amusing new member -saynotonader.com

[Beet]

http://www.saynotonader.com/

Do you think the bumper stickers being advertised here will be effective? I think they are because they're not too confrontational. Supporters of third parties should support electoral reform. Under the winner-takes-all system with congressional districts and electoral college, third parties will never win anything. That is the real barrier to third parties, the system... not Republicans or Democrats. Anyways I thought this site was mildly amusing.

[SayNoToNader.com]

The sticker could go either way, Bush supporters might even like them..

[ilikeverin]

Gore / Lieberman lost Florida by only 537 votes in 2000. Ralph Nader got 97,488 Florida votes in 2000.
Had Gore / Lieberman won Florida, they would have won 25 Electoral Votes and the 2000 Election !!
~~~~~~~~~~
Gore / Lieberman lost Florida by only 537 votes in 2000.  Some Random Presidential Candidate Got 538+ Florida votes in 2000.
If some Some Random Presidential Candidate had not run, Gore / Lieberman would have won 25 Electoral Votes and the 2000 Election !!

[ElectionAtlas]

Actually, I have to pipe in (my engineering education here...).  A vote for Nader is a one vote swing - i.e. one less vote given to the Democratic candidate (assuming, of course that the voter's second choice is actually the Democratic candidate).  On the other hand, a vote for Bush is a two-vote swing (assuming that the voter's second choice is the Democratic candidate).  So, Democrats voting for Bush is far worse than Democrats voting for Nader - see Florida in 2000 where hundreds of thousands of registered Democrats voted for Bush.

Also, if you watch him, Nader is also trying to attract frustrated conservatives and liberal republicans.  He's also running as an independent, not green.

[SayNoToNader.com]

Actually, I have to pipe in (my engineering education here...).  A vote for Nader is a one vote swing - i.e. one less vote given to the Democratic candidate (assuming, of course that the voter's second choice is actually the Democratic candidate).  On the other hand, a vote for Bush is a two-vote swing (assuming that the voter's second choice is the Democratic candidate).  So, Democrats voting for Bush is far worse than Democrats voting for Nader - see Florida in 2000 where hundreds of thousands of registered Democrats voted for Bush.

Also, if you watch him, Nader is also trying to attract frustrated conservatives and liberal republicans.  He's also running as an independent, not green.

That's a good point. Something tells me that Florida Democrats won't vote for Bush this time around.  But at this point, nothing would suprise me.

I voted for Nader in 2000, I guess I figured no one in their right mind would vote for GW given his lack of experience. That, and with Gore coming off Clinton's successes, I figured he was a shoe-in. My bad !!!  

[SayNoToNader.com]

Dave,
Just thinking about the part where you said that hundreds of thousands of Democrats voted for Bush in Florida, brings me to a question that I am looking for an answer to.

I'm trying to find out how many registered democrats there were in each state in 2000, and how many turned out to vote. I was able to get voter turnout totals using your 2000 election results app, but that just shows totals and does not break it down by party.

So my question is, is it possible to get breakdown of data?

Thanks,

Ray

[© tweed]

Registered Democrats always come out in droves in the south to vote GOP nationally.  For example, Dems outnumber Reps by 16% in Oklahoma.

[Nym90]

Well, regardless of whether you thought people would be "dumb" enough to vote for Bush or not, the reality is that the polls certainly suggested that they were about to do just that, and that the race was close enough that every vote might matter. So voting for Nader because you expected Gore to win doesn't make much sense, if you paid attention to the polls.

Though being in New York, I can understand voting for Nader, since Gore was completely assured of victory there, thus your vote didn't hurt him at all.

And yes, Dave is very right, a vote for Nader is only half of a vote for Bush, if you want to look at it that way.

Are Dave and I the only ones who have an engineering background in this Forum? Just curious.

Come to think of it, those conspiracy theories that Dave is me are going to intensify now I suppose...I win the Fantasy election, I have an engineering background like he does...LOL.

[minionofmidas]

Well, if you were in NY it didn't matter anyway.

[Gustaf]

Well, regardless of whether you thought people would be "dumb" enough to vote for Bush or not, the reality is that the polls certainly suggested that they were about to do just that, and that the race was close enough that every vote might matter. So voting for Nader because you expected Gore to win doesn't make much sense, if you paid attention to the polls.

Though being in New York, I can understand voting for Nader, since Gore was completely assured of victory there, thus your vote didn't hurt him at all.

And yes, Dave is very right, a vote for Nader is only half of a vote for Bush, if you want to look at it that way.

Are Dave and I the only ones who have an engineering background in this Forum? Just curious.

Come to think of it, those conspiracy theories that Dave is me are going to intensify now I suppose...I win the Fantasy election, I have an engineering background like he does...LOL.

AHA! I knew there had to be a connection somewhere...but they aren't as smart as they think, oh no, they messed up now, right in to them...(mindless mumbling continues...)