Why blame Nader for 2000?

[mdmc]

DU has alot of interest in Nader's 2000 run for the White House. We are pissed that w is in the White House. We all are.
Poll Question:
What good comes from blaming Nader for our loss in 2000?

[corporatewhore]

1. sniffle sniffle he challenged gores proggressiveness make the bad man

go away

[mdmc]

2. lol

I didn't vote for Gore. I support Dean. I'll work for the nominee.

[Deja Q]

3. Because we don't want to believe that

* Gore ran a shit campaign, pure and simple.

* the US supreme court based their choice on partisanship rather than looking at the facts (ala the popular vote, which won't be around in 2004 BTW).

* The illegal antics of Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris, fudging the system to ensure votes couldn't be counted from felons, even if the people weren't felons...

Selection 2000 goes well beyond the antics of Nader, though I concede he did play a SMALL part.

In 2004, who are we going to blame? Greens? Or the NB_ folk? (fill in that blank with the first initial of the candidate's surname. I'm not going to be guilty of name-dropping, but you can bet your sweet bippy that some Democrats will prefer to support their candidate over the one chosen in the polls. x( Please blame them, since I reckon there are more of them than there are of Greens; if we go by how many votes the Green party got in 2002 (which was far less than what they got in 2000...))

[mdmc]

4. How does one court the progressives?

Kucinich, Sharpton can back the nominee. Ditto with Clark and Dean.
Running Kerry is a good start (he is more left than my guy, Dean).

[peacetalksforall]

5. Nader, Moore, Sarandon, Robbins and others

did damage. There were many people who knew what was coming with a Bush administration, but these people couldn't see it. (Actually, I don't think anyone saw that it would be as bad as it has been.)

But Nader is not entirely to blame. The pugs had an eight year lead in assassinating the character of Clinton and Gore, they had terrorists for governor, secretary of state, election officialls in Florida, they had a team of vulture lawyers in the form of Baker and the Federalist Society and unlimited funding. They had lies, deception, arrogance, a well-oiled machine.

It wasn't all Nader and his near color-blind followers. To this day, I cannot understand why they didn't throw the votes to Gore to keep from going where we've gone. And why they started the game of playing votes between states.

Tell me if you know anyone who did not look at Cheney during the same time they were looking at Nader and did not know what was coming? And let me know if you know anyone who knew about the letter to Clinton from PNACers in 1998 and still voted for Nader.

Dems are not perfect. Nader made them out to be worse than they were. But everyone here knew that we were faced with a populace of hardcore two party voters and that diverting them in what everyone said would be a close race with millions of zealots backing the marionette was absurd. Thinking that they could win the votes for the top spot was stupidity. Nader was clearly a spoiler, if not paid to be one.

[mdmc]

6. I have four FLA friends, all voted for Nader

ALL remain unrepentant! They hate politics, they wouldn't vote if Nader didn't run. They didn't vote in 96, and voted for Perot in 92.

How did you vote above?
What good does blaming Nader? It makes it harder to change the dem party, imo.

[peacetalksforall]

8. I voted 'other'

I think you made my point - i.e. - they wouldn't have voted if Nader hadn't run. I've also heard stories that many Minnesota youth had never voted until Ventura ran.

I'm an Independent. But I'll side with the Democrats anytime as flawed as they are if it means defeating the right wing.

The country needs about five parties, but with 2 solid parties and 1 or 2 250th's of other parties and a populace that can't wrap their minds around much more than guns, abortions, supremism they should not try to start at the highest office with a divider like Nader.

I would like to know if your friends votedor worked to put Greens in the smaller civic and state positions also. They also count, not just the presidency.

Nader was once a hero in my eyes. I can no longer abide his decision to not ask the Greens to throw the vote. I think someone should examine the financial reasons behind his stubbornness.

[BillZBubb]

7. I despise Nader

Anybody with an IQ higher than an eggplant knew the 2000 election would be very close. That was obvious for a number of reasons, one of which was Gore's style. Everyone knew Gore wouldn't be a great campaigner.

Still, anybody with an IQ higher than a cucumber knew a Gore presidency would be much preferable to a Bush* regime for the environment.

Close elections are near the tipping point. Just the smallest nudge can move them one way or the other.

Nader knew all these things yet he ran and syphoned crucial votes away from Gore, especially in highly contested states. He is in a big way responsible for installing the Bush cabal. No amount of hand waving about Gore's poor campaign can change that or excuse it.

I despise Nader. There is no forgiveness in me for the damage he helped perpetrate on this country.

[Terwilliger]

10. You despise Nader because Gore sucked?

what a country! :eyes:

[wuushew]

12. Gore didn't suck the American voter sucked

Clinton won both times cause his easy going southern mannerisms and slick venner wooed over people who were too stupid to vote on issues. Gore has good positions on enviromentialism and foreign policy. When people vote against their self-interest how is it Gore's fault?

One stupid thing he did I will grant you is choosing Holy Joe as VP.

[Terwilliger]

15. Oh, I see...it's ALWAYS somebody besides the Democrat

its NEVER the fault of the Democrat

In fact, Democrats are perfect...that's why they win all the non-stolen elections....

what? they don't win the non-stolen elections??? :shrug:

[BillZBubb]

28. I despise Nader because Nader sucks

Apparently you didn't read my original message.

I pointed out Nader had to know the election would be close. Everyone else in the country with a pulse knew it. Nader also had to know that a Gore presidency would be much better for the U.S. than a Bush* residency. Anyone who cares about the environment knew that.

Therefore Nader had to know the chances of his tipping the election to Bush* were very real. Yet he persisted with his lie that there was no difference between the two. And he pulled votes primarily from Gore.

If he still believes that President Gore would be as bad a resident Bush*, he's an even bigger dimwit than I think he is.

He makes me sick.

[ulysses]

29. the joy of original thought.

:eyes:

[DennisReveni]

23. Bill Maher

On a recent REAL TIME Maher claimed that THREE MILLION gays voted for Bush.
Now explain why you aren't bitching about the gay vote instead of Nader?

[LeahMira]

26. 'Scuse me?

Everyone knew Gore wouldn't be a great campaigner.

Mr. Gore has given several really outstanding speeches over the past year or so. Where was that man during the campaign?

Why did Mr. Gore choose to keep President Clinton at arm's length during the campaign?

Why did he choose Joe Lieberman, who spoke forthrightly about his religious convictions, as his running mate?

I think the Democrats were running scared after President Clinton's affair was smeared all over the evening news. I hope a lesson has been learned because the Republicans are sure to try something very similar this time around and we'd best be ready to deal with it.

[Dr Fate]

9. Who gives a damn about 2000? Nader should be helping us in 2004!!!

I cant believe Nader is selling out progressives again in 2004- I'm over 2000- but Nader needs to do the right thing and HELP progressives and moderates DEFEAT BUSH in 2004...

Who the hell does he think he is helping???

Again- wo cares about 2000- we need to worry about 2004- Why cant Nader help UNITE progressives and moderates???

[Isere]

11. Because it was his doing!!!!!

Did you see Meet the Press today and take note of the chart that Pumpklnhead showed of how close the Bush-Gore vote was in several states? He listed ten or so states where the margin was only a half a percent or one percent between them.

Of course he neglected to mention the 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 percent that went to Nader and was taken right out of Gore's behind.

Never, never forget the 90,000 Nader voters in Florida.

(and BTW, wasn't Charlie Rangel in superb form?! He is the best!)

[napi21]

13. Don't worry about Nader in 2004

The 2000 election taught a lesson to a lot of people. After the last 3+ years, they realize that it does matter if you make a protest vote. I really believe lots of people who voted for Nader in 2000 never dreamed things would get soooo bad.

I happen to know a small number of people who saaid exactly that! They won't vote for a 3rd party candidat4e this year.

There's just too much anger at GW.

[Terwilliger]

14. Never forget the 350,000 Florida Democrats who voted for Bush

while you're at it

[mdmc]

16. Terwilliger, you Green :-)

The point that I was trying to make is that 'blaming' Nader only disenfranchises progressives and underlines the fact that the Dem party DOES NOT need to change.

Do you agree? According to this poll, most du'ers think Nader should be blamed (as opposed to not blamed) simply because it is true (a 'fact' that you and I dispute).

I mean, did Nader cost the Dems TN and AK? Or can we accept that there was some other reason that the Dems couldn't hold these home states.

[TerWillie]

19. I had a great reply, but I tried it and found I had been nixed

safe to say, I don't trust the ideology that the Democrats proclaim

I think they're just as partisan as Repukes (something that really disgusts me) and they don't seem to desire to address the problems fundamental within their own party.

This whole Dean debacle is demonstrative of this problem.

MODS: I just wanted to respond to this poster...I'm not trying to circumvent board rules

[Doomsayer13]

20. DINO's who would've voted Bush anyways

Are you saying we should've moved further to the right to cater to those Bush Democrats? If that's the case, why should Dems even bother paying attention to the 97,000 Nader voters in FL?

[ulysses]

30. ...

Are you saying we should've moved further to the right to cater to those Bush Democrats?

I don't speak for Terwilliger, but that's exactly what we've been doing (with less than spectacular success), for years.

[Hippo_Tron]

17. I don't blame nader...

I just feel that the people who voted for him deserve a country with George Bush as president.

[depakid]

18. Blaming Nader is easy and visceral

It also allows people to ignore the many shortcomings in their own party which have led to Republican policies prevailing even in Democratic administrations. The fact is that there is a great- and I submit growing dissatisfaction among voters at the limited choices that they're given in the two party system. It's very much as Chomsky says- there's vigorous debate, but only within a narrowly defined orthodoxy. Anything else- no matter how logical or practical, is considered anathema if it threatens the corporate interests that dominate the American political landscape (to our detriment).

If it wasn't Nader in 2000, it may well have been somebody else. Nader is easy to demonize, but it wasn't Nader who set up the Shadow Conventions. It wasn't Nader who sold us out so often that it made the claim "there's not a dimes worth of difference between the two parties" believable to millions of Americans. And it wasn't Nader who allowed the the election to be stolen in Florida.

People who persist in blaming Nader and engage in juvenile name calling while ignoring these facts need a wake up call- and to some extent, I think (or rather hope) that Howard Dean's campaign has given them one.

[Doomsayer13]

21. No, we shouldn't blame Nader

but this round we shouldn't lay down and take Nader's Dem=Repub BS like we did last time.

[peacetalksforall]

22. Where has Nader been? What has he done to try to fight

the terminators, dominators, and self-feeding frenzy?

He's just a big mouth now. Just dangerous air.

He used to be great.

[Piperay]

36. That is what I would like to know

I don't hear Nader critizing anything the chimp has done, so evidently he has no disagreement with it.

[bushwakker]

24. No Nader in 2000 = President Gore

it's just the truth

[ulysses]

25. is it?

The Pugs stole enough votes, with almost no outcry, to take Florida in 2000 - minus Nader, wouldn't they still have stolen just enough more?

Nader is a scapegoat for the party's failures.

[VOX]

37. Forget Florida -- it was New Hampshire where Nader did the damage...

http://www.fairvote.org/plurality/nader.htm
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0876793.html

Nader's 22,188 votes in New Hampshire far outstripped the 7,211 votes separating state winner Bush from Gore.

Bush 273,559
Gore 266,348
Nader 22,198

New Hampshire's 4 electoral votes went to Bush, who with Florida, got 271 electoral votes.

If Bush didn't take New Hampshire with the help of Nader, and if its 4 electoral votes then went to Gore, Gore would have won the election with 270 electoral votes.

[LeahMira]

27. Are you forgetting...

... all those Jewish senior citizens in south Florida who allegedly voted for Pat Buchanan? How come no one blames Pat for Gore's loss?

I really don't think that Ralph Nader influenced elections that much in any state other than to make the margins a little narrower.

How about we blame the folks who really are to blame like Jeb Bush, Kathryn Harris, and the crew in Florida and Texas who purged the voter rolls, the crew that ordered road blocks put up in Democratic areas of Florida, the crew that doctored absentee ballots, and generally all the dishonest Republican folks in Florida that delivered the state to the Chimp. Compared to their shennanigans, anything that the Greens did by running Ralph Nader was a very small drop in a very large, very smelly bucket.

[mdmc]

31. So 50% feel blsming Nader is justified.

The truth.

[HawkerHurricane]

32. Plenty of blame to go around...

We would have won Florida...

IF the Nader voters had voted for Gore
OR
IF all the votes had been counted
OR
IF only legal absentee votes had been counted
OR
IF the voter purge hadn't happened
OR
IF the butterfly ballot nonsense hadn't happened
OR
IF the recount hadn't been stopped by paid thugs
OR
IF the Supreme Court hadn't interfered
OR
whatever.

All of these things caused the Gore defeat. Any one of them changing would have resulted in a Gore victory. I don't blame Nader or his voters; they did what they thought was right and were honest about it. I'd much rather blame the dishonest actions of the Republican party, at least then I'm blaming someone that's guilty of something more than disagreeing with me.

[alwynsw]

33. Time to get over 2000 and move on

Face it, Nader did to Gore what Perot did to Daddy bush in '92. One was a good thing, the other sucked.

Speaking of sucking; it's high time we all sucked it up and quit whining about 2000 and move on towards November. We're not going to change the past, but we can mold the future.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

34. Forget about 2000??? That is one of the key driving factors toward...

...kicking Junior out of the White House in 2004!

You can do whatever you want, but I'm keeping the 2000 theft front and center as the 2004 elections draw nearer.

[alwynsw]

35. There's a huge difference between "get over" and "forget"

Read again, I said "get over".

One of my most closely held beliefs is the old saw about those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

Use 2000, refer to 2000, beat people over the head with 2000, but get over the anger and use it constructively. It's human nature to see only the anger while missing the message completely.

[mdmc]

38. never forget