Reply #50: Nope. I'm just saying that you can't blame Nader for a problem with the system...

[cascadiance]

... that prevents the progressive's voices from being heard. If we had IRV then, then there would be no way to blame Nader for that then, and perhaps Nader would have gotten more votes and really championed the idea that there's a segment of our community that's not being heard, even with someone like Al Gore then.

Some would argue that when Al Gore moved more towards populist themes towards the end of the election that probably worked against what some of the party insiders wanted ultimately for him to embrace, that they dropped him like a bad habit when it came time for challenging the election, which is why you didn't have any Democrats in the Senate supporting the challenge that might have made a difference then too. Look at how long the GOP contentions to close races have taken before they got resolved for the governor's seat in Washington, as well as the senatorial seat now in Minnesota. Doing it quickly to "preserve our system" was an excuse to keep in place the corporate hegemony that some likely thought was threatened if Al Gore moved more towards populist causes and that Nader really had taken away voters from then.

Until we have a system where the progressives can have a voice to be heard, and aren't taken for granted or cast aside, we really can't blame people that vote for Nader for these problems.

For Nader, I'd like to at some point for him to play hardball, when he has enough of the voting populace to make a difference in the election, to negotiate with the Dems to say that he'd pull out and work with them, IF they put in place instant runoff voting, so that independent and third parties could be heard to their fullest extent in subsequent elections, and might even have more of a chance at winning if the two parties in power are doing badly enough in not representing the people. If he were to focus on that, I think that's a goal that might be achievable, and make a big difference, and would be something I think many would sacrifice not voting for him in one election, if they felt they could vote for his voice and many others like him in coming elections with more clout, and less damaging results happening. Now that the Dems have control over congress, arguably they have a choice to make this happen before he runs again.