Do you know any person who voted for Gore and plans on voting for Nader?

[ButterflyBlood]

I can't possibly see how anyone could be like that. That's why any poll that shows Nader above his 2000 total is pure BS.

[WI_DEM]

1. yes

three people in fact and the war is the big issue with them.

[liberalhistorian]

3. Well, then I hope they're

prepared for the waste of their vote causing four more years of Bushit!

[zoeyfong]

26. Right; if dems lose it's Nader's fault. Uh, I think dems better find a

winning strategy that doesn't depend on their competition dropping out.

[Frances]

4. Good for them

If they vote for Nader, and Bush wins reelection by 1% of the vote, your friends can take all the credit when Bush invades Syria and then Jordan and then....

[Sparkly]

6. Exactly -- war's the "big issue"...

such a big issue that some people apparently want more of them. Four more years of PNAC, anyone?

[zoeyfong]

25. So in order to stop war, we've got to elect a pro-war candidate?

I'm afraid the Orwellian propaganda of the bush administration has gotten to your brain.

[zoeyfong]

27. Well, i'm already taking credit for bush's iraq war, since i voted for

two dem senators who supported it.

[ButterflyBlood]

5. In Wisconsin?

please tell them all rather bluntly that they are TOTAL COMPLETE FUCKING IDIOTS.

[zoeyfong]

24. Me; and you're right, the war was the straw that broke my back.

I voted for gore in 2000 because at that time i still had hope that the democratic party stood for something, and was really working for progressive change in America. The last 4 years have shown me that they (congressional dems) stand for nothing but their own personal advancement. The way they couldn't wait to stand side by side with bush on every anti-american "security" measure he came up with, up to and including supporting a totally unneccessary, unwinnable war, was a disgrace to the name of the democratic party. Quite simply, they chose to get lots of people killed because they thought there were some votes in it. It doesn't get much lower than that. Add to that the fact that many supported bush's criminal, reverse-robin hood tax cuts; they clamored to support backward, hateful anti-gay state and national legislation; they refuse to even propose any meaningful improvement in our health care system..... etc. I think that when dems chose Kerry as the nominee that was the point where experience finally triumphed over hope for me and i had to say, No, i will not give my support to that candidate, and i don't care if he's got a 'D' behind his name.

[liberalhistorian]

2. No, but I know plenty of people

who voted for Nader who plan on voting for Kerry now!

[debsianben]

7. Eh?

Why do you assume that the only people who would vote for Nader now who didn't last time are former Gore voters? Beyond obviously a lot of people who for whatever reason (age, whatever) didn't vote last time or were political energized by the movement against the war that Kerry supports, the fact remains that plenty of people who voted for Bush in 2000 might vote for Nader in 2004. Why? Because of the big three (Bush, Kerry, Nader), he's the only one who opposes "staying the course" in Iraq. (Public support for "staying the course" plumetts with each passing day's carnage.) Remember, in 2000 Bush ran (hypocritically, as it turned out) on a somewhat isolationist foreign policy platform, saying that he wouldn't engage in "nation-building." In fact, lots of Arab and Muslim organizations endorsed Bush in 2000. Plus, the Reform Party just endorsed Nader, which represents a bunch of people in several different states who most definitely didn't vote for Gore last time.

Anyway, I'm going to go out on a limb and make a prediction right now: unless Kerry does a 180 on Iraq before November, it's quite possible that Nader will twice the vote total he got in 2000.

[Sparkly]

10. I didn't see that assumption in the original post.

I also don't see Kerry saying "stay the course," but rather proposing a strategy to stabilize Iraq and then get out.

Kerry is not PNAC, and wouldn't invade other countries as another Bush administration might.

And Nader can say whatever he likes -- he doesn't have to try to implement any of it, nor does he have to bear any responsibility for the consequences, because he won't ever be in office.

You like war? Vote for Nader.

[debsianben]

12. Yes he has.

Kerry has said again and again he would not "cut and run" from Iraq. He has harshly criticized the incoming social democratic government of Spain for pulling out of Iraq. He has said on the campaign trail that he would send more troops if the generals tell him more are needed. He has never said or even hinted at pulling out of Iraq any time in the foreseeable future. All indications are that he agrees that troops should stay to "help secure Iraq's future" yadaya.

If you support the continuation of the war in Iraq, then by all means vote for Kerry.

[union_maid]

13. And if you don't?

Who should you vote for then? Bush has shown exactly what he'll do and Nader isn't going to do anything because he's not going to win. Why in the world would you not want to at least give Kerry a chance?

[Sparkly]

18. You don't see the difference?

You're talking about Kerry's strategy for stabilizing and leaving Iraq. Saying he wouldn't "cut and run" is a far cry from the goals of the PNAC.

The Bushies see a growing "axis of evil" and believe we have some religious duty, combined with a zeal for power through might, to "spread democracy" all around the globe. There is a definite danger that these people might start wars with Iran, Syria, North Korea, who knows where else.

Kerry is NOT part of the PNAC. As I said -- if you like war, vote for Nader.

[zoeyfong]

29. I don't know about twice, but i wouldn't be surprised if he

gets more than he did in 2000.

[Skittles]

8. I would be embarrassed to know people that stupid

nt

[benburch]

9. If I knew such a person...

I would let that person know what a traitorous dog he or she is.

To vote for Ralph Nader is to vote against America, and to vote for fascism.

Anybody who cannot see that is either willfully ignorant, or much too stupid to be allowed to use real silverware.

[demnan]

11. God, no!

And a good thing too! I don't relish having to smack someone un-silly!

[shivaji]

14. I will vote for Nader ONLY IF Clark is on the ticket

any other VP candidate and Kerry gets my vote.

[Lefty Pragmatist]

15. Is there really one Nader person left

who, upon reflection that Gore + Nader votes would have won FL easily, still thinks there is no difference between the Dems and the GOP?

What does Bush have to do to get people to genuinely understand that he is the problem and the first step in the solution is to get rid of him? Nuke the campuses?

Who knows -- maybe he will.

[Dying Eagle]

16. When will people get it through their thick heads

A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
A VOTE FOR NADER, IS A VOTE FOR BUSH!!!

[MrSlayer]

17. No, I don't know anyone who voted for Nader in 2000 either.

Everyone I know stuck with the two major candidiates.

[napi21]

19. No, but do know one who voted Nader and now for Kerry.

His wife voted for Bush, and says now "I never thought he'd be this bad!" I know that's only 2 people but I'm sure they aren't alone.

[beyurslf]

20. No but I know 2 Nader votes who refuse to vote for him again

and will vote for Kerry.

[ProfessorGAC]

21. I Only Know The Opposite

I know 3 Nader voters from 2000 (we live in a safe blue state, and they never thought Bush would win), but they've already said that there's no way they'd take the chance this year. They are definitely going Kerry. The statement they want to make this year is to eliminate any illusion that Bush has popular support.
The Professor

[Cheswick2.0]

22. I know about 10 Nader voters who plan to vote for Kerry

funny part is that I am a Gore voter who may not be able to force myself to vote for Kerry. But if I don't I will be writing in Gore or Dean depending on who the VP is. If either Clark or Gephardt is the VP, it will be Dean. I will vote one "Stop Dean", Osama add backstabber to get rid of bush....but not two of them on the same ticket. That is just asking too much.

[Padraig18]

23. Not a single one.

What's more, I know a LOT of people who voted for * in 2000 who will either vote Kerry or just simply skip down to the US Senate race without voting for POTUS at all.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

28. yes

my mother

[notbush]

30. Yes, Kerry's view on the war says it all....

I know several friends who voted Gore in 2000 who say they're voting for Nader.(All based on Kerry's war stance).
They, (I) want our troops out now!!!!!Not in 4 years!!!!

[MessiahRp]

31. Just a thought

and not trying to be overly critical here but...

(run on sentence, but you'll get my drift)

Has it occured to them that by voting for Nader where Nader will struggle to reach the 5% plateau nationally and that at least a good chunk of that 5% would go to Kerry... that if it is close and Bush does win by a few percentage points that instead of getting the four year exit plan of Kerry we get the Axis of Evil entrance plan with wars in Syria, Iran, possibly North Korea, or more?

I mean if people are logically against war, that is understandable because I am too, but people must realize that even if Kerry's timeframe is less than the ideal "get out now" strategy we'd like to adopt, it still doesn't proceed into new wars as Bush's plans do.

I also think about this on a larger plain. If Kerry gets in and we get a good Secretary of Defense and we start to direct the soldiers' duties in an honorable manner (which it's blatantly obvious Rummy and the PNAC boys are not doing) and we get UN support to help, we might actually be able to at least slightly turn around the sentiment against us?

I know it seems impossible to believe but a new President here would give a lot of solid Middle East citizens a reason to have hope that we can change our course of action and help rebuild rather than slaughter innocents.

If we leave now we will have not only pulled into a stupid, immoral, illegal war because Bush wanted it so badly, but we will have left a stain even larger on the country because of how we treated the people when we were there. To me that means when they get together with a lot of the other anti-American governments in the area and do meetings of leadership, they're not going to look for ways to interact with us, they're going to look for ways to wipe us off the face of the planet.

That may seem extreme at first but let's rationalize here. First what has America done to the region, and second leaving it AS IS instead of trying to correct the situation and genuinely help these people. Those two things will make future 9/11s more than possible.

I was 100% against this war from the beginning. I don't think a draft is neccesary, I think a change in orders from the top is. And once we make that step and weed out the bad seeds down the chain of command, we can help these people and not make America seem so evil. I think that almost has to be a goal because otherwise we've triggered a future World War by our actions and to me voting for Nader who will lose in a landslide just because you don't like that Kerry believes we can at least stabilize Iraq, is foolish. Bush will do far worse and increase the threat to our country and to our children if he stays in office.

And if people are truly anti-war, they should think about that. It's not as if Nader will actually be elected to pull those troops out.

Rp

[Moloch]

32. I voted for Nader in 2000 *ducks*

I just turned 18 and I was very disappointed in Al Gore's campaign (especially his selection of LIEberman) BUT I had no idea * would be so horrible and will NEVER make that mistake again. Many of my friends also voted for Nader in 2000 and won't be doing it again. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me...

[beyurslf]

33. That has been my point all along. Many of Nader's voters

were young and influential. Most will not do it again. He has to bring in a new crop of young uninformed voters to match his take last time. He seems less organized with less support this time and I just don't see it happening. My sister in law and her sister both voted for Nader and said they will not do it again. They are behind ABB.

[Demobrat]

34. Yes.

I'm personally undecided, but I know two people who voted Gore who will either vote Nader or sit out.