Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Actually, Nader did not fight against Kerry's election. The Democratic Party used all kinds of legal shenanigans to keep Nader off the ballot this time around, and look what good it did them.

Nader, unlike Kerry, had a platform that put the American people first. Kerry's platform was empire-lite, and his message whatever his campaign advisors thought would capture the "swing voters".

While Bush supporters were true believers, Kerry campaigners were almost apologetic (anybody but Bush is not exactly an endorsement of Kerry).

And blaming Nader for Gore's defeat is disingenuous too. Had Gore won in Florida, he would have been the first president in a long time (ever?) to win the election without carrying his home state. Apart from winning Tennesee, Gore should have been able to "win" the three campaign debates against Bush with his brain tied to his back, and he failed to do that, too (the impression was that he won the first, tied the second and lost the third, on foreign policy).

The Democratic party has nobody to blame but themselves.

Out with the politics of lesser-evilism!

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Nov 18th, 2005 at 09:30:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series