General Discussion

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)

194. Bush, unlike Nader, got 50,460,110 votes

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 02:59 AM

Mar 2013

and won a whole bunch of states. 29 to be exact.

So yeah, he did pretty good, especially with Nader's help.

Nader, like anybody else in this country, did have an absolute constitutional right to try to help Bush win the election.

But just because the law gives you a right to do something, does not make that thing a good thing to do, or a smart thing to do. In the final analysis, it was a very evil thing to do, and he was warned and he should have known better and he should be very, very sorry for what he did.

It's very simple election math. In New Hampshire 273,559 was greater than 266,348 + 22,198

And it's another simple fact that Nader in New Hampshire pre-empts SCOTUS in Florida and renders it moot.

Nader was key to putting Bush in the White House and that is far, far more shameful than anything that I can write on the internets.

But whatever, give me some other explanation for why you are certain the sun revolves around the earth.

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:

2000 New Hampshire. Bush 48.07 Gore 46.80 RALPH NADER 3.90.=Bush 4 electoral votes. [View all] graham4anything Mar 2013 OP

My analysis of the above official statistics in New Hampshire, 2000. graham4anything Mar 2013 #1

Loz? Warren Stupidity Mar 2013 #3

I've been saying that from day one. It's like really shitty ''performance art''. nt Guy Whitey Corngood Mar 2013 #184

I am beginning to question my commitment to Sparkle Motion. Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #2

Nicely done. Warren DeMontague Mar 2013 #25

I think we have all seen �Bonanza� XRubicon Mar 2013 #35

Nader worked tirelessly to screw Gore. On edit: Nader Nader worked tirelessly to screw America. onehandle Mar 2013 #4

Gore did it to himself. Bonobo Mar 2013 #5

I still can't believe Gore picked a Republican as a running mate Cali_Democrat Mar 2013 #7

Yeah that did not help. Warren Stupidity Mar 2013 #9

it was a dumb move, from advisors concerned about "values voters" and Clinton's evil unit, no doubt. Warren DeMontague Mar 2013 #26

If one was so inclined... Bonobo Mar 2013 #186

The blame for the pick ultimately lies with Al Gore, and no one likes Al Gore more than me. Warren DeMontague Mar 2013 #190

No, people that did not vote for Gore did it to themselves. graham4anything Mar 2013 #8

Yes, candidates need take no responsibility for the way voters decide. Bonobo Mar 2013 #11

So, Cheney was BETTER than Lieberman? jazzimov Mar 2013 #29

Yeah, that is EXACTLY what I said. Bonobo Mar 2013 #31

There are no circumstances whatsoever under which I would vote for a ticket containing Lieberman MNBrewer Mar 2013 #115

Lieberman was my Senator. I voted for him twice in 2000. Jennicut Mar 2013 #138

With Lieberman at the top of the ticket, yes, but . . . brush Mar 2013 #128

"They are the direct cause for those 4 little electoral votes." morningfog Mar 2013 #21

Yes we do. Plus all those Nader told to stay home and don't bother graham4anything Mar 2013 #27

This is such a boring "debate." Let me help you with four easy facts. morningfog Mar 2013 #74

The argument is not that Nader COULDN'T run for president... krispos42 Mar 2013 #193

I agree with much of your post. morningfog Mar 2013 #196

Gore would have needed 32% of the Nader voters to vote for him morningfog Mar 2013 #6

If it comforts you to believe that the Supreme Court elected Bush in 2000, go ahead. bluestate10 Mar 2013 #10

I voted for (shudder!) DLC Gore MannyGoldstein Mar 2013 #12

what would you consider to be impartial analysis? hfojvt Mar 2013 #19

Why am I not surprised jazzimov Mar 2013 #30

I'm also a Constitution apologist, a Human Rights apologist, an earned benefits apologist MannyGoldstein Mar 2013 #41

You Know Manny Well? HangOnKids Mar 2013 #68

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

Oh yeah, sure. A whole bunch of Nader voters would have picked Bush pnwmom Mar 2013 #158

13% of Florida's registered Democrats voted for Bush in 2000. MannyGoldstein Mar 2013 #160

Ralph Nader himself proudly said he got 50% more voters from Gore than from Bush. pnwmom Mar 2013 #161

SO Nader is a phoney until he says something that you can cling to? morningfog Mar 2013 #168

I'm not talking about Bush. I'm talking about Nader, who gave Bush just enough of an assist pnwmom Mar 2013 #172

There is no such thing as "close enough to steal." morningfog Mar 2013 #175

Mr Objective Fact has spoken DisgustipatedinCA Mar 2013 #15

Thank you! Possible name change... Bonobo Mar 2013 #17

Nader sure seems to get his heart pumping DisgustipatedinCA Mar 2013 #20

My name is based on Bob Graham uber liberal from the state of Florida graham4anything Mar 2013 #154

I don't know about a rightwing bill of goods union_maid Mar 2013 #51

Not to worry, you'll have plenty of time for errands... DisgustipatedinCA Mar 2013 #56

One large pile of misplaced bullshit. morningfog Mar 2013 #18

Another HUGE thank you! You NAILED IT!!! Bonobo Mar 2013 #22

The 2000 Supreme Court interpreted the Constitution. You can claim that they ignored bluestate10 Mar 2013 #87

^^ G_j Mar 2013 #107

Comforts us to know that the SC stole that election? It was treason, and I doubt sabrina 1 Mar 2013 #92

Ding! Ding! Ding! OnyxCollie Mar 2013 #14

maybe because the Supremes hfojvt Mar 2013 #24

All of which only goes to the fact that Gore, or more accurately Donna Brazile, ran Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #36

terrible campaign or not hfojvt Mar 2013 #42

The Nader cost the nation in 2000 deniers are no different than devout global warming deniers. bluestate10 Mar 2013 #70

I have a friend who blames Monica Lewinsky for everything. OnyxCollie Mar 2013 #72

I don't understand the whole "shitty campaign" excuse hfojvt Mar 2013 #84

Brilliant reasoning. Thanks. nt bluestate10 Mar 2013 #90

The issue that breaks my heart is the 97,000 Nader votes in Florida. bluestate10 Mar 2013 #69

if you talk about Florida hfojvt Mar 2013 #73

There were 97,000 Nader vote in Florida. Bush won Florida by something like 957 votes bluestate10 Mar 2013 #95

yeah, but Nader defenders love to talk about Florida hfojvt Mar 2013 #117

"they can keep bringing it back to SCOTUS and Jeb Bush" Holy shit, wow. morningfog Mar 2013 #169

Bush apologist? hfojvt Mar 2013 #182

You accept, then, that close elections can and will be stolen. So sad. morningfog Mar 2013 #188

Bush, unlike Nader, got 50,460,110 votes hfojvt Mar 2013 #194

Was Bush v. Gore a good decision? morningfog Mar 2013 #195

Where is the evidence that over 60% of them would have punted? hfojvt Mar 2013 #23

I remember watching Nader thucythucy Mar 2013 #54

I'm not the one making the claim. morningfog Mar 2013 #75

you are making the claim hfojvt Mar 2013 #86

Thanks you. You laid some wood to assholes. All I want to see is Nader voters take bluestate10 Mar 2013 #76

an individual Nader voter does not have that much responsibility hfojvt Mar 2013 #94

Each of us arrive at our vote individually. I appreciate your defense of Nader voters bluestate10 Mar 2013 #99

In Florida, he only would have needed 500 Nader voters out of 95,000. pnwmom Mar 2013 #105

I have no opinion on Nader. morningfog Mar 2013 #109

He's a phony. He makes more money for his public interest org pnwmom Mar 2013 #137

But the fault rests with scotus morningfog Mar 2013 #142

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

Nader had every right to run. Those who voted for him every right. morningfog Mar 2013 #148

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

You are living in a theoretical world, and legitimizing Bush. morningfog Mar 2013 #174

According to Nader, 38% of his 97,000 Florida voters would have voted for Gore pnwmom Mar 2013 #162

More democracy is a good thing. morningfog Mar 2013 #164

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

Thanks! graham4anything Mar 2013 #177

How could have Gore sucked so bad! Arctic Dave Mar 2013 #13

I was just thinking it was time for a good old fashioned DU Nader shit fest. TransitJohn Mar 2013 #16

I know, right?! eom City Lights Mar 2013 #40

No, this is a continuation of "cudgel people into voting for the 'right' candidate" winter is coming Mar 2013 #141

to add- At the end of the day, that day being Nov. 2016 graham4anything Mar 2013 #28

Here's a question for YOU. Bonobo Mar 2013 #32

The Democratic candidate for President. 100% of the time. graham4anything Mar 2013 #33

You ducked the question. I don't need an essay. Bonobo Mar 2013 #39

you mean 2016 don't you? What election is in 2015. graham4anything Mar 2013 #47

Sanders VS. Lieberman in 2016? Bonobo Mar 2013 #50

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

And 12+ years later your point is? hobbit709 Mar 2013 #34

that 2016 doesn't repeat what happened 1968,1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, 2004 graham4anything Mar 2013 #44

2004: Republican Mike Bloomberg endorsed Bush re-election. nt Union Scribe Mar 2013 #55

what does that have to do with this thread? this thread is about 3rd party runs president graham4anything Mar 2013 #57

You said you wanted to make sure 2004 didn't happen again. Union Scribe Mar 2013 #98

But you have no idea who he voted for do you? (initials JK) graham4anything Mar 2013 #100

Bloomberg fought giving dead 9/11 heroes death benefits. Union Scribe Mar 2013 #111

Cite for BS claim that you know whom he voted for? nt Union Scribe Mar 2013 #112

Again, take this to a different thread. This is about 3rd party candidates. graham4anything Mar 2013 #118

You made a statement of fact, please show evidence of it. nt Union Scribe Mar 2013 #119

In 2013, let's all work together to have a gun-free America. graham4anything Mar 2013 #121

I completely agree with you. In 2016, we will once again be at the end of a 8 year bluestate10 Mar 2013 #81

They luvz the flamebait. morningfog Mar 2013 #77

You still flogging this dead horse? MadHound Mar 2013 #37

Why doesn't even ONE Nader voter say they are proud of their 2000 vote? graham4anything Mar 2013 #45

Ass u me much? MadHound Mar 2013 #60

Hillary earned my vote. Janet Napolitano earned my vote. Hillary45/Napolitano 2016 2020 graham4anything Mar 2013 #61

Well, frankly, none of those people have yet to earn my vote, MadHound Mar 2013 #66

You make it clear that no on ever loses the "right to whine." morningfog Mar 2013 #79

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

So what? Only one group acted against the COTUS. morningfog Mar 2013 #93

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

Goddamnit, bush did NOT win FL. morningfog Mar 2013 #134

The OP was clear, 2016 is staring us in the face. If the current track continues, bluestate10 Mar 2013 #82

Frankly, given Hillary's record, I would hesitate to call her a Democrat. MadHound Mar 2013 #122

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

I care more about the shenanagins in Florida than Hayabusa Mar 2013 #43

Novemeber was New Hampshire's 4 votes. Gore would have had 271. graham4anything Mar 2013 #46

I know, but Hayabusa Mar 2013 #49

So why would a supposed liberal named Nader contribute to that problem? graham4anything Mar 2013 #52

I don't exactly know if he was in on the fix, but he certainly didn't help Hayabusa Mar 2013 #67

I wouldn't have voted for Obama if he had run with Lieberman Democracyinkind Mar 2013 #58

What does Joe Lieberman have to do with this thread?Just a diversion graham4anything Mar 2013 #59

Everything, as my post above makes clear. Democracyinkind Mar 2013 #62

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

"more" Democracyinkind Mar 2013 #65

They should have picked Bob Graham, but that has nothing to do with this thread. graham4anything Mar 2013 #102

If Nader wasn't in the race, what if those who voted for him Apophis Mar 2013 #71

Unlikely. The Nader voters on DU call themselves the strongest possible progressives. bluestate10 Mar 2013 #85

I was just saying who's to say they would have voted for Gore? Apophis Mar 2013 #89

well they did claim Bush wasn't so bad by saying he was just like Gore JI7 Mar 2013 #91

Who are the Nader voters on DU? sabrina 1 Mar 2013 #96

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

Probably the same who thought good things about Ron Paul graham4anything Mar 2013 #103

Does it ever get old for blaming Ralph Nader for all of the world's problems? I Cant Dance Mar 2013 #88

Truth doesn't have an expiration date. nt bluestate10 Mar 2013 #114

Only if it were true. I Cant Dance Mar 2013 #146

How many Democrats voted for Bush? Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2013 #97

How many democrats voted for Romney. bluestate10 Mar 2013 #116

If Gore wanted progressive votes he should have campaigned for them. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2013 #126

Again? SomethingFishy Mar 2013 #101

Your post is a distraction. The fact is many americans never vote. But those people also bluestate10 Mar 2013 #120

ROFLMAO.. yeah keep saying that SomethingFishy Mar 2013 #130

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

you have no way of knowing those votes would have gone to Gore MNBrewer Mar 2013 #110

You have no way of knowing they would have not gone to Gore. nt bluestate10 Mar 2013 #125

I'm not the one blaming Nader for Gore's loss. MNBrewer Mar 2013 #135

But you are defending Nader and his voters with a chicken shit excuse. bluestate10 Mar 2013 #180

I never said he wouldn't have gotten them. MNBrewer Mar 2013 #192

8 years of Gore - followed by President Joe Lieberman? oberliner Mar 2013 #123

Maybe. But that would still have been infinitely better than 8 years of George W Bush bluestate10 Mar 2013 #127

It's amazing to think how different politics was in 2000 oberliner Mar 2013 #129

And how fucking wrong Nader was. Some people saw through Nader's bullshit. There WAS bluestate10 Mar 2013 #181

I totally agree oberliner Mar 2013 #185

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

It's been 12 years n2doc Mar 2013 #136

Two party system = "progressives" to the right of Hoover. /nt TheMadMonk Mar 2013 #140

He doesn't give a fuck about policies, man. Bonobo Mar 2013 #178

Nader haters were obnoxious in the early 2000's, now they are just pathetic. morningfog Mar 2013 #152

They have been consistent in one regard. They always had a clue. bluestate10 Mar 2013 #183

Fuck Nader. I never voted for him. But, I place the blame where it belongs, morningfog Mar 2013 #189

nt theKed Mar 2013 #153

What about the 33% of registered voters who didn't vote? nyquil_man Mar 2013 #155

10 million LESS voters voted in 2000 than any other modern election. graham4anything Mar 2013 #176

Gore's total vote was the highest for any Democratic candidate up to that time, nyquil_man Mar 2013 #179

You need to stop living in the past and look Forward�. Marr Mar 2013 #159

Perhaps when the Democratic Party Stops Running Corporate Toadys they will get more votes thetruthhurtsforsome Mar 2013 #163

Tennessee also had 4 electoral votes in 2000 Jumpin Jack Fletch Mar 2013 #166

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

"your ilk"? What the fuck is that supposed to mean? limpyhobbler Mar 2013 #198

Nader had the right to run for president... NaturalHigh Mar 2013 #191

FINALLY A NADER THREAD! Capt. Obvious Mar 2013 #197