General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why is it *my* #%^*ing fault? [View all]Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)You write that we "learned nothing in 2000 that might have helped us in 2004." Wrong. Before the 2000 election, it was obvious to sensible people that the Nader candidacy might cause Bush to be elected. The actual results brought this point home to many people who should have known it before but who needed to have their noses rubbed in it.
By my count, more than two million people learned something in 2000 that they then applied in 2004.
Number of popular votes for Ralph Nader:
2000: 2,882,955 (2.74% of the national total)
2004: 465,151 (0.38% of the national total)
Unfortunately, there are other people who still haven't learned this lesson. That's why a focus on Nader is appropriate. The lesson of Nader's 2000 candidacy is that third-party politics is a disastrous tactic for the left. That lesson is still relevant today, far more so than your speculation about Joe Lieberman's likeability or my speculation about how Gore-Kerry would have fared in New Hampshire.