POLL: Worse consequences for US? (Susan Sarandon)

[Proud2BAmurkin]

Which of the following has resulted in worse consequences for America?

[BamaLefty]

1. Nader

If you voted for Nader you knew damn well what you were doing. The Iraq war vote is pretty low too...

[Warpy]

10. BULLSHIT. The crooked state of Florida, headed by

the pResident's BROTHER, gave us the stupid sack of shit, aided and abetted in crime by a corrupt and partisan Supreme Court.

NEVER FORGET THAT.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

12. Nader got 90,000 votes in FL. If 600 had gone to Gore, no Iraq War

Nader, Jeb, Scalia all equally to blame

[Warpy]

14. BULLSHIT. Every single splinter party in the race made THAT

difference. The FIX WAS IN. Don't you get it?

This gang of thieves would have done ANYTHING to seize power and get those hacked voting machines out there so they could hang on to it.

Spread the bullshit where it might do some good and wake up to the fact that YOUR COUNTRY GOT STOLEN, and not by people casting a protest vote for somebody YOU DON'T LIKE!

You don't own any vote but your own. Now you don't even own that. What are you going to do about it? WHINE ABOUT NADER for the rest of your life?

[Tom Joad]

17. Does not make sense.

Nader never supported the Iraq war. He opposed crushing sanctions on iraq that was killing innocent Iraqis, that Gore supported.

Doesn't it make more sense to blame the Iraq war on its supporters... like bush, hastert, hillary, lieberman?

And as far as blame for the election is concerned, why not blame those that voted for Bush? I think they had much to do with Gore not taking office.

[MrModerate]

2. Nader gave us Bush (thanks, Ralph) . . .

Without Nader, no Bush, and hence no Iraq War Resolution.

WITH Bush, the resolution was going to pass anyway. Do I wish Dems had been courageous enough to vote against the mad and senseless resolution? Yes. They fucked up. Now's the time to start fixing things.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. interesting question, with a good choice.

Hillary is the mirror image of McCain. Each is abandoning their support by trying to convince unbelievers of their truthiness.
Both are being run by polls, by consultants, and by election computer programs. Both will ultimately fail.
Watch them tack back to regain their lost bases once their "Behind the assbrain experts" realize that they miscalculated.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

4. Bush never mentioned "abortion" in his campaigns but his base stayed

but his base never abandoned him because they knew they'd get theirs once he was in office and they did.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

15. how true. Watch the attack on the RU drug.

Viagra kills more men by percentage, but do they care? hell no.

[Armstead]

5. These have little to do with each otehr except....

or the fact that actions like voting for the Iraq War is the type of behavior that helped drive people to Nader.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. The vote for the war. Nader was right.

The cowards and opportunists sold out the country when they backed Bush.

Blaming Nader for the Dems refusal to capture the Left's votes is sour grapes.

[SteppingRazor]

7. Voting for Nader, no question...

Without Nader, Gore would be president. And with Gore as president, there would be no Iraq War Resolution for Democrats to cave in to -- the former begets the latter

[Proud2BAmurkin]

9. Yup, no Nader vote and President Gore takes office, no Iraq war

it's that easy

[onehandle]

8. Nader could have spent that year displacing a Dem Congressperson...

...instead of giving us the most disastrous President in history.

Can you imagine the Hell he could have been giving both parties in the House or Senate?

Instead, he undid all of his previous accomplishments.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

11. Nope not destructive enough for crumpled Nader's ego nt

nt

[onehandle]

13. Is anyone reading the questions? Choice #1 includes Choice #2.

No Bush equals no Iraq War.

And no Right-Wing SCOTUS placements.

[skipos]

16. 85% of Nader 2000 voters bailed on him in 2004

as they should have. Too bad America had to learn the hard way that "there is no difference between Gore and Bush" is an absolute lie.

[ThomWV]

18. I Just Tied It Up - Here's Why

Althoug I think the vote to allow that asshole to start the war in Iraq was a horrible mistake its just one mistake. The vote for Nader resulted in that war but also so very much more vile shit. So I had to go with the Nader.

[bloom]

19. And I tied it going the other way

Since Bush* stole the vote anyway - so it doesn't make sense to blame it on Nader - or his voters.

And why do they think that voting for Bush*s idiotic war would help anything. :shrug:

[MadHound]

20. Well, here it is again

Another "let's blame Nader thread" all in order to compensate for the massive Democratic shortcomings and wrong doings. OK, let me go through this all once again(I really should copy all this down somewhere in order to copy and paste when needed).

Nader in no way, shape or form cost Gore the election in Florida, here's why.

First off, Gore cost himself the votes of almost 200,000 registered Democrats and almost 400,000 self described liberals in Florida, all due to his support of off shore drilling in the Gulf off the shores of Florida. Liberal and Democratic Floridians were so pissed about this stance(taken at the behest of Gore's corporate master, BP Oil) that decided to double screw Gore in '00 and voted for Bush. Whoopsi, theres almost 600,000 votes gone, bye-bye.

Second, the journalist Greg Palast handed the entire Votescam scandal to Gore and his handlers on a silver platter, complete with names, dates and connections that would have implicated not only Harris, but the Bush brothers as well. And Palast gave Gore this information shortly after the election, during the recount process, all in time to effect the outcome. Now think about this for a minute, you're a presidential candidate, in a contentious election, and you've just been handed a bombshell that would not only win you the election, but would send your opponent and his family to the political wilderness for good. What would you do? Most normal people would have put this information into the hands of the closest newspaper, but Gore? Noooooo, he had to sit on it, and thus he was complicit with massive voter disenfrachisement. So much for his oath about upholding the Constitution:eyes:

Third, according to even the DLC's exit polling, Gore was doing better Nader in the race than if Nader hadn't been running. "The assertion that Nader's marginal vote hurt Gore is not borne out by polling data. When exit pollers asked voters how they would have voted in a two-way race, Bush actually won by a point. That was better than he did with Nader in the race."<http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=127&subid=179&contentid=2919>
I tend to trust this analysis by Mr. From, cause God knows, if the DLC could find a reason to scapegoat somebody for this mess, they would.

And finally, guess what? When the furor died down, and people went back and actually counted all the votes, Gore came out ahead. If Gore and his handlers hadn't tried to be cute in their recount tactics and simply asked for a complete recount, they would have won. But instead, they tried to cherry pick here and there, and wound up losing it all.

I go through this time and again not because I voted for Nader, I didn't, I voted and worked for both Gore and Kerry. The reason that I go through this is because this ongoing scapegoating of Nader is flat out wrong, and it prevents us from taking a long hard look at how the Democratic party has failed time and again. This sort of introspection has been desperately needed for years and decades now, and this sort of "blame Nader" game is not conducive to such badly needed introspection. It just provides one more sad excuse to allow the Democratic party continue on it's wrong tact and wrong path. So please, stop with this nonsense, it's not only wrong, but it is counter productive to the party good.

[onehandle]

21. So the total of Bush's crimes (including Iraq) is worse than Iraq alone?

O.k....