Skip to main content

View Diary: The Hall of Shame (319 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Appreciate (4.00)
    the removal.  People on this site need to settle on the reason for Bush's wins.  Is it corruption in the vote counting process?  Swiftboating?  Or is it that Democrats run such unattractive candidates that people feel drawn to third parties?  In 2000, when it became evident that Nader had drawing power, what did the Democrats do?  Modify their positions?  Listen to the people who were supporting Nader?  Noooo.  They smeared him in true Rovian style.  Nothing we can be proud of.

    Finally, I have seen no evidence that the election would have turned out differently if Nader hadn't run.  Let's quote one of the Supremes or K. Harris, if we want to bring in shame for Bush's appointment to the presidency.

    •  Just one mo' (4.00)
      Bush didn't "win" fucking anything. He was appointed the first time &, though we sanely recognize nobody will ever be able to prove it, he stole '04.

      Oh, I feel a rant coming on. But don't want to aim it at you; you don't deserve it, dear C&Jer. So mebbe I'll take myself off to the end of the line and post it there.

      cheers to you. Jeers to rehashing naderisms. Keep moving, folks, nothing to see there (unless...umm.. anybody feels like checking out Meteor Blades' diary about Eco-NO

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site