4 ms·

The war in Iraq was a direct consequence of people voting for Nader over Gore.

• BeetleB 8y ago
  Funny, I thought the war was a direct consequence of people voting for Bush. Also thought the war was a direct consequence of more Democrats voting for Bush than the total number of votes Nader got.[0] Democrats favored Bush over Nader. The number of Democrats who voted for Bush exceeded those who voted for Nader five fold. In the last state I lived in, Democrats were far more hostile to 3rd party candidates than Republicans were - putting in a lot more effort to ensure they wouldn't get on the ballet. As someone who grew up in a country where people couldn't vote, I can't imagine acts more hostile to democracy than what I saw the Democrats do to limit choices on the ballot. I may vote Democrat often, but I don't see myself as ever supporting the party. [0] https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-2000 https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-2000
  • yourbandsucks 8y ago
    Bush voters got what they wanted. Nader and Stein voters did not. As far as registered Dems voting habitually R.. yeah, that happens, you should see the south.
    • BeetleB 8y ago
      >Bush voters got what they wanted. Nader and Stein voters did not. And had Nader voters voted for Gore, they would not have gotten what they wanted either had Gore won. They voted Nader because they did not want Gore. The only thing I can take away from your comment is that if your candidate lost, you wanted the wrong thing. >As far as registered Dems voting habitually R.. yeah, that happens, you should see the south. I do - and I see more Dems responsible for Bush than Nader voters.
      • yourbandsucks 8y ago
        There are different schools of ethics, of course, but utility counts for something. 500k dead Iraqis on account of how that election swung. You sure showed us Democrats.