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

[dazzleman]

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.

[Inverted Things]

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.

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.

[Joe Republic]

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".

[GOP = Terrorists]

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.

[Joe Republic]

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

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

[GOP = Terrorists]

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. =)

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

I'd strangle them for being idiots

[The Vorlon]

"Thank-you for participating in the Democratic process.

Every vote is important."

[ottermax]

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.

[Boris]

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?

[7,052,770]

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...

[Nym90]

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.

[Reignman]

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

[°Leprechaun]

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

[WMS]

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.

[Dr. Cynic]

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.

[Jake]

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...

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

[Ban my account ffs!]

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.

[auburntiger]

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!!!

[Max Power]

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...

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

[Platypus]

It only mattered in a handful of states anyway.

[CultureKing]

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)

[Tetro Kornbluth]

"You did the right thing."

[Nation]

"hi mom"

[Padfoot]

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!