General Discussion

ecstatic

(35,085 posts)

92. It was a perfect storm. Many things went wrong:

Thu Jul 3, 2014, 10:09 PM

Jul 2014

1) Voter disenfranchisement

2) Dirty tricks (hanging chads)

3) Shady, no paper trail voting machines

4) Liberals voting for Nader

5) The above issues made the margins close enough to steal. Trust me, they tried to steal it in 2008 and 2012 but the turnout was way too high, so they failed.

6) Corrupt supreme court

I don't believe the crap about Dems voting for Bush. Refer to point 3. If there were some dems that did that, they are irrelevant and not really democrats. The problem was liberal minded people not voting for the person most likely to advance liberal causes.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

95 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If you blame Nader then you are saying Katherine Harris numbers were correct and aboveboard [View all] SwampG8r Jul 2014 OP

Gore ought to have fought it. He didn't. delrem Jul 2014 #1

He fought it like mad- all the way through the SCOTUS. There was NOTHING else he could do. cali Jul 2014 #35

I didn't see it like that. delrem Jul 2014 #88

So whats your opinion of Kerry's 2004 concession. bahrbearian Jul 2014 #60

I'm not a US citizen. delrem Jul 2014 #86

That wasn't what I asked bahrbearian Jul 2014 #87

They both lost. delrem Jul 2014 #89

its actually possible to blame nader and her. roguevalley Jul 2014 #85

doesn't matter, i attack Nader for his fucking LIES claiming Bush was just like Gore JI7 Jul 2014 #2

Totally agree! maddiemom Jul 2014 #26

No, you're saying that 97000 IDIOTS allowed people like Harris to juke the numbers alcibiades_mystery Jul 2014 #3

so you believe harris numbers? SwampG8r Jul 2014 #5

Post removed Post removed Jul 2014 #6

i dont think you could find SwampG8r Jul 2014 #9

I wasn't a Green when i voted for nader in New York alcibiades_mystery Jul 2014 #13

only 32000 for nader in 2004 SwampG8r Jul 2014 #16

2000 was the un-nadir of Nader. So what? alcibiades_mystery Jul 2014 #18

i voted for gore and i will SwampG8r Jul 2014 #19

90,000+ imbeciles voted for Nader in Florida alcibiades_mystery Jul 2014 #20

Nader had quite a lot to do with it�90 some thousand votes brush Jul 2014 #22

how does gore get the votes? SwampG8r Jul 2014 #24

More likely for Gore than Bush. nt brush Jul 2014 #69

Hear Hear, Sir! The Magistrate Jul 2014 #21

Post removed Post removed Jul 2014 #30

Why did you vote for Nader, even though you were not a Green? merrily Jul 2014 #47

You build the strawman to tear it down. MohRokTah Jul 2014 #4

then please SwampG8r Jul 2014 #7

You built the strawman MohRokTah Jul 2014 #10

i guess you cant...i would think a strawman would come apart pretty easy even for you nt SwampG8r Jul 2014 #12

Dude, do you even understand what a strawman is? MohRokTah Jul 2014 #15

you are just adorable SwampG8r Jul 2014 #17

Too weak to tear down a straw man today? bahrbearian Jul 2014 #59

Al Gore won, the votes were counted and he won. Rex Jul 2014 #8

this is of course the correct answer SwampG8r Jul 2014 #11

Yeah, but without Nader, even with Harris's purging . . . brush Jul 2014 #23

I call bs. There is zero indication that Nader's motivation for anything in his life merrily Jul 2014 #28

It's as if some here don't want to blame Baker, Rove or Bush. Rex Jul 2014 #64

It's like someone stabs you in the back, geek tragedy Jul 2014 #14

More like several people running a race. merrily Jul 2014 #41

That's not at all an accurate anology. morningfog Jul 2014 #50

I don't trust ANY Republican (or half the DEMS, either!) blkmusclmachine Jul 2014 #25

IMO, most politicians should not be trusted. merrily Jul 2014 #32

Gore did win Florida narrowly. Moreover, if he had run a merrily Jul 2014 #27

Why are they discussing this? RobertEarl Jul 2014 #29

I don't know why. merrily Jul 2014 #31

The reason they discuss this (still!) is to discourage expansion of democracy. morningfog Jul 2014 #51

Indeed! (eom) CanSocDem Jul 2014 #58

It is not a two party system, only a two party monopoly. merrily Jul 2014 #70

The diversion to Nader was a result of some anger that erupted on Monday BootinUp Jul 2014 #34

In my strong opinion, it's about a lot more than coming together. merrily Jul 2014 #39

Obviously we expect that whomever is picked in the Primary BootinUp Jul 2014 #42

"Obviously?" I no longer expect that at all. Nor do I think merrily Jul 2014 #43

Ok, here's the caveats BootinUp Jul 2014 #44

Gee, and I try so hard to disguise my need to be educated on basics. merrily Jul 2014 #46

Your patience is remarkable. woo me with science Jul 2014 #52

Thank you and thank you. merrily Jul 2014 #55

post of the year Doctor_J Jul 2014 #66

Wow. Thanks. You guys are in danger of turning my head, but thanks. merrily Jul 2014 #71

"What I don't get is why we are focusing on Nader 2000." delrem Jul 2014 #90

Thanks, but the person who started this thread seems to be trying to merrily Jul 2014 #91

Your comments in these threads make sense to me. delrem Jul 2014 #93

You sound plenty well-informed and aware to me. merrily Jul 2014 #94

Kicked and recommended! I agree with you, SwampG8r. Enthusiast Jul 2014 #33

That's bullshit leftynyc Jul 2014 #36

Who won Florida in 2000? RobertEarl Jul 2014 #38

I think Gore won leftynyc Jul 2014 #48

You mean, a politician's thinking "evolved"while he was running for an merrily Jul 2014 #40

And that has exactly what leftynyc Jul 2014 #49

My prior post addressed that, but I'll try again. merrily Jul 2014 #56

Thanks for the explanation leftynyc Jul 2014 #57

Well, Gore won Florida--and lost enough other states, including his own-- merrily Jul 2014 #61

This is objectively false. joshcryer Jul 2014 #37

There were only 500 votes between Bush and Gore when they stopped counting. pnwmom Jul 2014 #45

That's a really dumb strawman. jeff47 Jul 2014 #65

You and I agree. Thanks to Nader taking so many votes from Gore, pnwmom Jul 2014 #79

I've never looked it that way JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #53

I am well familiar with what was done and said.. sendero Jul 2014 #54

Two things can each be true at the same time. Here, without Nader, Gore wins and the Republicans karynnj Jul 2014 #62

I disagree. Nader had a long history of helping Americans. merrily Jul 2014 #72

Kerry is far more liberal than Gore -- and that is exactly what Nader's comments reflect karynnj Jul 2014 #74

The issue was not whether Kerry is more liberal than Gore, nor was it merrily Jul 2014 #75

What I was saying was exactly that karynnj Jul 2014 #81

I question it now. merrily Jul 2014 #82

Thanks for this viewpoint karynnj Jul 2014 #83

I am not sure what this means. merrily Jul 2014 #84

why is this suddenly being rehashed in several threads? Javaman Jul 2014 #63

It's part of the drumbeat of Aerows Jul 2014 #68

I think it's a reaction to the contraception decision. Jim Lane Jul 2014 #78

yes, Nader sold the "no differences between the two major parties" idea aikoaiko Jul 2014 #80

I absolutely blame her and Jeb Bush & cronies Aerows Jul 2014 #67

I never thought of that KamaAina Jul 2014 #73

I was plenty mad at Nader at the time. FiveGoodMen Jul 2014 #76

your argument is nonsense bowens43 Jul 2014 #77

It was a perfect storm. Many things went wrong: ecstatic Jul 2014 #92

The fix was in with Jeb---WITH NADER'S HELP in allowing for "plausible deniability." Yes, Gore won, WinkyDink Jul 2014 #95