Fck ff nd d, Rlph

[womzilla]

Daily Kos has poll numbers:

New Mexico

American Research Group. 3/30-4/1. MoE 4%. No trend lines.

Bush 46
Kerry 45
Nader 3

(Entry title courtesy of Xopher. If you don't get the joke, you should probably read TNH's blog Making Light more often.)

UPDATE: Be sure to read the comments for more about why Rlph should fck ff nd d.

Comments

Re: Now Will You Go Off in to a Corner

[womzilla.livejournal.com]

Rule one: Be polite to other posters.

As to the numbers: Doug's point, which you completely missed, is that we might want to concentrate some of our animosity at the 2.9 million Bush voters in Florida or the 50 million Bush voters nationwide instead of concentrating our animosity on the 3 million Nader voters. On the other hand, I don't think anyone can accuse me of being gentle on Rutherford Bush.

Re: Now Will You Go Off in to a Corner

[shelleybear.livejournal.com]

I responded to the following:

"I am highly skeptical of your "cold hard facts."


The reality is, that whatever else may have happened, Bush won by the numbers he did, and Gore lost. It is likely that, had Nader not run, or thrown his support to Gore things would have turned out differently in Florida (even with the disenfranchisement of thousands of voters).
So, I don't really think it matters what the poster's opinion is, based on the facts, he's wrong. He can criticize the Democratic party until the cows come home, but Nader STILL got the votes he did, and Gore lost by what he did.
Perhaps I overreacted to someone questioning information I knew to be facts, but that is less of an issue then his response being the sort of cookie-cutter reaction I have heard from every Naderite.

Re: Now Will You Go Off in to a Corner

[womzilla.livejournal.com]

The numbers are facts, yes. But they don't prove that Nader "cost" Gore the election. Now, in fact, I believe that Nader did do exactly that, but so did several other things, which latter point is Doug's point as well even as he disagrees with the first point.