A friend, reflecting on something I blogged, said that if Ralph Nader had not siphoned off all those votes in 2000, George Bush would not be in the White House, we wouldn't be suffering these disasters and the world would be a much different place. She said that she is paying the price for all those who voted for Bush and Nader.
I know where she is coming from, and I empathize, but I voted for Nader, and I would again. To steal a line from the 60s, there isn't a dime's worth of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats, particularly when it comes to war and peace. Both of them enthusiastically supported the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq. And support Israeli battering of Lebanon, which is unconscionable. Voting for a pro-war Democrat is not an option. If the Democrats are dumb enough to put up Hillary, I'll find some other Nader to vote for.
But Nader did not cost Gore the election. In the first place, Nader didn't get enough votes to affect the election one way or the other, unfortunately.
Gore lost the election all by himself -- because of the wimpy way he ran it, and because he wouldn't confront the fact that the election was stolen by the Republicans. They got away with it in 2000, and in 2004. And they're probably going do it again because the Democrats refuse to face the facts. The Republicans own the voting machines and they are manipulating the voter roles to eliminate millions of voters who are likely to vote Democratic. An extremely high percentage of those purged voters are people of color, and the Democrats, the Democratic politicians that is, are nearly as biased as Republicans and aren't willing to raise a fuss on their behalf.
If the Democrats don't get back to their base and fight for workers, healthcare, an end to the Iraq war, and the dozens of other issues important to the people, they will lose again. A strong Democrat could win, a Republican-lite will lose to the real thing.
Posted by Deck at August 11, 2006 10:43 PM