[lbo-talk] please, ralph, NOOO!!!

[Brad DeLong]

>Brad DeLong wrote:
>
>>>Well, look at it this way. I think we all agree that Nader's 
>>>impact on the 2000 election was pretty marginal, and the Democrats 
>>>are making far too much about it to cover up for their own 
>>>failures. If that's the case, then maybe we shouldn't worry very 
>>>much about Nader's impact on the coming election.
>>
>>???
>>
>>There's a 1% or so chance that Nader's candidacy will swing the 
>>election to the Republicans. Why isn't this something to worry 
>>about?
>
>Because the Democrats _themselves_ could botch at _least_ that many 
>points with poor choices, lousy campaigning, and any number of bad 
>decisions. It happened with Gore, after all-- who couldn't even 
>mount much of a fight to get a decent vote count in Florida.
>
>I can understand most reasons to not vote for Nader. But I cannot 
>see any rational reason to hold him responsible for the loss of the 
>2000 election. Might just as as well blame those Jews who voted for 
>Buchanan.

Oh, we blame the butterfly ballot in Palm Beach. We blame lots of things.

There's *lots* of blame to go around. But somehow Naderites are 
extremely unwilling to take their share...

Brad DeLong