(no subject)

[bzarcher]

Ugh. Just woke up and saw the news. And let me make one thing perfectly clear.

If any one of you vote for Nader, you are not only being foolish, but you are throwing your vote down the toilet. (Or to the GOP.)

If Bush wins the election because Nader decided to play spoiler, and I find out any of you were involved, I will find you in your sleep, stab you in the night, and put clown makeup on you.

Do we have an understanding?

(Why, no, I don't like Nader or what he's doing. Why do you ask?)

Comments

[paradisacorbasi.livejournal.com]

...coooooooooo.

pretty rage.

[snowspinner.livejournal.com]

That would be a good point if the election were between Bush and Not Bush.

But the election is more than that, and if someone supports Nader's platform, they should vote for him. The fact of the matter is that, for a lot of people, given the choice between Bush and Kerry, their answer is "Neither." And for a lot of people, they'll vote while holding their noses. Whereas if all of those people went and voted either Libertarian or Green, and suddenly 20% of the electorate wasn't voting for a Democrat or Republican... that might just send a message.

The problem is that no one does that because no one believes that enough other people are going to do that. And the only real way around that problem is to do it anyway.

And if 49% of the population supports Bush, 48% Kerry, and 3% Nader, then Bush has a plurality of support, and that's that. The electoral process does not account for second choices.

Is it fair? No, but there's no way to have a fair election with three or more candidates.

[bzarcher.livejournal.com]

I'll admit that if you want to prove the viability of a 3rd party, yes, that is the logic behind it.

However, I think Nader's reasoning for entry into the race is flawed, given that he expressly stated that he is running to get Bush out of office. Why weaken your overall goal? If he really feels that Bush & Co. have violated their contracts with America, giving them a better chance to win seems somewhat foolish.

fu fu fu

[spartanfan.livejournal.com]

Hee hee hee...

Muah ... hahhahah ... ahahahahaha!

Waaaahahahahaahahahaahaahahahahahahahahahaha!

MUAHWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAHHAAHAH!!!!!!

*breathe, breathe*

AAAAHHAHAHAHAHHHAHAAAHHAHAAHHHAAHHAHAHAAH!

HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

AHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

*breathe, breathe*

...ha!

Nader in 2004. Four more years.

Re: fu fu fu

[bzarcher.livejournal.com]

Yep. Saw that coming. :D

[spiralpegasus.livejournal.com]

I'll even chip in for the clown makeup!

[dasubergeek.livejournal.com]

Around here for a while there were bumper stickers that said, "Unrepentant Nader Voter". After BushCo had started strategically dismantling the Bill of Rights, one started to see creatively altered stickers with the "un" cut off.

Re:

[bzarcher.livejournal.com]

Not totally surprising. I've seen a bit of that here, too, though not as much.

I lit a candle for your mother. She's in thoughts here.

[volemaster.livejournal.com]

I guess I could vote for a horrible candidate, a horrible candidate or a horrible candidate.

But I'm sure there's some nice, anarchistic-pacifist candidate out there. Somewhere.

And he needs to get at least two votes.

[jcobleigh.livejournal.com]

I voted for Nader in the last election and am not ashamed of this fact. Of course, I live in Massachusetts which was won by Gore, so it did not matter. If I lived in a state that looked like it was going to be close, I would have voted for Gore.

[bzarcher.livejournal.com]

I think the key is last election.

Then, he was backed by a party, and was at least trying to build 3rd party politics. This year, he has no party, no real agenda except the one he's already weakening by the mere existence of his candidacy, and no clear 3rd column which he is attempting to appeal to.

Why would he seem a good choice now?

[jcobleigh.livejournal.com]

The only reason Nader would be a good choice is that he is neither Bush nor Kerry. I'm pretty sure I'm going to end up voting for a third party candidate (which may be Nader, we shall see). I don't find Kerry as offensive as Gore, but I'm not thrilled with Kerry's voting record. Since I'm in a state that is going to be won by Gore, I want it recorded that I voted, but for neither major candidate. I know that this makes no difference in the long run, but makes me feel better.

Re:

[bzarcher.livejournal.com]

Feeling better is great. Taking actions that might lead to a President who feels the constitution is at best a light suggestion getting re-elected doesn't seem that great to me. They're your beliefs, and I'm glad you have the courage to stick to them, but I just don't see how they really benefit the nation right now in the short term, even if there's a chance it may affect the long run.