I think Ralph Nader, if he actually were elected president, could really clean this country up.

Yeah he could.

http://www.votenader.org/issues/index.php

I think i like this guy....

I remember my dad voted for him in '96 because he like neither Clinton or Dole...

I may end up going independent because i don't like Kerry that much, although would have to forget about Nader killing the Covair, lol.

Screw Nader. He is a socialist, and he is anti-nuclear. I think Nader has just put all the nails in the democratic party's coffin, dug the hole, and fluffed the pillow. I would vote for any of the democratic candidates before I would vote for Nader. (Including Sharpton, :shudders:)

Okay, I just noticed that he is anti-atomic power. So fuck him. I liked him up until just now when I realized that he would put me out of a job.

I may not like Nader's policy's but I strongly agree with his sentiment that our country needs more then two political parties, especially since they're slowly turning into one party, it won't be too long before we;re living in a contry twith a single party system and a patriot act that prevents you from badmounthing that party.

-Bob

There won't be a third party president until they abolish the electoral college system that gives all of the votes to the candidate that wins a state. They won't abolish the electoral college system until the legislatures of the individual states include more third party members, as the current legislatures keep the current system in action to protect their majorities in the states they know they can win. The legislatures won't include more third party members until the parties are taken more seriously by the average voter. The average voter won't take third parties more seriously until they can disprove their stereotype of futility. It's a cycle of futility that won't end in our lifetimes.

My head hurts

It has to be said: a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush.

Whoa, let's not get into this again...

Please explain exactly what you mean, give exact figures and site your sources. Until you accomplish this your statement has no validity.

Alot of Democrats blame Nader for Bush winning the '00 election. They say that if the Nader votes in Florida would have went to Gore that Bush wouldn't be in office.

However i would like to see some statistics.....the Flordia election was "won" by Bush with slightly over 500 votes.....and i would imagine 500 people in Florida voted for Nader.

I see nothing wrong with voting for a 3rd party candidate over the "lesser of two evils". I consider it the right, American thing to do, vote for who you think is the best man for the job, not who has the best chance of winning the election. And getting out of the horrid 2-party system would be nice too.

90,198 people voted for nader in florida. 506 was the number of votes gore lost florida by.

First of all, what I said is obviously an opinion...
Now for my rational. We have a two party system (when was the last time we had an independent president?). So whichever party Nader is most similar to will lose votes to Nader. I think Nader is closer to being a Democrat than a Republican.
Honestly, I think Nader will be lucky to make it on the ballot of all 50 states much less win the race.

I would like to see statistics also. That was the whole point of my post. I have statistics that say 25% of people who voted for Nader in Florida were democrat while 38% were Republican. These stats are from votenader.org and therefore may be biased. However, the following stats are from CNN and can be found here http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/results/index.epolls.html

11% of registered democrats voted for Bush while 2% voted for Nader. Sounds like Gore lost the election for himself. Now, this all depends, of course, on whether or not you trust polls. But I challenge anyone to present statistics that prove me wrong.