General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Gore not becoming President: whose fault? [View all]morningfog
(18,115 posts)First, Gore recieves more votes. Despite that fact, Bush stole the presidency and became president. I'm not confident that what happened in Florida was simply spontaneous and opportunistic or if bush was going to do whatever it takes, and the scenario that played out was the FL debacle.
If bush had rightfully won, I would agree that Nader was, one of many causes. But he he didn't. The blocked recount was an intervening, and illegal, cause. In the legal sense, the causation rests with Harris and the justices. They are solely liable.
A criminal act broke the chain of events. All the preceding legal acts are irrelevant of the causation. People are free to dislike Nader for his decision and his comments, and if bush were legitimately elected, he would share the blame for the aftermath.
But, the presidency was stolen and that is all that matters. To focus on Nader now does two things I disagree with. One, it legitimizes theft of elections. It suggests that if the margins are close enough, we must accept stolen elections in our system. Second, it discourages democracy and supports the duopoly.