2000/blame Nader is ok But far less easy to face the truth that DNC was as guilty in 2004

Yes, the real first guities in both elections are, first , the BushInc and their mens.
Yes, Nader was the 2000 big diversion, even if the real first to blame are Bush familly, along with corporate SCOTUS...

But when it comes to the following STOLEN BY BUSH 2004 election, it is less easy. This time they was no Nader to be enough powerfull to divert voters. This time, unlike in 2000, they were no proofs to allow the Kerry team to ask for a public recount in Ohio and/or Forida e . The criminals had learnd from last time ( re Blackwell destroyed evidences of fraud before he left his Ohio SoS' office)

But this electon might have be finally won, if first, the Kerry team would have had enough support from the Dem powerstructure in order to, maybe, open a public, opened-doors inquiry and investigations. And secondly, well maybe did Kerry wasnt the perfect candidate, but, remember, which prominent dem figure really stood for him when the SBVT crap was on air? Who, from the DNC ? Certenely not McAuliffe,
who is by the way, very close to both Clintons!

Yes, really, at least for 2000, even if Gore didnt ended up in the WH, don't forget that 2004 was also very stolen, and the only difference on both elections from the Dem side, was the lever of powerfull network the Dem nominee had around him... AND that this times, GOP improved its fraud ability!

So please, you do bash Nader legitimally! But don't bash Kerry too much in the same way for 2004;