Nader cost himself federal funds (Re: election demographics

Marta Russell ap888 at lafn.org
Fri Nov 10 08:55:34 PST 2000


California was not a swing state. Gore had a wide margin here. marta

Nathan Newman wrote:


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Marta Russell" <ap888 at lafn.org>
> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
>
> >Nader would have gotten more votes if those intending to vote for him had
> >been "freed" to do so by the Democratic party liberals who have been guilt
> >tripping every Dem who wanted to vote Nader for weeks. For instance in CA
> >Nader was up to 7-8 percent in the polls but when people actually voted the
> >support dropped to 4 percent.
> >I think people who where coerced into voting for Gore made a big mistake by
> >caving -- they cost the Greens the loss of federal funds.
>
> I know a lot of folks, like myself, who would have voted Nader if the Nader
> supporters were not attacking other progressives and if Nader had not
> campaigned in the swing states the week before the election. If Nader had
> chosen to campaign hard in "free states" a la the Molly Ivins strategy, he
> would have done two things - increased votes in those states and not
> alienated folks in those states. On election day, here in safe Connecticut,
> I had meant to vote for David McReynolds but found that he was not certified
> for write-in, so I almost voted for Nader but was pissed off about the swing
> state campaigning, so voted for Gore. Since then, I have talked to a bunch
> of others who were planning to vote for Nader, but ended up voting for Gore
> for the same reasons.
>
> There was a large panel today with students discussing the election. These
> were overwhelmingly liberal students, most of whom would normally love
> Nader. But when Nader's name was mentioned in the introduction, spontaneous
> hissing broke out from around the room.
>
> Nader made the choice to campaign in the last week in swing states rather
> than in states like Texas or Connecticut. Yes, the voters in the swing
> states collapsed for fear of Bush, but what is remarkable is how poorly
> Nader did in safe states like Connecticut. That collapse is Nader's own
> fault, not the fault of the liberal Dems.
>
> Nader cost himself federal funds by alienating voters in safe states.
>
> -- Nathan Newman



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list