Nader=Bush?
Oct 27 '00
Greets:
It's one thing to stand up for your principles, but quite another thing to follow your principles off a cliff!
At first, I did not buy the argument that a vote for Nader is really a vote for Bush. It would seem logical to think a vote for Nader is a voter for Nader! But I had the misfortune of listening to the pundits go on and on about this for the last few days. I checked out web pages and zines, mostly. I hate to admit, they are right. A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush.
The fact is the vast majority of Nader supporters come from the so-called Democratic base. In swing states where Bush and Gore are tied, the 2-5 % who plan to vote for Nader swing the state in Bush's favor. If those voters voted for Gore instead, Gore would win the election. It's cut and dry numbers, folks.
Others complain they are so disenchanted they want to abstain this year. Once again, not voting favors the Republicans. (There are more registered Dems, so if they stay home, the balance is tipped towards Bush).
Some of my Nader supporter friends say they are sick of voting for the "lesser of two evils." But isn't this really about "the greater good"? Do Nader supporter think things will be better if they help Bush get elected? I mean, Bush seems pretty much the polar opposite of Nader. At least Gore is sorta kinda at least a bit pro-environment and pro-consumer. He does deserve credit for helping with the Internet, dealing with Global warming, consumer issues, and other not-so-bad things.
Part of the vote Nader hypothesis goes, that if things get worse under Bush--the Democratic Party will have to adopt some Green Party positions. But is it really a good thing for things to get worse? Things are pretty bad, now. The environment is going down the toilet, animals are going extinct. Will things be better when more forests are wiped out, more bio-engineered food is forced down our throats, and global warming returns to something that "needs more study"? Will things be better if the Supreme Court gets more right wing appointments? Will it be good for America's women when they totally lose "choice"? Oh, and say goodbye to RU486.
OK, but suppose, after Bush's 4 to 8 year administration, you get a Nader or Nader like candidate--and by some miracle, he wins! Will that win put back the polar ice caps? Will that rainforest magically spring back via an act of legislation? Will extinct species reappear? In addition, won't it be great that all these unwanted children are here to enjoy this mess!
The Nader supporters, because of there principles, are smashing the hopes, dreams, and lives of many. I wish they would not so stuck on their principles and think about the greater good. I hate to say this, but listening to Nader, I just get this impression he sounds like a fundamentalist. I think there has been too much intolerance in this country -whether it comes from the left, right, or middle. One very nice thing about the Democratic Party is its diversity. People should think twice about losing that strength.
The world is a big complicated place now; it is not like battling GM.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
gene_s
|
|
Location: Denver, New York City, and SF
Reviews written: 6
Trusted by: 4 members
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.