General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Ralph Nader - "Stay Silent and Stay Powerless Against Trump's Tyranny" [View all]Stargleamer
(2,614 posts)and you are right that Gore not winning his home state was a problem that cost him the election. Perhaps he was tainted by voter dissatisfaction with the Monica Lewinsky scandal. It was difficult election year for Democrats, as historically it's hard for a president's party to win presidential elections 3 times in a row, although it can happen. Also, George McGovern lost his home state too, in a difficult election year.
But in my opinion, the butterfly ballots in that one Florida county were also a problem that had correct design of such ballots been carried out, Gore would have won.
If the Supreme Court had allowed the recount to go on and let all ballots be checked for legitimate votes by having vote counters check ballots having over- and undervotes for legitimate votes, I think Gore would have prevailed, so that was a problem costing Gore the election too.
But acknowledging that there were other problems, doesn't mean that Ralph Nader putting his name on the ballots in Florida in an election he knew was going to be close was not a problem too. Al Gore only lost by .009% in Florida. All it would have taken if Nader's name wasn't on the ballot would be for 540 would-be Green Party voters to decide that Al Gore was something of an environmentalist too and vote for him. Hillary Clinton had problems too, such as "her email messages" and James Comey, but that doesn't mean Jill Stein should have stayed on the ballots in crucial swing states, for in both cases THE STAKES WERE TOO HIGH!!!