Here's a recent post that made me wonder about Kerry's view on Nader...

[mstrsplinter326]

"Here’s a guy that voted for the $87 billion to fund the war before he voted against it.
This is correct, but it’s not a flip-flop. Kerry voted for an amendment to the Iraqi appropriations bill that would have paid for the $87 billion by taking it out of the tax cut for the extremely rich. That amendment lost, 57-42, because Bush insisted that the $87 billion be added to the deficit. As we discussed with Paul Krugman last week, never in the history of this country have we had tax cuts while we were at war. Not only that, but Paul Krugman told me that he has yet to find any civilization in the history of this planet that ever had a tax cut during a war.

After the amendment went down, Kerry did vote against the final $87 billion supplemental appropriation, as a protest against the way Bush got us into the war and is conducting it. But he knew that the troops would have the support, because the bill passed 87 to 12."

He voted for a losing cause, to protest those in power.
That's the same rational people use in voting for Nader in non-swing states. How can the Democrats blame them, when their own leader prescribes to the same ideology?

[sir_captain]

1. How about those who vote for Nader *in* swing states?

[mstrsplinter326]

2. they prescribe to a different and much more cynical ideology

Different story all together.

And instead of attacking Nader - why don't we push for popular vote election or proportional representation?

[orlin2k]

3. Nader Voters

Michael Moore was kicked off the Nader campaign in for suggesting that those in swing states vote for Gore over Nader. Nader had a noble cause in the last election this election it's pure ego. A vote Nader is a vote for Bush period.

[NightTrain]

6. Sad to say, you may just be right about that.

I've been wracking my brain, trying to figure out what the hell was going on in Nader's head when he decided to jump into the race this year. Look at all he has working against him:

1. Except for Patti Smith, none of the numerous celebrities who supported his 2000 run are behind Nader this time.

2. None of the dozens of people I know personally who voted for Nader in 2000 (and that includes me) plan to vote for him this year.

3. Unlike four years ago, the Democrats have a progressive voice in Dennis Kucinich this time around.

So what made Nader think he'd accomplish anything positive by running for president this year? Either he really does have an ego problem, or he likes being a contrarian. You make the call. :shrug:

[Nite Owl]

4. So if Kerry is polling at 87

and Bush is at 12 then it will be ok to vote in protest for Nader? This will most likely come down to a very few votes and we need first off to get the Bush* out.

[sir_captain]

5. personally

i don't really see the attraction to Nader. What is so great about him other than his massive ego?

[NightTrain]

7. I happen to agree with most of his stances on the issues.

Unfortunately, I still can't vote for him this year.

[sangh0]

9. Yes, and if monkeys come flying out of a pig's butt

it will be OK for you to open an umbrella, even if it's indoors.

[bobbyboucher]

8. With all this "Nader is an egomaniac" crap

and "Nader is only running because of his huge ego" makes you all sound like Bush nanobots and Rush dit-monkeys the way you repeat the lie ad nauseum.