This is sort of a follow up to Darian's "just curious" thread. It looks like Nader is the only anti-war candidate. A lot of forum members are pretty vocally anti-war. Are any of you going to vote for Nader?
(I would not find it inconsistent if thinking anti-war persons said heck no! The practical result of a big Nader turnout is obviously 4 more years of GWB. hardly an anti-war move. This is not news, but this does seem to be Nader's strategy)
I think that historians 50 to 100 years from now will find the effect of third party "spoilers" (Nader in '00, Perot in '92) pretty interesting. The sizable vote for these third party candidates indisputably threw the race to the least desireable candidate, from the perspective of the generic person who voted for the third party.
(I would not find it inconsistent if thinking anti-war persons said heck no! The practical result of a big Nader turnout is obviously 4 more years of GWB. hardly an anti-war move. This is not news, but this does seem to be Nader's strategy)
I think that historians 50 to 100 years from now will find the effect of third party "spoilers" (Nader in '00, Perot in '92) pretty interesting. The sizable vote for these third party candidates indisputably threw the race to the least desireable candidate, from the perspective of the generic person who voted for the third party.
