Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Obama says Sanders' supporters helped undermine Obamacare [View all]truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)who voted for George W Bush are somehow less responsible than the 24,000 Democrats who voted for Nader?
Or consider Democrats, thirteen percent of whom voted for Bush. In all, Gore lost 308,000 voters from his own party to W., while losing 24,000 Dems to Nader. Now sure, if Gore gets even half of that 24,000 who voted for Nader, because Nader never runs, or drops out at the last minute, then he wins Florida. But by the same token, if he gets even one-half of one percent of the Dems who voted for Bush, he also wins. Why are we only focusing on the votes he didnt get from the much smaller Nader pool, than the votes he didnt get from the much larger Bush pool?
http://www.timwise.org/2000/11/no-more-mister-fall-guy-why-ralph-nader-is-not-to-blame-for-president-bush/
http://www.prorev.com/green2000.htm
And if you look, the postmortem in 2000 sounds remarkably like this one in some very important ways:
http://www.salon.com/2000/11/28/hightower/
Pretty sure you won't look though: the fantasy is much more comfortable.