There's a flaw or two in the persecution of your argument.
1) Ruinious Phiolosophy: Nader's platform was built around the theory that there was no viable difference between DNC and GOP. It doesn't take much time to see that as a falsehood. So Nader threw the election for Gore by disenheartening voters and lowering their turnout.
But that's pretty weak, because it presuposes voter logic. However, it does fit into the grander point:
2) Not Florida: Florida is easy to focus on, because it's a weak link. But what about Missouri? Wisconsin? Tenassee? States where it was close, not as close as Florida, but close. If all those people in all those places then Voted for Gore, would he have taken an extra state, thus making all such points moot?
And as another note, I think that I, had I been in Gore's counsel, would have likewise suggested a recount of the relevant counties and not the whole state. These were places where he could expect to win and didn't...the others were places he didn't always expect to win and there was the real chance that he could lose more votes in a statewide review than he could gain. Selecting a few counties lowered the rates of unpredictiblity.
As it stands, the most insigtful comment I've heard regarding the topic came from a statician, who noted that the degree of difference inbetween the votes in Florida is under the statistical difference for error tolerance (an apt, if grim, counter to point one).
Not that people blaming Nader isn't stupid, but...
1) Ruinious Phiolosophy: Nader's platform was built around the theory that there was no viable difference between DNC and GOP. It doesn't take much time to see that as a falsehood. So Nader threw the election for Gore by disenheartening voters and lowering their turnout.
But that's pretty weak, because it presuposes voter logic. However, it does fit into the grander point:
2) Not Florida: Florida is easy to focus on, because it's a weak link. But what about Missouri? Wisconsin? Tenassee? States where it was close, not as close as Florida, but close. If all those people in all those places then Voted for Gore, would he have taken an extra state, thus making all such points moot?
And as another note, I think that I, had I been in Gore's counsel, would have likewise suggested a recount of the relevant counties and not the whole state. These were places where he could expect to win and didn't...the others were places he didn't always expect to win and there was the real chance that he could lose more votes in a statewide review than he could gain. Selecting a few counties lowered the rates of unpredictiblity.
As it stands, the most insigtful comment I've heard regarding the topic came from a statician, who noted that the degree of difference inbetween the votes in Florida is under the statistical difference for error tolerance (an apt, if grim, counter to point one).