By Ralph Nader April 11, 2025 If there was ever a strong contemporary case for declaring that silence is complicity, consider the hush of Joe Biden, Barack Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and even George W. Bush as they grind their teeth over the Donald Trump/Elon Musk wrecking…
Blaming Nader for the Supreme Court handing the election to the Bush Dynasty is the kind of thinking that paralyzed American politics on the “left.” Nader spent his career working to help the people.
Bush having the governor of the deciding state be his brother and having the Supreme Court in his pocket sealed that election.
Democrats should win every election by massive landslides. Instead, they spent the last several decades bowing to billionaires and providing controlled opposition that suppressed any actual reform.
The illusion of choice between neoliberals morphed into fascism, and it’s now difficult to discern neoliberals from fascists. They have the same interests: Big number goes up for billionaires; nothing else matters.
As a reminder, Chief Justice John Roberts as well as Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Amy Coney Barrett all worked the hanging chads case on the side of Bush.
The fact that people still blame Nader instead of the fucks who literally owe their positions to being on the case is such a joke. Like, why does anyone think these pricks ended up Justices? Because they helped steal an election in 2000.
I looked at the totals for the 2000 election and found that, had every Nader voter instead voted for Gore, there would have been only two states that would have flipped:
Florida, by a tally of 2,912,790 Bush to 3,009,741.
New Hampshire, which would have been 273,559 Bush to 288,546 Gore.
Now, it’s entirely possible we still get the ratfucking from SCOTUS and they still throw the state to Bush. But New Hampshire had 4 electoral votes, and had they gone for Gore then it would have been 267 Bush - 270 President Gore.
Bush won because 22,198 people in NH didn’t understand that voting for a third-party only hurts the major party that most closely aligns with your ideals.
Having only two major parties and “winner takes it all” elections is a shit system and it was doomed to fail. You can’t force people to vote for “the lesser of two evils” forever. That’s not how a democracy is supposed to work. Especially if neither of the major parties allign with your ideals. Of course the consequences of this non-compliance are dire but it was inevitable.
Blaming Nader for the Supreme Court handing the election to the Bush Dynasty is the kind of thinking that paralyzed American politics on the “left.” Nader spent his career working to help the people.
Bush having the governor of the deciding state be his brother and having the Supreme Court in his pocket sealed that election.
Democrats should win every election by massive landslides. Instead, they spent the last several decades bowing to billionaires and providing controlled opposition that suppressed any actual reform.
The illusion of choice between neoliberals morphed into fascism, and it’s now difficult to discern neoliberals from fascists. They have the same interests: Big number goes up for billionaires; nothing else matters.
As a reminder, Chief Justice John Roberts as well as Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Amy Coney Barrett all worked the hanging chads case on the side of Bush.
The fact that people still blame Nader instead of the fucks who literally owe their positions to being on the case is such a joke. Like, why does anyone think these pricks ended up Justices? Because they helped steal an election in 2000.
I looked at the totals for the 2000 election and found that, had every Nader voter instead voted for Gore, there would have been only two states that would have flipped:
Now, it’s entirely possible we still get the ratfucking from SCOTUS and they still throw the state to Bush. But New Hampshire had 4 electoral votes, and had they gone for Gore then it would have been 267 Bush - 270 President Gore.
Bush won because 22,198 people in NH didn’t understand that voting for a third-party only hurts the major party that most closely aligns with your ideals.
Having only two major parties and “winner takes it all” elections is a shit system and it was doomed to fail. You can’t force people to vote for “the lesser of two evils” forever. That’s not how a democracy is supposed to work. Especially if neither of the major parties allign with your ideals. Of course the consequences of this non-compliance are dire but it was inevitable.
You have to vote for the lesser of two evils in order to get a chance at changing the election system.
The GOP are trying to take away voting rights. Not the Dems.