All absolutely true, but totally irrelevant to the question whether Nader and his supporters swung the election. Those other factors in no way change the fact that Nader and his supporters also brought George W. Bush into the White House, as explained above. In such a close race, there were multiple necessary, contributing causes.
The most substantive argument that Zeese and Flowers make is the following:
CNN's exit polling showed Nader received the same amount of votes from both Republicans and Democrats: 1 percent. Nader also took 4 percent of the independent vote. Had Nader not run, Bush would have won by more in Florida. CNN's exit poll showed Bush at 49 percent and Gore at 47 percent, with 2 percent not voting in a hypothetical Nader-less Florida race. (See articles at end of article for more details.)It may be true (though I find it hard to believe) that had Nader not run, more of his supporters would have voted for Bush than would have voted for Gore. If so, blame those Nader voters for their bad judgement! They should have voted for Gore. We don't have ranked-choice voting in this reality.
In short, yes, Nader and his supporters did cause Gore to lose in 2000 -- as did other factors.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
