Skip to main content

View Diary: Mark Sanford, heroic defender of marriage (84 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't live in any particular year (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MPociask, jnww

    I just call them like I see them, no matter what the year is.

    For example, I lived Buttfuckville USA back in the 1960s and wasn't shy about standing up against gay (and religious) bigotry.

    Sure, if I had run for election, I probably would have received about 1 or 2% of the vote.

    But whatever, that is less important to me than not being a total sellout.

    And voila, 40 years later, who'd ever have thunk that I turned out to be on the right (i.e., "correct") side of history?

    •  1% to 2% (0+ / 0-)

      which pretty well describes the margin Nader took from Gore, thus giving us Bush. See sometimes purity in favor of pragmatism leads to real world consequences.

      •  That is a red herring,or what ever the (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MPociask, jnww

        relevant logistical fallacy is (I'm not very good at keeping those straight).

        The bottom line is that Nader got something like 70,000 votes total in Florida in the year 200 election.

        At the same time, 200,000 Democrats voted for George W Bush.

        So, puzzle me this -what was the problem here?

        Nader's minor poaching of votes from both sides??

        Or Gore's inability to hold on to "reliable" Democratic voters???

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site