Nader: "Hey Michael, Where Were Your Friends?"
Moore: "He doesn't give a shit about anyone but himself. He's let himself be taken over by his own anger towards the Democrats…He's gone crazy."
I'm siding with Moore on this one . . . I voted for Nader in 2000 and still defend that decision: my state was won by Gore, I knew it would be won by Gore, and plus I was helping the Green Party (and all third parties) to be stronger in the future (to get that six percent, etc.). Most importantly, it was the Bush in Florida and Katherine Harris and the Supreme Court, et. al, who stole the election--not Nader's fault. This time, however, I think Nader is running just because he's a stubborn asshole.
What do Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn have to say on the issue?
Noam: “Voting for Nader in a safe state is fine. That's what I'll do. I don't see how anyone could read what I wrote and think otherwise, just from the elementary logic of it. Voting for Nader in a safe state is not a vote for Bush. The point I made had to do with (effectively) voting for Bush.”
Zinn: “I will vote for Nader because Mass. is a safe state. And voters in ‘safe states’ should not vote for Kerry.” He also notes, “I don't have faith in Kerry changing, but with Kerry there is a possibility that a powerful social movement might change him. With Bush, no chance.”
Nader also seems to have the GOP in Oregon on his side . . .
Post a Comment