Quoting Nader except in one area is wrong

.I respected him before 2000. After that, no.
He was used and was a user. There are many of those.
In this case, it resulted in thousands of deaths. Hundreds of thousands.
Without his blind ambition and ego in 2000, many would be alive that are dead.
..He has often said that he was not the cause of the loss of Gore in 2000.
He is wrong, and he lies on this...always.
The Bushes planned to steal votes in Florida , and they did.
But they could steal just so many.
Without his 60,000 Gore would have won .
.He never admits that truth, and he never will.
.That alone makes him disgusting.
To quote him on anything, except consumerism, is wrong.
Now, then, always.

I guess an anti-Nader thread was as inevitable as the sun coming up this morning. I hope you feel better that you can blame everything on Nader, lo these 11 years later.

If Gore's campaign had been better prepared for the possibility of shenanigans in Florida. If Gore had attacked Bush as the coward who skipped out on his military obligation. et cetera.

Nader took repuke money. That's why I have zero use for the man.

that I dislike him.
His ego could not see that. He sold out for that ego. Sure, the Supreme Court needs blame.
But without Nader, the pukes wouldn't have been able to get there.
If it was close, (without Nader) there would have been an investigation into Bush voter fraud
They would have had to give up..

Now...here is an example of this that worked for us.
Why didn't the pukes fight the close vote in Virgina that defeated George Allen?
..Think back?..it was only 3-4000 votes. Why not fight, get a recount...etc?
...Cause to fight would have uncovered massive voter fraud.
The pukes knew that.. so they conceeded relatively early...(now of course we cannot prove that, can we)
all the evidence is long gone...
Remmber???

Instead he pandered to the center and lost both.

cheated..without the Nader issue, and those 60,000, we would have won.
That is the truth...and we know it.

But, if flounders had feathers they'd be flamingos.

Gore failed to get the left or the moderates with his wishy-washy DLC approach. Blaming the left for abandoning a politician who doesn't appeal to them is an exercise in double-think.

Nader appealed to the left and got their votes. Gore didn't appeal to them and lost their votes.

It doesn't get any simpler.

They still want to blame the left...:crazy:

Can you imagine Vice-President LIEBERMAN?!

but nobody around here blames the dems for gore's loss. hmmmmmnn.....

It suggests that if you "use" someone, you "get" something.

So what did Nader "get", if he's a "user"?

If Gore hadn't been so busy running from the Clinton record and White House scandals, he might have had an inspiring campaign and fewer people would have voted for Nader.

That's on Gore, not Nader.

You have no way of knowing how many Nader voters would have just stayed home rather than vote for Gore. You're wrong to count every Nader vote as a Gore vote.


It was a perfect storm: the Republicans purged hundreds of thousands of Democratic voters, Democrats created a STUPID, confusing butterfly-ballot, Florida voters lacked the physical strength to properly punch a hole in a perforated piece of paper, and Al Gore couldn't say "I agree with Governor Bush" fast enough.

Blaming the Iraq War on Ralph Nader is the most myopic and useless thing I've ever heard! It's another example of the centrists blaming the left for their defects.

One man, one human being made the decision to invade Iraq and his name is George W. Bush.

more than enough to enable the Bush gang to steal the election which they did.

Poetic justice would be the dropping of a ceremonial Corvair on Ralph.

Maybe it was even more votes. There were A LOT of spoiled ballots in Florida that year.

Those 97,000 people voted their conscience. They voted for Nader, not against Gore, Bush, or Buchanan.

Without Nader on the ballot, you have no way of knowing if those votes would have even been cast.

You'd still rather blame the left than Jeb Bush's criminal administration, and that says a lot about the state of the Democratic party.

200,000 - 97,000 = 103,000

It doesn't even make sense and looks like it was typed on a cell phone.

isn't going to make our problems go away.