Nader (seemingly) made a major difference in Florida and perhaps New
Hampshire in November, 2007. Imho, Ralph's foolish ego shamefully
"took away" many otherwise Gore voters in Florida.

I would think an endosement by Nader gives Edwards an edge, especially
if Edwards runs in the top two or three places in Iowa, which now
appear nearly tied anyhow.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7647.html

On Jan 1, 11:53 am, Robert Cohen msn.com> wrote:

Perhaps you should stop watching cnn and reading the ny times long
enough to do some thinking for yourself. You'll have to pardon my lack
of patience on this issue, but it's the story of "if you repeat
something enough times, people begin to believe it".

Ralph Nader is not to blame for Gore losing for God's sake -- this can
be objectively verified and reasoned. Did you know that more democrats
in Florida voted for Bush than for Nader? And even if they hadn't, you
can't isolate one factor and declare that that is *the cause*. Gore
couldn't even pull his home state of Tennessee.

If you don't want to crunch the numbers yourself, here is a good
summary:

http://www.alternet.org/story/10065/

If you're more visually inclined, check out:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=KV8shKupf2I

"ta" nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:7a3c231d-7b2e-4889-a78a-015aa6c928ab@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

On Jan 1, 12:21 pm, "thinker" notreal.com> wrote:

Gore's entire "campaign" was to convince people to vote against
Clinton.

Ever since _Primary Colors_ Gore has had this bottomless hatred of
Clinton. Gore hates Clinton more than any Republicon hates Clinton.

Gore hates Clinton more than Gore loathes any Republicon.

Maybe Gore will jump into the race a be another spoiler. In Gore's
mind even Dumbya is better than the Clintons.

Bret Cahill

On Jan 1, 12:36 pm, ta nc.rr.com> wrote:

"ta" nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:bee3e85e-0be4-4ea1-99bd-12a51a294137@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Old has been men are a lot like old has been Hollywood beauty queens.
They still want to priss on the stage when they no longer have
anything to offer.

Gore, BTW, isn't a has been; he's a _never_ been.

Democrats really hate Nader -- wrongfully or not, I think wrongfully
-- so much that it slightly hurts Edwards.

The effect will be small either way because Nader could only get 2%% of
the vote himself so his endorsement will mean much less. The fact
that most Nader voters would vote for Edwards anyway diminishes the
small effect even more.

Nader gets in a huff whenever anyone points out how insignificant he
has become. It's like telling a former beauty queen she's ugly.
It's his own fault. Nader thinks because so much dumb stuff goes on
in politics, that politics is trivial.

Gore hated Clinton so much he would have conceded defeat even if he
carried every state in the country.

Anyone who concedes twice, both times without an accurate vote count,
just doesn't want to win.

The real argument against Nader isn't that he is a spoiler but that
he's a do nothing.

Bret Cahill

On Jan 1, 1:26 pm, "thinker" notreal.com> wrote: