Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: 2000 New Hampshire. Bush 48.07 Gore 46.80 RALPH NADER 3.90.=Bush 4 electoral votes. [View all]SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)130. ROFLMAO.. yeah keep saying that
Instead of admitting there is a problem, call it a distraction and complain some more about "Ralph Nader". Maybe if you whine about him for another 13 years something will actually happen.
Your obsession with Nader does nothing for anyone, except maybe you and Ralphie.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
198 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
2000 New Hampshire. Bush 48.07 Gore 46.80 RALPH NADER 3.90.=Bush 4 electoral votes. [View all]
graham4anything
Mar 2013
OP
I've been saying that from day one. It's like really shitty ''performance art''. nt
Guy Whitey Corngood
Mar 2013
#184
Nader worked tirelessly to screw Gore. On edit: Nader Nader worked tirelessly to screw America.
onehandle
Mar 2013
#4
it was a dumb move, from advisors concerned about "values voters" and Clinton's evil unit, no doubt.
Warren DeMontague
Mar 2013
#26
The blame for the pick ultimately lies with Al Gore, and no one likes Al Gore more than me.
Warren DeMontague
Mar 2013
#190
There are no circumstances whatsoever under which I would vote for a ticket containing Lieberman
MNBrewer
Mar 2013
#115
If it comforts you to believe that the Supreme Court elected Bush in 2000, go ahead.
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#10
I'm also a Constitution apologist, a Human Rights apologist, an earned benefits apologist
MannyGoldstein
Mar 2013
#41
He got 95,000 votes in Florida, and Gore would have won if a tiny fraction of them had gone to him
pnwmom
Mar 2013
#149
If Nader hadn't run, those 95,000 votes would have each gone to 1 of 3 places
MannyGoldstein
Mar 2013
#156
Ralph Nader himself proudly said he got 50% more voters from Gore than from Bush.
pnwmom
Mar 2013
#161
I'm not talking about Bush. I'm talking about Nader, who gave Bush just enough of an assist
pnwmom
Mar 2013
#172
The 2000 Supreme Court interpreted the Constitution. You can claim that they ignored
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#87
Comforts us to know that the SC stole that election? It was treason, and I doubt
sabrina 1
Mar 2013
#92
All of which only goes to the fact that Gore, or more accurately Donna Brazile, ran
Egalitarian Thug
Mar 2013
#36
The Nader cost the nation in 2000 deniers are no different than devout global warming deniers.
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#70
There were 97,000 Nader vote in Florida. Bush won Florida by something like 957 votes
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#95
Thanks you. You laid some wood to assholes. All I want to see is Nader voters take
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#76
Each of us arrive at our vote individually. I appreciate your defense of Nader voters
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#99
He didn't know it would end up at SCOTUS. And if he'd gotten another thousand votes or so,
pnwmom
Mar 2013
#143
Again, this is all theoretical. Gore won FL and the Presidency, SCOTUS blocked the
morningfog
Mar 2013
#145
SCOTUS wouldn't have had the opportunity if Nader hadn't chosen to run in the swing states,
pnwmom
Mar 2013
#147
Of course he had every right. He has every right to be the self-serving phony that he is.
pnwmom
Mar 2013
#150
LOL! So you admit that Nader didn't violate any laws or the Constitution. So, now
morningfog
Mar 2013
#151
No, he didn't violate any laws. I never implied that he did. He's just a narcissistic jerk
pnwmom
Mar 2013
#157
BUt, the ruling is ALL that matters. The ruling is what stopped the democratic process.
morningfog
Mar 2013
#170
No. The ruling would never have happened if Nader hadn't drawn more votes from Gore supporters
pnwmom
Mar 2013
#173
Nader knew from the outset that he didn't have a chance, and he could have concentrated
pnwmom
Mar 2013
#165
Again, so what. It is irrelevant with respect to the egregious usurpation by the SC.
morningfog
Mar 2013
#167
I was just thinking it was time for a good old fashioned DU Nader shit fest.
TransitJohn
Mar 2013
#16
No, this is a continuation of "cudgel people into voting for the 'right' candidate"
winter is coming
Mar 2013
#141
You do realize as Democratic party members, both were on the same side 95% of the time
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#53
So would Nader as Senator be the 60th vote in any vote needed for an important issue?
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#48
If only Lieberman could beat the republican choice, I would vote for Lieberman.
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#80
that 2016 doesn't repeat what happened 1968,1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, 2004
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#44
what does that have to do with this thread? this thread is about 3rd party runs president
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#57
Again, take this to a different thread. This is about 3rd party candidates.
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#118
I completely agree with you. In 2016, we will once again be at the end of a 8 year
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#81
Why doesn't even ONE Nader voter say they are proud of their 2000 vote?
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#45
Hillary earned my vote. Janet Napolitano earned my vote. Hillary45/Napolitano 2016 2020
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#61
You are an apologist for Bush and the conservatives Justices with this thread.
morningfog
Mar 2013
#78
If 2% of Nader voters in each state had instead voted for Gore, the Supreme Court would
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#83
You're beginning to become ragged. The Supreme Court can't overturn a clear election result,
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#106
You are off your rocker. They stopped the election results from proceeding properly.
morningfog
Mar 2013
#108
Bush won Florida by just over 900 votes. That has been proven by independent recounts
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#133
The OP was clear, 2016 is staring us in the face. If the current track continues,
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#82
The old "Why Nader is right" circa August 2000 argument. Where did that get us.
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#131
Yeah, except for the fact that we've continued to move backwards, no matter if it is a 'Pug or Dem
MadHound
Mar 2013
#144
You are ignoring the fact that Nader may have pulled people that would not have voted at all
davidn3600
Mar 2013
#38
So why would a supposed liberal named Nader contribute to that problem?
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#52
It's not if Jeb Bush gets elected by protesting voters thinking what Nader did
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#63
Maybe Gore should have appealed to the left more than Nader and got those votes.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Mar 2013
#64
They should have picked Bob Graham, but that has nothing to do with this thread.
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#102
Unlikely. The Nader voters on DU call themselves the strongest possible progressives.
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#85
Those people know who they are. I won't make a foolish attempt to call them out,
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#113
In which case I will give your comment all the credit it deserves. I did not vote for
sabrina 1
Mar 2013
#139
Does it ever get old for blaming Ralph Nader for all of the world's problems?
I Cant Dance
Mar 2013
#88
If Gore wanted progressive votes he should have campaigned for them.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Mar 2013
#126
Your post is a distraction. The fact is many americans never vote. But those people also
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#120
Is the purpose of this OP to try and ensure that people will vote "D" no matter what
djean111
Mar 2013
#104
No. The purpose of the OP is to insure people don't allow someone in that is horribly
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#124
Maybe. But that would still have been infinitely better than 8 years of George W Bush
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#127
And how fucking wrong Nader was. Some people saw through Nader's bullshit. There WAS
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#181
And Florida didn't count all of the votes at all. Handed the highest office via bro to bro.Wake up.
judesedit
Mar 2013
#132
Nader haters were obnoxious in the early 2000's, now they are just pathetic.
morningfog
Mar 2013
#152
Fuck Nader. I never voted for him. But, I place the blame where it belongs,
morningfog
Mar 2013
#189
Gore's total vote was the highest for any Democratic candidate up to that time,
nyquil_man
Mar 2013
#179
Perhaps when the Democratic Party Stops Running Corporate Toadys they will get more votes
thetruthhurtsforsome
Mar 2013
#163
How do you know how many of those Nader votes would have just stayed home, or voted for some other
limpyhobbler
Mar 2013
#171
How do you know that Nader votes would have stayed home or voted for some other candidate?
bluestate10
Mar 2013
#187