drydem | Nader

Alright, I am sick of people blaming Ralph Fucking Nader for Bush's presidency. Dan Savage did it in his most recent column and I hate it. Here's the deal. Sure, if Nader hadn't run in Florida, then Gore would proably have won. However, if Bush had murdered somebody on national television a few days before the election Gore would probably have won also. Here's where Gore lost.
In filing charges before the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore, Gore had a few options for what he could demand. He could have demanded a recount of the counties where he had a lead(which would have been a sure victory if he won the case, but which left him open to equal protection arguments) or he could have demanded a recount of the entire state(which may have made things uncertain in terms of victory, but which avoided the equal protection clause on a state level). He chose the former, and the high court(assuming it was not entirely partisan, which I am dubious about) ruled against him, precisely based on the equal protection clause.
In all the recounts done by independent organizations, including full state recounts, without hanging chads, Gore won. So, really, if Gore had taken the moral high ground and asked for a full recount, he could have won, both the Supreme Court case and the Electoral College. Sure, there would have been a period of doubt, but our government could have withstood that.
So, to sum up, Nader did not lose the fucking election. Gore lost it because he played partisan rather than playing fair. If he had played fair, chosen to try and ascertain the will of the american people instead of just trying to win, we wouldn't be in a kakistocracy right now.