Talk Elections

If you ran into a Nader voter from 2000 what would you say to them?


(Something like this was posted on DU today and much to my suprise alot of them were saying pretty nasty things.  What would you guys say?)

Thank you.

LOL, I figured most Republicans would say something like that.

Glad to be of service :)

I just noticed something...

Bush is the first popular vote loser ever to be re-elected...

Quincy got trounced in '28 with the Corrupt Bargain and all...

Hayes didn't even run again in '80...

And Cleveland came back to win in '88, booting out Harrison.

Interesting...

I spoke with a couple shortly before the election of 2004. Most of them were pretty bitter.

"You're an idiot."

See a difference now?

Nader did get a lot fewer votes this time.

"Why am I talking to myself?"

(or, "Hi mom!" ^_^)

Not good enough. I want fewer votes last time.

"Instant Run-Off Voting, anyone?"

Kiss my shiny metal ass!
()

Couldn't have done it without you.

Hi.

We'll have two beers.

"Nader was half right, by my estimation.  There was certainly Tweedledum, who got elected, but the second was Tweedledumber, with whom I'm talking right now."

I would tell them the same thing I tell the Nader voters on campus:

"You saved the American Left.  If Al Gore had been President during the recession and 9-11, there woul dhave been no one else to blame."

"It's not easy being green..."

You forfeited your moral authority to complain about Bush-Cheney.

Damn, that sucks

let me see if i get this straight -you're clearly disappointed about how Gore lost in 2000 due to the defection of liberal Democrats to the Nader/LaDuke ticket, and yet you want liberal Democrats to leave the Democratic Party and join the Greens because you perceive us as being the main reason why the Dems simply cannot win a national election,


so, which is it -do you want us to stay, or do you want us to leave? 

I dislike Greens not because they cost Gore the election- I supported him, but I didn't particularly want him to win- but because they're far left idiots. I would say that to any far left idiot I may encounter, regardless of party affiliation.

And yes, I would like you fanatical leftists to become Greens- you and Jfern in particular, if you're talking about Forum members.

so, being the angy and bitter asshole that you are, why don't you compile a complete list of all the (active) Forum members who are currently Democrats that you would like to see join the Green Party?  by all means, i encourage you to do so.  in fact, you could start a thread on it, and ask the moderators to sticky it.     

You're such a pansy. No need to get so emotional, especially since you're the one who brought the subject up. There's also no need for a separate thread (as you suggested in a poor attempt at sarcasm). You are very stupid, aren't you?

first, i wasn't being emotional.  you generally come across as an asshole especially when the subject turns to leftism, so i described you as such.  perhaps you disagree?

second, my suggestion was hardly one of sarcasm.  i was dead serious about it.  why single out Jfern and me?  i am sure there are others in this forum who you would add to the list -you've implied as much.  so why keep people guessing?  wipe away their doubts.  i really am curious to see just who on this forum (beyond the two you mentioned) you think should leap ship and vote Green.   


grow up.  if you consider yourself more intelligent than me, i would certainly expect you to exercise some measure of maturity when addressing others.   the two come hand-in-hand. 

Do you want to be more "sensitive", so I don't hurt your feelings? Too bad. If all you can do is whine about how mean I am, go somewhere else. No one wants to hear your bullsh**t.

Why single you out? Because you're the worst Democrat on the forum (yes, worse than Jfern). Actually, Opebo may be slightly worse than you, but he's a racist pedophile, so that's to be expected. All the other Dems are perfectly fine- you're the only problem here.

I see he's get cranky at you, too.

how exactly am i the worst thing you have ever encountered?

and how is he a racist?


wow, flattering......  since i have the dubious honor of being on your sh**t-list, it is all the more reason for me to stay. 

i'll resolve to be more active in the future then. 

The media would have eaten him alive, saying that it wouldn't have happened if Bush was President. The media really hates Gore, they went on and on about how Gore must be a huge liar since he said he invented the internet. The real liars are anyone who says Al Gore said he invented the internet.

1. You're an idiot, and you make discussion here worse via your ridiculous posts.

2. He hates white people (and it's funny that you didn't dispute that he's a pedophile).

3. Good for you, pal.

"Hugging trees, not bombs."

LOL

"Ha! I'm a bigger failure than you are!"

Nader voter from 2000: How does it feel to vote for the most hated political candidate in modern history?

Nader voter from 2004: Idiot!  David Cobb was a far better choice for someone with similar views, you could've supported an interesting grassroots candidate  rather than a disgruntled zombie.

I was a Nader voter in 2000.

Gore lost my vote during the Clinton impeachment.  It’s one thing to support the leader of your party during his time of trouble because of an opposition witchhunt.  It’s something entirely different to effusively praise him and call him one of our greatest Presidents.  Gore brown-nosed too much at that time for me to ever consider him in the future as a worthy Presidential candidate.  That left me with Bush and Nader to choose from.  The attraction of Nader was that he might have been able to jump start the Greens into a viable third party.  I’m definitely not a Green, but a viable third party would definitely give US politics a much needed shake-up, and if the loony left departed the Democrats for the Greens, the Democrats would be a much better party.  In 2000, I never got a sense of why Bush wanted to be President other than it is a really neat job to have, so absent any reason to vote for Bush, I voted Nader.

If not from Florida or New Hampshire: "what the hell were you thinking."

If from Florida or New Hampshire: words too evil to post

"Hi."

I don't really care who people vote for. It's their business, unless it's Peroutka.

Haha, why the exception? :P

I'm a proud green, and hence will never denigrate Nader's 2000 run.

My brother voted for Peroutka. He was the only candidate that he didn't know well enough to dislike :P.

Thanks :D

"LOOK AT WHAT YOU CAUSED"

Jeez!

The moderate-liberals/liberals shouldn't blame the liberals for costing them the election! That contributes to the disunity that has plagued the Democrats for so long.

Gore got hundreds of thousands of votes more than Bush, Nader didn't take those from him. Nader didn't have any say in the Supreme Court ruling. Nader didn't have any influence over the vote counting agencies. Nader's brother wasn't the governor of Florida.

Yeah, but why blame the right, when you can blame yourself?

He had more sense than you! :D

My dad voted for Nader in 2000, but we lived in Kansas at the time so he figured (correctly) that his vote didn't matter too much.

Thank you for voting your conscience.  I voted mine.  Gore voters voted theirs.

Al Gore wasn't entitled to any of those votes any more than Bush would have been if the situation were reversed.  It may be safe to assume that if Nader were not on the ballot that a lot of votes, had those voters voted, would have gone to Gore.  But its also safe to assume that had George W. Bush not been on the ballot and there weren't any other options, Al Gore would have gotten more votes.  Nader doesn't have a responsibility to stay off the ballot, nor do his 2000 voters have a responsibility not to vote for him.  Its THEIR vote.  It doesn't belong to Al Gore.  It doesn't belong to George W. Bush.  It doesn't belong to Ralph Nader.  It belongs to them and only them.

It should also be stated that a whole lot of Nader voters were people who merely respected him and his achievements in consumer safety - or folks who just wanted an alternative.  They weren't all necessarily left-wing Green adherents and a decent portion would have even opted to vote for Bush.   The only Nader voter that I know (a friend of mine's mother) falls in to that category.

If the situation were reversed...
Yes, I would be upset that my candidate didn't win.
But I would hate to admit that votes for Peroutka or Buchannan would ever even go to a candidate that I was supporting.  If you are dumb enough to make that kind of choice, then we'll just have to make up that vote elsewhere, thank you very much.

either:

your the reason everyone in iraq is dead

or

too bad most americans are too stupid to understand how a preferential ballot can make presidental elections more fair

Your first statement is very sad but true.

I know someone who voted for Nader in 2000. She lives in Massachusetts and told me at the time that since Al Gore would win the state in a landslide anyway, she felt she could vote for Ralph w/o worrying about it affecting MA. And judging from his showing there, she wasn't alone in her thoughts.

I'm still mad at Nader voters in theory, but one thing I would say to them is:

"Thank you for switching to John Kerry last year, too bad we still couldn't overcome the tidal wave of christian hate coming from the red states, but we tried."

If you voted for Nader in NY or MA, I completely understand.  But if you voted for Nader in FL or NH, you're a freaking idiot.

That's all in hindsight.  Before the election, nobody knew the election would hinge on these states, or that they would be so close.  Also, some Nader voters didn't think Bush was any worse than Gore.

I disagree. The few people who did vote Nader in FL and NH had probably given considerable thought and decided that Bush and Gore were both terrible.

Insulting people for voting for who they wanted to vote for is rather shortsighted.

If I ran into a Nader voter?  I'd probably say sorry, and then keep on driving.

Oh you mean if I met one?  Ah, well in that case I would smile and say, "hello".

I voted for Nader in 2000 merely as a protest vote against the selection of Joe Lieberman.  I liked Gore but Lieberman will NEVER get my vote for dogcatcher let alone VP.  I think Nader is scum but still better than Lieberman.

Then again there was no question which way my state would go.

I wonder if any Nader voters in Florida thought that same thing.

Yes but the fact that I was clearly right and they were clearly wrong shows I know what I'm talking about and they don't. =)

I'd strangle them for being idiots

"Thank-you for participating in the Democratic process.

Every vote is important."

I would say that you voted for a good person.
If you know anything about Ralph Nader, I think you would like him for all the things he has done for us. When did we all forget his contributions to consumer safety? Plus, if people voted for him in 2000, it should point out that the Democrats need to find better presidential candidates.

Find better candidates?

First of all, Al Gore is the incumbent Vice President and therefore the defacto nominee. When the incumbent President has a 60%+ approval rating, you generally want a candidate that is associated with him, which is why he was a better choice than Bill Bradley.

Al Gore was Bill Clinton's #2 man for possibly the eight most peaceful/prosperous years in American History. Do I really need to reiterate all of the economic progress that Bill Clinton and Al Gore gave us? He has a strong record for protecting the environment (maybe a little too strong as some might say), so he certainly isn't soft in that arena. Vice President Gore is very knowledgeable in foreign affairs/national security (one of the reasons he was put on the 1992 ticket) and was one of the ten democratic senators to vote FOR the first Persian Gulf War, which shows that he's no pussy when he comes to defense.

Let's see. Ralph Nader has terrible economics and would have done a terrible job protecting this country after 9/11 (although he'd maintain better foreign relations than Bush, which isn't saying a lot) The only downside to Al Gore is that he isn't as charismatic and doesn't connect with the voters as well as Bill Clinton. But then again, would you rather have a charismatic yet incompetent President or a uncharismatic but competent President?

I know 2, and I've forgiven them and don't bring it up.  They're loyal Dems now and I'm sure their conscience kills them...

People had every right to vote for Nader; Gore certainly wasn't entitled to their votes.

That being said, I think most of them realize in retrospect that they made a mistake. At the time, Bush looked like he'd be a lot more moderate, and Gore looked moderate, too. So the argument that it didn't matter who won was more plausible at the time then it is now.

You've got weed in your pocket, don't you?

Considering how even Connecticut has now rejected Lieberman, who can blame you?

The Connecticut Democrats have rejected Lieberman. NOT Connecticut as a whole. That we will find out the answer to in November.

I would first of all forgive them. They voted thier conscience, and I can't fault them for it... But back in 2000 I was absolutly furious at Nader and the Green Party for more than likely costing Gore the election.... But I've grown up alot, and learned to forgive and forget.

Yeah, I'm sure they're sooooooooo disappointed that they didn't bring Gore 0.001% closer to victory in Mississippi.

Over 7% of my county went for Nader in 2000.  My guess is that these were mostly Native Americans.

This 7% pushed Bush over the threshhold in my county, bringing a Republican win to the county for hte first time since 1972.  Am I bitter? No.

I would say 'vote your conscience'.. but I think it's better to say "Vote your conscience plus a bit of common sense'... are the greens going to win? No.  So, why not vote Democrat and get the next best thing?

I think we need instant run-off voting.  That way people could vote Green, and if they didn't make it, their second choice could be for the Democratic candidate.

I think the Libertarians, Constitutionalists, Greens, and Indepence voters could agree with me here.  It would force the Dems and Republicans to the center, which I think needs to be done.

It's their choice. I probably wouldn't think any thing about it. I'd just say "thankyou" cause without then, Gore would have been president.

Btw, I gave a speech on Instant Runoff Voting last week, saying that's what America needs to aviod the spoiler effect.  I got an A on it

AND YES - moving both parties to the CENTER would be fantastic!!!

Why would their conscience kill them, its not like there vote counts  subject to the total.

It only mattered in a handful of states anyway.

I have no Idea what I would say to Nader... I would probably try to first convince him not to run, then when that doesnt work I would just start swearing. (I never really liked Nader alot, he never seemed very practical)

"hi mom"

Well first I would ask if they voted in New Hampshire or Florida since these are the only two states where their vote could have made any difference.  If they said yes then I would ask them why they voted for the war in Iraq before they voted against it in 2006.  (Especially those NHers I mean come on guys!  FLers have an excuse since no one there knows how to vote correctly anyways and they can't be held accountable for not knowing how to read a butterfly or get some guy named Chad pregnant.)  I mean who couldn't see Iraq coming back in 2000?  Sadam said he was gonna kill little Bushy's daddy!  All Bush needed was a flimsy excuse to invade, and that was bound to happen given that Sadam was a crazy person.  Then boom, Bush gets the last laugh as Sadam and all his heirs go down in flames.  Don't mess with Texas bitch!

"Thanks :)"

Thanks for giving us the win!  Keep up the great work!

I would strangle them.

wrong, it was their fault

"Good job on electing Bush, I hope you'll think before voting for a guy with no chance of winning next time. " Then I would probably punch them.

^ Who did you vote for in 1988?

The idea that in a democracy everyone can only choose between POS #1 and POS #2 is absurd. Don't like that? Change the system, support IRV for a start.

If I had been American and born in 1988, I'd have voted Dukakis.

Well from a US POV, that's how America is set up- really a choice between A and B. Voting for C in the United States is useless, unless there's a miracle, candidate C won't win.

I fully support PR, for a start.

I don't know how they do it over there but they don't give new-borns voting rights here.

I wasn't even alive in 1988.

I voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 and I don't regret it. Obiviously it didn't make a difference in Nebraska but If I ran into someone from florida who voted that way I don't see how I could be angry with them.
 
They problaby wouldn't have voted for gore anyways, since about 50% of the country didn't vote at all, there had to be millions of people who would've preferred gore to bush but they weren't compelled to vote for him.

Democrats take the 51% progressive/semi progressive vote in 2000 for granted(Nader cause alot of people to show up at the polls which problaby helped them in congressional and senate races). If they were more interested in good policies that retaining power they would've tried to install some sort of instant runoff voting system at the various times they were in power.

Why should prospective third-party voters be effectively blackmailed into voting for a "lesser-than-two-evils" when the latter feels no obligation to subsequently change this sordid state of affairs in return? This alone should be more than sufficient proof that the Republicans and the Democrats are in it together.

Oh, and IRV would be a very poor choice for a national or state election system as it would require every vote to be tallied together, a logistical nightmare. A two-round runoff system (or, even better, approval) would already be a substantial improvement.

A sociologist has theorized that Nader actually added to Gore's vote count in 2000, instead of taking away.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/01/AR2007040100973.html

What were you thinking?

Thanks for voting your principles and not your fears.

That the Democrats and Republicans don't offer us much of a real choice.

Four and a half years will do a lot to an Atlas poster.

I'm flattered you would bump that, and there are plenty of equally crappy posts you could drag up from 2004 and 2005. It's nice to remember how far I've come.

Hey, maybe in four years, you won't be a dumb anymore, either. :)

... That was rude, dude.

I'm trying to help you.

It's funny how we used to argue all the time.

Congrats, you were smart enough to not vote for Bore or Gush.

Gratz, you kept He of the Warming out of office. You delayed this recession by 5 years.

If I ran into a Nader 2000 voter, I would say....


"If I was old enough to vote in 2000, I would have done the same thing."

Happy now?

How dare you make us blow that election? Sure Gore was a crappy candidate, but he was the lesser of the two evils? You just had to make that ignorant cowboy President, didn't you? Thanks a lot. I will never forget what you did. Never.

Thank you!