443 posts)Gore got over 51 million votes. That's 3.6 million more than Clinton received in 1996. In fact, it was the highest number of votes a Democratic nominee had received up to that time.
Had Clinton received that many votes in '96, he would have won 53% of the popular vote. Gore got more votes than Clinton in 37 states and in DC. That includes Ohio, Florida, New Hampshire, and several others which could have swung the election.
He brought at least 3.6 million new Democratic voters to the polls. The problem? Bush got more votes (about 11.3 million) than Dole in all 50 states, mostly from ex-Perot voters. That helped make the election close enough to steal.
There's an argument for Nader as spoiler, but it's not the only argument. I'm not even sure it's the main argument. Those Perot voters were a major factor.