Ralph Nader ABSOLUTELY Helped Cost President Gore the Election in 2000 despite these revisionists

[LaydeeBug]

trying to tell you otherwise. Nader called Gore and Bush 'identical' on the environment. Oh no, NOTHING to see there.

The NYT on the matter:
In Florida, where Mr. Gore trailed Mr. Bush by only a few hundred votes, a shift of just a fraction of the nearly 97,000 votes Mr. Nader polled could have given the state, and the White House, to Mr. Gore, the most likely major-party alternative for Mr. Nader's supporters.



The argument can be made that Nader did not cost what was stolen, but do you honestly think the campaign insiders weren't aware of what was going on about voter rolls? Nader was a conduit for the theft, and I am not going to suffer revisionists trying to placate their sorry asses now with "Oh nooooooes!11!!! It wasn't *Nader*"

Yes it fucking was, and people who don't learn from their mistakes are destined to repeat them.

[graham4anything]

1. NH and their 4 votes would have put Gore over 270 without Florida.

[LaydeeBug]

3. This is very true, but that doesn't mean that Nader had nothing to do with abetting the theft in

Florida.

Fuck this revisionist shit.

[graham4anything]

14. It has been true since 8pm eastern on election day 2000

And well, people elected Jeb Bush to be governor

actions of voters have consequences
Jeb Bush put Kathryn Harris in her job

Who did one think Harris would support?

As for SCOTUS, anyone who didn't vote for Jimmy Carter in 1980, must have been happy with the SCOTUS Reagan/Bush41 selected.

It really is simple

from now on vote straight democratic and in the future we won't have these problems
100% of the time (except in the rare instantane where the democratic candidate is one who can't win and there is a 3rd option

Governorships and senate seats and mayor seats and all the others including house are as important

People seem to forget

no one gives the others a pass, but actions=consequences

revisionist history is thinking Ralph Nader did not cause what happen
(and he has had a really nice life style financed by what he did).

We do though, it can be agreed, thank him for the fact that from this day forward, NO 3rd party candidate shall ever
be seriously entertained as a vote by any true democratic supporter.

I also btw, blame those who smeared Jesse Jackson time and again.(and still do).
I vote for Jesse twice for President and once knowing Jerry Brown was going to pick him for VP, so I voted 3x for him.
(but that was the primaries ON THE DEMOCRATIC Ticket.

[LaydeeBug]

19. ummmm...I agree, and then, not so much...

I get that 'elections have consequences' but your post engages in blaming the victim too much for my taste. NO ONE should expect to be purged off a voting list just because they may have voted for Jeb Bush. NO ONE should expect that Katherine Harris should not have been impartial...she should have, regardless of her preferences, and I am too old to pretend that third party candidates weren't aware of this.

He helped them steal it, and I will not allow revisionists to change that.

[graham4anything]

26. Yes, if all the votes were there and counted, Al Gore won a landslide (100,000 votes in Florida???)

so yes, that is 100% true

however, because of the other things, that didn't happen.

So in essence, we all are correct.

Let's make sure it don't happen again
(and as the post I just made in a new thread says, we can all disagree on how much different one party is to the next

However, we should all agree there is a difference no matter how small or large.

and we knew this was coming.

[A Simple Game]

96. Now I am just getting confused, please clear things up for me

You said:

if all the votes were there and counted, Al Gore won a landslide (100,000 votes in Florida???)

How does that coincide with your saying Nader cost Gore the election?

You say: Nader made it close enough for them to steal the election. Seems if Nader cost Gore the election he must have been the one to steal it. Is that what you are saying?

You say all Democrats must vote for the Democratic candidate, are you saying Democratic voters voted for Nader? Do you think independents had anything to do with it? How about Liberals?

Other than telling people who they must vote for, a solution that seems totally undemocratic to me, how would you stop people from voting for a third party candidate? Would you outlaw third party candidates? Would you be the one to decide who could run for office on the Democratic ticket?

Perhaps you feel like the Republicans, eliminate minority and female voters and we will have the candidate(s) we want elected. Who would you eliminate from the voting poles?

Everything you advocate seems undemocratic to me, please show me how I am wrong. What makes you think you can tell me who to vote for?

[graham4anything]

100. Ralph Nader himself made sure that a 3rd party vote will never interfere with the democratic party

and I really could care less if say Rand Paul ran independent against Jeb Bush or CHris Christie and that led
to Hillary winning all 538 votes.

Why didn't Nader just run as a democratic party candidate in the primaries, get in the debates and go from there?

As he wanted something and he has said, he was rebuffed by Al Gore according to him (like he wanted say a cabinet post?)
that means he knows which side was better, and he did it solely for ego.

Gore should have offered him whatever he wanted. America would have been far better off had the two worked together rather than apart.

In effect, President Obama included Hillary and didn't shun Hillary. He values Hillary. And the two have worked together and will support each other.

People forget that President Obama ran to unite.
And he united 95% of the democratic supporters.

Nader could have done the same thing. His Ego got in the way (same as Ted's in 1980),etc.
(in 1980, Jimmy/Ted should have been the ticket, with Mondale being given say SOS or possibly a SCOTUS nomination
Jimmy/Ted would have beaten Reagan).

And yes, all the factors, both separate and apart led to bush seated.
One in November, one in December.

[riqster]

6. There are lots of other possible scenarios

But in the one we actually experienced, Nader's Republican-financed campaign made Florida close enough to steal.

[BlueCaliDem]

130. Exactly! Thank you! eom

[Cha]

137. Exactly. They can push all the other reasons why Gore lost but the Main

one was on Nader's stupid.. "there's no difference betweens repubs and Dems." It was stupid then and it's more stupid now. Nader's got blood on his hands.

[pnwmom]

62. So what? Nader was a single individual, advocating for progressivism,

whose personal decision affected 97,000 votes in an election that was determined by less than 500. No other single individual, much less a progressive, held that kind of power in that election.

Other progressives at the time begged him to stay out of the critical swing states, but that's where he chose to campaign the hardest, insisting that there was no difference between "Tweedledee and Tweedledum." To others, he admitted that he preferred a Bush win because he thought a disastrous Bush reign would bring about positive change faster. Well, we got change all right.

[LaydeeBug]

66. No. He wasn't. He was a wolf in sheep's clothing and he wanted BUSH over Gore and said as much

and then he drove the get away car.

[still_one]

2. We have been paying for nader's arrogance since 2000, and it isn't getting better

[LaydeeBug]

5. absolutely. And I will not suffer revisionists. nt

[G_j]

28. LOL

it's funny how while lamenting today's SCOTUS ruling, some conveniently forget
how African Americans were purged in Florida, flying right in the face of voter rights.

[LaydeeBug]

29. Oh, I know. These people are a *scream*

Don't blame Nader for aiding the theft, blame Gore for losing the election that he fucking WON. They are blaming the victim, and I can't stand that shit.

[G_j]

36. the Congressional Black Caucus:

They were effectively ignored by the rest of the Democrats. That, and the racial purging is what really pissed me off, and why should we "suffer" forgetters?

Please excuse the long post, but this is so tragic, and must be remembered .

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0101/06/se.02.html

Special Event

Congressional Black Caucus Protests Electoral Vote Count

Aired January 6, 2001 - 2:00 p.m. ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: And if you're just joining us, we're going to go straight to the press conference we told you about with the Congressional Black Caucus with regard to the -- all right, we're working on getting audio for you in just a moment. And while we're doing that, I will recap just a bit.

If you're just joining us now, you are looking at live pictures of a Congressional Black Caucus press conference, with Eddie Bernice Johnson, Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, active member of the Congressional Black Caucus, talking about why she objected not long ago, within the past half an hour, to -- or rather in the joint session with Vice President Al Gore, as they were counting the presidential votes for one last time.

We have audio. We're going to listen in.

REP. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (D), TEXAS: ... black caucus, and I'm going to ask Mr. Hastings to give his opening statement, and I'll return.

REP. ALCEE HASTINGS (D), FLORIDA: Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Today was a very solemn day, and the remarks are that many of us were not permitted, regretted by us all. Had I been given an opportunity to go forward with an appropriate objection, I would have indicated that because of the overwhelming evidence of official misconduct, deliberate fraud, and an attempt to suppress voter turnout by unlawful means, I felt the necessity -- as do my colleagues from the Congressional Black Caucus, and other members of the House of Representatives -- to object to the kinds of errors against democracy, the holy grail of democracy, that were permitted in the state of Florida.

And we felt that they should not be tolerated, as they would not be tolerated in other countries. Indeed, we should not tolerate them in America.

I would have said to Vice President Gore that Harry Truman once said that what is popular is not always right, and what is right is not always popular. What we were doing here today is right. I hope all of our colleagues and the American people see it that way. And that is why we raised our objection. And it's a proud moment for the conscience of the House of Representatives, for those of us that are representing the entirety of the Congressional Black Caucus, in the presence of our chairlady, and the members here assembled, we stand proudly to say that we did what was right.

JOHNSON: Forty years ago, during the civil rights movement, I marched for justice with a firm belief that my son would not have to march, in order to utilize his voting rights. Much to my dismay, 40 years later, I find myself marching again, but this time for my grandchildren, so that they will not have to march in order to be afforded the same rights.

How long will we settle for injustice in America? How long will we have to fight to perfect the 15th Amendment? How long will we have to struggle for something that should be every American's birthright? On election day, 100 million Americans went to the polls to make their voices heard. Those voices want to be heard still. No hyper- technical manipulation of election laws should derail the intent of the voter.

We cannot sweep under the carpet the claims of first-time college voters who say they registered to vote, had voter registration cards in their hand, but when they were not allowed to vote at the polls, because their names were not on the roll, the lines were busy all over the country, where they tried to call to clarify their registration.

We cannot sweep this under the carpet, the cries of those who were incorrectly removed from the polling places in Florida by an inept Texas company hired by Mr. Bush's brother.

We cannot ignore believable stories of police intimidation, questionable activities by poll workers and simple ineptness by volunteers at the precincts. We cannot ignore what we saw with our own eyes on television: polls closing on voters in St. Louis, un- American voting lines in Pennsylvania and incredibly complex ballots in South Florida.

There is overwhelming evidence that George W. Bush did not win this election, either by national popular vote or the Florida popular vote. As members of Congress charged with defending the constitutional principles of this country, it is our duty to challenge this vote.

The vice president, in an incredibly statesmanlike effort to take the high road, has ruled against our challenge, so George W. Bush has managed to ascend to our nation's highest office. But he should be on notice that without justice, there can be no peace.

And we will ensure that there is no peace in this Congress until he truly reaches across party lines and corrects these wrongs. He must reach across party lines, racial lines, and philosophical lines. We see what's going on. There will simply be no peace until these problems can be corrected.

<snip>
--
Congressional Black Caucus press conference and listen in once again.

REP. CARRIE MEEK (D), FLORIDA: We dare not have it repeated. We dare not have the Tilden and the Rutherford Hayes situation repeated again, because it disenfranchised our people at that time.

This will disenfranchise -- it already has -- our people. We don't want that continued. We will always come out. We will always fight. We don't care who is it there.

We are very disappointed that our senators did not stand up and support us today. We helped to elect those senators. They will hear from us again, because we feel very disappointed that they didn't say we want our African-Americans, and our disjointed people who were not able to vote, to have someone in the halls of Congress to say, yes, give them a chance to debate this issue, so that the world could see what is happening here.

We have had our votes nullified. That's why we're so sad. They were nullified by defective voting machines, nullified by discriminantly distributed and targeted machinery, election machinery, in our neighborhoods. The votes were nullified by a purge of voting lists, undertaken by direction from a campaign that retained the equivalent of electoral thugs.

,
, one after the other, rose to their feet to object to the votes from Florida.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AL GORE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: For what purpose does the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Deutsch, arise?

REP. PETER DEUTSCH (D), FLORIDA: To make point of order.

GORE: Gentleman will state his point of order.

DEUTSCH: Mr. President, we have just completed the closest election in American history. There are at least...

GORE: The gentleman will suspend. The chair is advised by the parliamentarian that under section 18 of title 3, United States Code, no debate is allowed in the joint session. If the gentleman has a point of order, please state the point of order.

DEUTSCH: Mr. President, there are many Americans who still believe that the results we are going to certify today are illegitimate.

GORE: The gentleman will suspend. If the gentleman from Florida has a point of order, he may state the point of order at this time. Otherwise, the gentleman will suspend.

DEUTSCH: I will note the absence of quorum and respectfully request that we delay the proceedings until quorum is present.

GORE: The chair is advised by the parliamentarian that section 17 of title 3, United States Code, prescribes a single procedure for resolution of either an objection to a certificate or other questions arising in the matter. That includes a point of order that a quorum is not present.

The chair rules on the advice of the parliamentarian that the point order that a quorum is not present is subject to the requirement that it be in writing and signed by both a member of the House of Representatives and a senator. Is the point of order in writing and signed not only by member of the House of representatives, but also a senator?

DEUTSCH: It is in writing, but I do not have a senator.

GORE: The point order may not be received.

HASTINGS: Mr. President, and I take great pride in calling you that, I must object because of the overwhelming evidence of official misconduct, deliberate fraud and an attempt to suppress...

GORE: The chair...

HASTINGS: ... voter turnout.

GORE: The chair must remind members that under session 18 of title 3, United States Code, no debate is allowed in the joint session.

HASTINGS: Thank you, Mr. President.

To answer your question, Mr. President, the objection is in writing, signed by a number of members of the House of Representatives but not by a member of the Senate.

Thank you, Mr. President.

WATERS: I rise to object to the fraudulent 25 Florida electoral votes.

GORE: Is the objection in writing and signed by member of the House and a senator?

WATERS: The objection is in writing, and I don't care that it is not it is not signed by a member of the Senate.

REP. BOB FILNER (D), CALIFORNIA: I have an objection to the electoral votes from Florida.

GORE: Is the objection in writing? Is it signed by a member of the House of Representatives and a senator?

FILNER: No, it is not in writing, but I rise in solidarity with my colleagues who have previously expressed their objection.

GORE: The chair thanks the gentleman from Illinois, but -- hey.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACK: There were 13 objections in all, 12 from minority group members in the House of Representatives, last one saw was Bob Filner, who's a Democrat from California, a former professor, a big supporter of Al Gore, and clearly was just moved by the emotion of the moment.

They were all gavelled down. It was a great irony for the vice president. Here were some of his biggest supporters in the House of Representatives. He was clearly sympathetic, understood what they were trying to do, but he went right by the book. There was no debate allowed under the law that governs this joint session. There is also -- no objection can be heard unless it is signed by a House member and a senator.

Not a single senator would join members of the Congressional Black Caucus, much to their dismay. About a dozen members of the caucus walked out in protest, to protest the Florida vote, and then had a press conference in the gallery.

<snip>

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bluenorthwest]

49. Thank you for posting that. Facts matter.

nt

[HiPointDem]

67. +1 he doesn't sound "clearly sympathetic" to me. he sounds like he blocked them.

[LaydeeBug]

70. I cried when I watched this as it was happening.

I am tired of people splitting hairs when we need the breadth of vision.

[noiretextatique]

42. but that was nader's fault too!

[LaydeeBug]

47. Nope...he just helped them.

No sarcasm icon here. If this shit weren't true, it'd be funny.

[noiretextatique]

53. THEY did not need any help...pleae try to grasp this

they had: katherine harris, jeb bush, and SCOTUS...and a lazy, complacent , brain-dead population who meekly accepted the coup, and still refuse the blame the real culprits. they also had the florida legislature as a backup. they didn't need nader at all, but he sure is a perfect fall guy.

[LaydeeBug]

54. and yet, HE helped them anyway..please try to grasp that. nt

[noiretextatique]

94. that's just beyond idiotic

do you understand how democracy is supposed to work? clue: in a democracy, the votes should be counted and a partisan court should not create a one-time law to benefit its preferred candidate. if that outraged people more than nader, perhaps we have some hope. today's voting rights decision means one thing to me: more dirty tricks are in store to select another GOP asshole for presdeint in 2016.

[LaydeeBug]

115. Nice try. No dice.

You went on and on about RIGHTS. Katherine Harris followed the letter of the law. So did Nader.

You pretend whatever you need to in order to get through it.

[heaven05]

93. that's

what I called it in 2000, A fucking coup! Nader fucked up a lot of things with his mindless bullshit, but that damn k. harris SOS shit pissed me off to high heaven. And by the way did you think j.bushmonkie was going to let his brother lose that state? The whole fiasco, corrupt from top to bottom and Gore, with the help of nader, thrown out, not counted democrat county votes didn't stand a chance. So here we are two wars later, a banker scandal that just made bankers richer, made millions of americans lose their homes and gave corporations person hood. This democrazy is on it's last breaths. The RW with today's SCOTUS help is taking over, permanently without massive, massive democrat turnout in the next 2 elections. Period.

[noiretextatique]

95. nader is mostly irrelevant

a convienent scapegoat for democrats against democracy. meanwhile, the real culprits continue their destructive agenda, now including giving the GOP the green light to disenfranchise minority voters. the nader-haters can continue their delusion, but they do so at their own peril. who will they blame in 2016? probably howard dean, if he decided to run.

[okaawhatever]

78. Yes, thanks for reminding me there's even more to be pissed about. I shouldn't

say pissed, I should say MOTIVATED!!

[Tarheel_Dem]

76. +1000

[Buzz Clik]

4. In the other thread, I argued that Nader cost Gore the election. Being a true contrarian...

Manbearpig shot himself in the foot.

[Waiting For Everyman]

7. Without Nader, there would've been a President Gore.

That means he cost Gore the election. Yes, it does. What's more, I think Nader knew that's what he was doing.

[LaydeeBug]

71. ^^this^^ nt

[UTUSN]

8. R#4 & K n/t

[Bonobo]

9. It's kind of strange that your own OP contradicts yourself, but...

Oh well.

For the record, Gore won the general election by half a million votes and won Florida as well.

He probably should have fought harder and not given up.

And that's not even mentioning how stupid it was of him to pick Lieberman.

No, you cannot blame a person for running for office and collecting votes from people in a democratic process, but you SHOULD blame the fucked up system that appointed Bush.

I will NEVER understand people like you who attack a legitimate campaign and legitimate votes and thus act as an apologist for the real theft.

Yay Democracy, fuck those who would try to take it away.

[frylock]

12. and of course, the registered dems that voted for bush get a free pass

[Bonobo]

13. That too. nt

[LaydeeBug]

24. There are many wolves in sheep's clothing, pity you don't see Nader as such

You know, register one way, vote another.

"...Which, Nader confided to Outside in June, wouldn't be so bad. When asked if someone put a gun to his head and told him to vote for either Gore or Bush, which he would choose, Nader answered without hesitation: "Bush." "

Fuck revisionism. I lived this shit.

[Bonobo]

25. Link or it didn't happen. Nt

[LaydeeBug]

61. Link to what or it did not happen? Nader saying he wanted Bush over Gore? Would that help you?

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2006/10/remember_rememb.html

[frylock]

31. you're the revisionist in this scenario..

yes, there are many wolves; Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush, and the Supreme Court, just to name a few. yet you save your vitriol for people exercising their constitutional rights as if they OWE you the votes. fuck that shit, and fuck your revisionist history.

[LaydeeBug]

63. Nope. I'm not. Pity you can't remember the truth, but I lived it

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2006/10/remember_rememb.html

[HiPointDem]

69. yeah, the rest of us were in suspended animation under rocks. only *you* 'lived it'.

[frylock]

79. let's entertain for just one second your fantasy that ralph nader single-handedly cost gore..

the election. that was THIRTEEN FUCKING YEARS AGO. what have you, or the party, done to ensure that wholesale election fraud errrrr.... third party candidates with a constitutional right to campaign and run in a presidential election, doesn't screw over your precious party in future? what have you done, aside from grouse about a thirteen year old incident that no amount of complaining is going to change, to see that it will never never ever happen again? what have you done? have you implored the party leadership to run candidates that may have a greater appeal to dirty hippies errrrr... I mean liberal-minded voters, or are you in the group that admonishes others because they don't fall in lockstep to vote for every turd the democratic party offers?

[noiretextatique]

43. they sure as hell do

and there were a lot more of them than democrats who voted for nader.

[LaydeeBug]

21. It's even more strange that the contradiction is what happened, but considering back pedaling and

obfuscation.

Nader did what Nader did in SPITE of what *Nader* said Nader would do.

And the only person serving as an apologist for that shit is you, honey, but I understand it.

I understand full well. Trust.

[ohheckyeah]

48. Honey?

Condescending much?

[LaydeeBug]

52. Terms of endearment are not always meant for condescension

but feel free to interpret and judge anyway.

[gcomeau]

104. No, it doesn't.

Nader out of the race =Florida not close enough to steal = President Gore.

"Yay Democracy, fuck those who would try to take it away."

Oh grow the hell up. Nobody is trying to take away anyone's freedom to run. Having the freedom to run does not mean having the freedom to not face ridicule for the consequences of your decision to do so. Nader made a decision that resulted in the devastation that was President Bush and he knew what impact he was having while he was doing it. People are allowed to be pissed.

[frylock]

10. tell that to the 100,000+ registered dems in FL that voted for bush..

100,000 is significantly more than "only a few hundred votes," yet it's the Nader voters that are held to account. what gives?

[gcomeau]

105. What gives...

...is Nader is one guy. One guy who made a conscious decision to siphon votes away from the Democratic candidate and single handedly swung the outcome of the election.

THAT is what gives.

[frylock]

107. he has superhuman powers!

even more powerful than the supreme court! you would be wise to bow down before the great and powerful NADER!

[gcomeau]

108. Now you're just being a child...

...because you've run out of argument.

[frylock]

109. yeh, that's what i'm doing... singlehandedly!!112!

[gcomeau]

112. Way to effectively reinforce the point. Bravo. -eom

[frylock]

113. that's me. the one with the childlike world view..

that lays the blame squarely at the foot of one man that was ARGUABLY one component to bush's installation. wahwahwah.

[markiv]

11. Nader forced Clinton, Gore and Obama to support trade deals and H-1b visas

that's why I'm mad at Nader, they never would have supported that without his intimidation

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. If Gore wanted the votes of the left, he should have appealed to the left.

Instead he ignored them and went for the centrists.

He failed, not the voters.

[markiv]

17. wrong, he needed support of corporatists, and obedience from the left

that's the only way we can keep out the repugs!

[marybourg]

20. The bottom line. IMHO.

[LaydeeBug]

27. Gore *GOT* the votes from the left because he WON THE FUCKING ELECTION

Nader aided the theft in Florida.

Awwww, but then that means you can't get all high spite and angry at corporatists and shit. LOL You're a scream.

[frylock]

32. if gore won, then what's you're fucking beef with nader voters?

you are all over the map. what has the democratic party done to ensure they get votes from liberal voters going forward? they've done jack fucking shit. "we're not as bad republicans, really" is only going to get you so far in this world.

[LaydeeBug]

58. I have no fucking beef with Nader voters. I have a fucking beef with Nader

and I guess, since you like to put words in my mouth, that might explain why you think I am all over the map.

Please.

[leftstreet]

35. Wait. So now you're saying Gore won?

Poor Ralph. He'll never know how popular he is at DU when it comes to the Two Minutes Hate

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. He got the votes of the left and won. But, the left didn't vote for him so he lost?

And, it's Nader's fault?

Non sequiter much?

[LaydeeBug]

65. Holy convoluted Batman! Your post ASSumes the votes were actually counted...

but they weren't, and you you know it.

And you know that Nader helped, because Nader had his preference. He wanted the country to go so far down that sweeping reforms would come in. It is almost laughable how you're pretending otherwise.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

75. So, what is it? It's Naders fault the votes weren't counted? Or, the people who did the counting?

Gore failed to appeal to Nader/Green/progressive voters and didn't get their votes. So, who's fault is that? The guy who did appeal to them? Or, the guy who didn't?

[rhett o rick]

16. This is CT and has no business in GD. nm

[NCTraveler]

18. I think using the word "helped" makes this a fair and valid argument.

Some just see it as black and white. Nader did not cost Gore the election, but he in no way helped. He clearly hurt Gore. I still think Lieberman and Gores campaign cost them more votes than anything Nader ever did.

[noiretextatique]

22. katherine harris, jeb bush and SCOTUS cost gore the election

focusing on nader, though clearly enjoyable for democrats against democracy, is literally focusing on the fly on the BIG FAT ELEPHANT"S ass. it was a GOP coup that cost gore the presidency...that is clearly something many people in this stupid ass country still refuse to accept.

[Melinda]

38. Hammer meets nail! Posts like yours are why need individual Rec function. Thanks!

This country has been undergoing a coup for the last 40 years, a well orchestrated take over of all 3 branches of govt by corporate interests.

This Nader stole the election stuff is, imo, a shiny distracting object. SCOTUS shreds the Voting Rights Act, and Nader becomes a focal point for discussion. The NSA is out of control, we have a Congress that passes laws in secret, we remain ignorant as a citizenry because the corporate owned media ensures it...

Bad things are good because they are legal. They are legal because we have a Congress that can legally sneak language into Bills to create laws we would never have agreed with had we known what Congress was doing. And nothing will change as long as we keep chasing bright shiny objects and eating the pablum we are fed.

Dayum, sorry about the rant. I have no idea where it came from. Oh wait, yes I do. Another Nader costs us the election almost 14 years ago. What did we learn from this... what do those who continue to advance this idea want to impress upon their readers?

Stay entrenched, don't buck the system, be a good soldier. Or, so I think, anyway.

Thanks for your post, I feel the same.

[noiretextatique]

40. +1000

incredibly, so-called democrats, in continuing to blame nader for participating in a rotten so-called democracy it is mind-boggling. meanwhile, we have concrete proof of crimes committed in florida, and the treasonius decision by SCOTUS. and yo are correct...it's not like this coup just started in 2000. thanks for you rant...could not agree more

[arcane1]

129. Yep, Nader didn't have caging lists, unverified electronic voting machines, the Supreme Court...

or the crappy paper ballots in poor districts with their "chad" problems.

"Nader took votes away from Gore" is a true statement, but he doesn't come close to being the reason Gore lost.

[LaydeeBug]

60. Katherine Harris, SCOTUS et al, stole it with Nader driving the getaway car...

I never said Nader was the sole impetus, I said he helped. Because he fucking did.

[noiretextatique]

81. bullshit

here's why. what nader did was not illegal. what scotus, katherine harris, jeb bush and others did was. is it with you people?! do you not grasp how democracy works? clue: it doesn't work when the system is rigged to benefit one candidate, namely george w. bush. keep pretending that it would not have happened without nader, if that makes you feel better and more in control.

[ohheckyeah]

50. Nader couldn't take votes from Gore if people

really wanted to vote for Gore.

[Fuddnik]

87. Pat Buchanan took more votes from Bush in Florida, than Nader took.

Not to mention the fucked up ballot design in Palm Beach County, where the heavily Jewish population voted for Buchanan, thinking they were voting for Gore. Even Buchanan said he didn't get those votes.

And, Al Gore actually did win Florida, had the recount been allowed to proceed. Nader? Nope 5 traitorous SCOTUS Justices.

[Skittles]

30. yes he did

[Jarla]

33. Why did so many people vote for Nader when they knew it would be a tight race...

...between Gore and Bush?

Like, I currently live in Ohio, so I never even considered going Green in 2012, even though I wasn't entirely happy with Obama.

[SunSeeker]

91. Good question.

[Puzzledtraveller]

34. or the people who voted for Nader did.

[Apophis]

37. Ugh.

The Supreme Court, Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush, and the thousands of "missing" ballots that were cast for Gore had nothing to do with it?

Please.

[MattSh]

39. Honestly, I don't give a shit.

It's fucking 2013. It does no good now to go back and moan about 2000. That clock ain't a turning back, no matter how much anyone pisses and moans about it here, or anywhere else.

The question is, what are YOU going to do going forward? What are YOU going to do in the here and now, and going forward from now? What are YOU going to do to make it better now?

Please don't tell me you're going to continue to piss and moan about Nader, cause it ain't a going to fix a fucking thing. Give it up. Y2K is long gone.

[PDittie]

41. False.

An urban legend.

http://brainsandeggs.blogspot.com/2012/09/of-urban-legends-and-2000-election.html

But those of you who need to hate on someone for A) a corrupt Supreme Court, B) an inept Gore campaign, C) and D) a combination of ignorant Florida voters and misleading Florida ballots and corrupt Florida elections officials... can always go with Plan E.

Read at the link all the way through. I agree with the OP... but it's still only the 5th best reason Bush went into the White House.

I have researched -- and defended -- this premise extensively, and won't do so here again. I've got another SCOTUS decision that needs my attention at the moment, so by all means ya'll go ahead and refry these beans a few more times.

[LaydeeBug]

68. Hahaha a *blog*. Quick! I'll link to a blog that says he stole it single-handedly.

(which is an assertion I don't make). But Nader wanted Bush over Gore and HE SAID SO RIGHT OUT OF HIS OWN MOUTH. So spare me.

[PDittie]

101. That's not a rebuttal.

You seem completely consumed by anger about something. I doubt that your rage is all about Ralph Nader, or even the other post on this topic taking the opposing POV.

You're going to have to work it out without my help, though. *FULL IGNORE*

[LaydeeBug]

114. Yes it was

And trying to conflate your aspersion for my facts is really, really LAME.

I am honored to be on your ignore list.

[bvar22]

44. The Centrist, Anti-LABOR, Free Trading, Deregulating Clinton Administration CREATED Nader.

Vacuums are filled in Physics AND Politics.
If Clinton had governed as a Democrat, then NO Nader.

[font size=3]
"I've seen it happen time after time. When the Democratic candidate allows himself to be put on the defensive and starts apologizing for the New Deal and the Fair Deal, and says he really doesn't believe in them, he is sure to lose. The people don't want a phony Democrat. If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign."
---President Harry Truman

QED:2010[/font]






[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[LaydeeBug]

72. Bullshit. Nader was around & seeking POTUS long before Bill Clinton was ever elected anything. nt

[bvar22]

85. I didn't mean created him in the biblical sense.

Of course he was around and active.
It WAS the Centrist Clinton Administration that gave away those votes to Nader in 2000,
thus "creating" the Nader controversy.

Vacuums ARE filled, in Physics AND Politics.
Is is The LAW.

You can keep Blaming the Voters if you want to.
It might make you feel good, but that is a completely useless avenue.
We will ALWAYS have stupid voters.


OR
You can address the real problem that I posted above.
THAT problem can be FIXED.



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[byeya]

45. So H. Ross Perot, who got 19% of the vote, unfairly and cravenly deprived G.H.W.Bush of his rightful

second term?

We need more candidates, not fewer

[arcane1]

131. And many on the right said Clinton was not "legitimately" president thanks to Perot's 19%.

What I haven't heard is this: if Nader is the reason Bush won in 2000, why was Bush re-elected? Why didn't all those Nader voters choose Kerry?

[Daemonaquila]

46. After 13 years, GTF over it.

Good grief. Here's the deal - it doesn't matter. Nader was a legitimate candidate in a country that has more than 2 parties. The sooner Dems get over 10 years of butthurt that OMG, a 3rd party candidate took away some of "our" votes because he attracted those "damned progressives," the sooner they may address the REAL mistake of moving to the right and not representing left-wing politics. The only one who lost the 2000 election was Gore, first by being a merely lukewarm candidate and then not fighting for the vote counts.

The "sorry asses" are the Dems who won't let go of OMGOMGOMG Naaaaaaaaaader!

[beerandjesus]

86. Exactly. If there's one thing about this whole discussion that pisses me off...

...it's the presupposition on the part of the Gore apologists that the Democrats are entitled to our votes.

After all, if you don't assume that the Democrats are entitled to our votes, you can't argue that Nader somehow 'stole' those same votes from the Democrats. This is rank hubris, and frankly, the Republicans know better than to shit all over their base the way the Democrats, in 2000, had spent the previous 8 years doing.

You want to make this about a few thousand votes? Anyone on here remember the PMRC? A hell of a lot of people my age (40) do, and I'll bet the memories of that ignominious episode cost Al Gore a lot more votes from my generation than Nader could have dreamed of.

You want to make this about revisionism? Al Gore now is a hell of a lot better (i.e. more liberal) than Al Gore circa 2000. I would happily vote for Gore 2013. Gore 2000, not so much.

[bobduca]

139. No doubt

I suggest they choose something that he was for, like seatbelts, and stop using that horrible nader-based technology.

[Bluenorthwest]

51. This is material designed to absolve Republican theft and Democratic cowardice.

Not one Senator would stand with the Black Caucus. That vote should never have been certified, Gore himself shut them down.
The OP is revisionism in favor of the center and right wing including Republicans who apparently did not steal the election, and including the 100k or so Florida 'Democrats' who voted for Bush 'cause they were 'moderate centrists'.
Push those pro Republican memes!!!!

[noiretextatique]

57. +1000

indeed. it was a GOP coup, for fuck's sake. that should trump blaming nader...then and now.

[Poll_Blind]

136. ^ This.

PB

[LaydeeBug]

140. Those instances happened AFTER Ralph drove the get away car on the theft of democracy

and you know it

[liberal_at_heart]

56. when democratic politicians lose votes to third parties it is the democratic politicians' fault, not

that of the other parties' politicians or the voters. If democrats don't want to lose votes to third parties, then the democratic politicians need to do the work the voters put them there to do.

[Comrade Grumpy]

59. These Nader threads are pathetic.

[liberal_at_heart]

80. they know voters are unhappy and want to make sure we know if we don't vote the way we are told

that it will be our fault if the republicans win. They can call me whatever names they want. They can blame me for whomever wins. I don't give a shit. I will no longer vote for democrats who do not represent my values.

[Egalitarian Thug]

64. You've completely missed the point.

Nader has a right to run.

Our elected representatives have a duty to defend the Constitution and the citizens of this nation.

Trying to lay the blame for a judicial coup on a man exercising his right, while ignoring our official's failure to do their duty is hypocritical.

Insisting on your hypocritical perspective leaves no option to prevent further abuses, other than denying people's rights.

No political party has a right to anyone's vote. It is incumbent on the party and candidates to attract people's votes.

[HiPointDem]

73. +1

[LaydeeBug]

74. It seems you're missing the point.

By your standard, Katherine Harris had a RIGHT to purge those voter files. She followed 'the letter of the law'. Jeb Bush had a RIGHT to ensure long voting lines. He followed the letter of the law.

But we're talking about THEFT, and Nader drove the get away car. You want to pretend it's different. Whatever gets you through the day.

[Egalitarian Thug]

116. First, you don't seem to understand the basic concepts on which our government

is built. Katherine Harris had the power to purge the voter rolls, and absent any court challenge (hello Floriduh Democrats, where were you while this was going on?), she was given that power by the elected representatives of the state. Same thing applies to what big bush did, and neither thing has to do with the rights of individuals.

The only thing that (occasionally) disturbs my day is the thought that there are tens of millions of Americans even more ignorant than you appear to be.

[LaydeeBug]

117. Oh no, I do. YOU don't seem to understand the letter of the law and the spirit of those laws...

add to that Ralph Nader STRAIGHT up saying he wanted Bush, and all of your rhetoric is just hooey.

[Egalitarian Thug]

120. Rhetoric.

Definition of RHETORIC
1 : the art of speaking or writing effectively: as
a : the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times
b : the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion
2 a : skill in the effective use of speech
b : a type or mode of language or speech; also : insincere or grandiloquent language
3 : verbal communication : discourse

There is no "my standard" or "your standard", there is only reality. The reality is that the Democratic Party Leadership got Gore nominated and he or they picked Donna Brazile to manage the campaign. They made one bad decision after another for months and created another in a series of abysmal campaigns.

You can't blame the voters, they are going to do what they are going to do, no matter what you wish or think. The Democratic Leadership made a decision to lay down and allow a coup, and they are the only people responsible.

[LaydeeBug]

121. Awww...you even cut and pasted, and yet I've still used the term properly.

Nice try. No dice.

[Egalitarian Thug]

142. Hey, no problem. If getting your righteous outrage on let's you pretend it's all

due to the actions of other people that you can't do anything about and had nothing to do with, is what works for you, please continue to rant into the void, the void doesn't care.

But you should remember, two things; 2010, and that The Circus is, once again, right around the corner.

Is screaming at people that everything is all their fault the best strategy to attract them to your cause?

[noiretextatique]

84. exactly...which i why i call them "democrats against democracy"

they are arguing AGAINST legal participation in the election, and in doing so, supporting those who ACTUALLY committed crimes to "win" the election. and they did so without any consequence whatsoever.

[Maedhros]

88. Blaming Nader achieves nothing.

Want Green voters to vote for Democrats? Push positions that Green voters support. Earn it.

[Politicalboi]

77. The word "helped" but NOT cause

The election was stolen. Just like they are going to try and do now that the Supreme Idiots fucked with voting rights. We better look forward instead of crying about an election that was 13 years ago. We have an election in 17 months to keep an eye on.

[iandhr]

82. Ding Ding Ding

[SCantiGOP]

83. 100% agree

I didn't even bother to post in that other thread - it was so absurd. To say that most Nader voters wouldn't have voted for Gore is sheer lunacy.

[SunSeeker]

89. Exactly. I fear many on DU are happy to repeat that mistake. nt

[OnyxCollie]

90. It was President/Senator/Congressman Nader

who voted for the Iraq war, and domestic surveillance, and allowed torturers to go free, and bankers to crash the economy with impunity, and the bp oil spill...

Wait, Nader wasn't elected, and as such, had no power to do such things.

I wonder how all those things happened. It's a mystery.

[LaydeeBug]

118. Nope. It was candidate Nader saying there's no difference between Gore and Bush. nt

[mikeysnot]

92. All I can say is...

good luck with this.

[Jamaal510]

97. Note to Nader and all other supporters of 3rd parties:

both parties are not the same. Get this through you thick skulls. BOTH PARTIES ARE NOT THE SAME. There is more job growth under Democratic administrations than under Republicans, and less wars. Republican policies are more hostile to gay people, women, and minorities. It is Republicans who have sought to make sure people dodge taxes who can afford to pay extra, while partaking in union-busting and attempts to eliminate affordable health care and entitlements.
Anyone who makes the claim that there is no difference between the two parties is nothing but a big, fat liar.

[liberal_at_heart]

99. Both parties have been bought by the 1%.

Why do so many democratic politicians take money from lobbyists? If they were really different than the republicans they would work towards repealing Citizens United and take up campaign finance reform. How many democratic politicians do you know of that are fighting for campaign finance reform? Here is my single issue. Education. The democrats suck just as bad at education as the republicans do. They go right along with whatever the republicans want. Want to decrease funds to public education? Sure. We can do that. Want to demand underfunded schools perform on standardized testing or lose even more funds? Sure we can do that too. How many democratic politicians demanded bankers be prosecuted after stealing money and homes from the American people and crashing the entire country's economy? There is no difference between democrats and republicans and you know why? Because both parties have been bought by the 1%.

[OnyxCollie]

103. How about prosecuting illegal wars,

prosecuting torturers, prosecuting bankers who crashed the economy, indefinite detention, assassination by drone without a trial, and ending domestic surveillance?

Both parties are the same on those issues.

[great white snark]

110. A friggin' MEN Jamaal510

[struggle4progress]

98. Bottom line: SCOTUS unconscionably stopped the recount. Ralph yam what he yam and that's all

what he yam: sometimes I regard him as one of my heroes, and other times I feel like strangling him. I've gotten used to having a love-hate relationship with my various heroes, Al Gore or Noam Chomsky or whoever

Many many other issues might also be raised about the election, y'know, such as the craptastic butterfly ballot or Gore's shizzy campaign, but

SCOTUS unconscionably stopped the recount

[Auggie]

102. A dumb electorate cost Gore the election

[trueblue2007]

106. I HATE RALPH NADER

[bobduca]

138. NO I HATE HIM MORE

I NEVER WEAR SEATBELTS IN PROTEST!!!!

[Aunt Bold Ire8]

146. Pope of the PROFESSIONAL "Left". I've been asking his gatekeepers since 2009 who. . .

I've been asking his internet gatekeepers ever since 2009, who they will throw under the bus and in what order and if the PROFESSIONAL "Left" has honestly discussed who pays the real price for what they are doing. I've NEVER received an answer to these questions from these Social Darwinsts, for whom Nader was THE model of working with the Right-wing and then who have the utterly elitist gall to say pure s**t about "No difference between Dems and Repubs". Yeah, "No difference" because PROFESSIONAL "Leftists" are making sure of that by doing things like Florida 2000 and, quite possibly, Kentucky 11/3/15, resulting in a techie Green Party hippie helping to insure that almost 450,000 Kentuckians will lose their health care, whether he actually intended to do that or not.

[AverageJoe90]

111. Sad but goddamn true. n/t

[flvegan]

119. The premise of your OP proves your last sentence. n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

122. Yup Harris had no role in this

She thanks you for your supoort in hiding that...or Governor Jeb Bush, who insisted this be taken by the SCOTUS...or the guys in Brooks Brothers Suits...or for that matter five Supreme Court justices.

Sorry, the one engaged in denial and revisionism is well...you. And like you I have little patience for those who refuse to learn from history and actually hate democracy in a manner of speaking.

By the way...Gore won.

[LaydeeBug]

124. I am wondering where I said Katherine Harris has no role in this.

Honestly. I said he helped.

Because he did.

kthanksbai

[nadinbrzezinski]

125. Sorry if I care not for the two minutes of hate

For Goldstein.

Proceed

[LaydeeBug]

127. um...ok. Whatevs.

Proceed. lol

[nadinbrzezinski]

128. Hey, they are predictable

We can even set our watches by it.

[Skip Intro]

123. I've changed my opinion on the whole thing over the years.

I think Gore would have won had Nader withdrawn before the election.

I think the election was likely stolen, in FL, and that Nader being in the race might have made it close enough to steal.

But I don't blame Nader for running, and staying in. He had every right to offer his vision and allow the people to vote for it. Just like Gore did. Just like Bush did.

I've come to hold the view that it isn't Nader's fault that Gore failed to attract more voters. That fault lies with Gore.

[Demo_Chris]

126. If true so what? Do you think Gore was entitled to those votes?

This is the problem with modern party politics. If our party wants someone's vote they need to begin earning it. Not by running down the other guy or pandering to fear, but by best representing the interests of the people voting.

[bluestate10]

132. A future that never happens is hard to defend. The Nader lovers will hit you with every

half baked reason why they didn't fuck up by voting for Nader, in particular in key battleground state. I can say that 9/11, the Great Recession, attacks on women's rights, attacks on gay rights, the Patriot Act, airport scanners, the TSA, would not have been facts in our lives if Gore had won in 2000. Nader lovers can claim I can't prove any of what I claim, fuck them, they believe what they want to believe, even as facts destroy their arguments.

[RetroLounge]

133. Boo fucking hoo

RL

[Cha]

135. Exactly, LaydeeBug.. righteous rant!

people who don't learn from their mistakes are destined to repeat them.

Over and Over and Over Again!

[Fire Walk With Me]

141. Oh Good Lord, didn't you watch Fahrenheit 9/11 for the clip of George and Jeb when W says

"We're going to win in FL, you can bet on it"?

MALFEASANCE. There, and through the "supreme court".

[LWolf]

143. Revisionists.

How ironic.

[LaydeeBug]

144. Oh my. sure. whatever. nt

[Aunt Bold Ire8]

145. Our War on Iraq, Nader's first salvo in his strategy of Disaster Anti-Capitalism

You've heard of DISASTER Capitalism? Well, it has a corelate, DISASTER anti-Capitalism - and - I won't say Disaster Socialism, because what Nader caused in 2000, beginning with the War on Iraq, is more fascist than it is socialist and that goes for what wants us to believe it is "the Left" too.

The general concept, sometimes referred to as Social Darwinism, is that you are too stupid to be able to recognize your own most efficient interests, so you need, not only a "2 X 4" up aside your own head, your family and community need to suffer the worst harms possible, before you'll wise up and do what needs to be done. This is why almost all public policy and programs devolve into the lowest common-denominator elements and, then, therefore, why they don't succeed in evoking more fully realized human development.