“This is a collapse of the Democratic Party.” Consumer advocate, corporate critic and former presidential candidate Ralph Nader comments on the reelection of Donald Trump and the failures of the Democratic challenge against him.

Despite attempts by left-wing segments of the Democratic base to shift the party’s messaging toward populist, anti-corporate and progressive policies, says Nader, Democrats “didn’t listen.” Under Trump, continues Nader, “We’re in for huge turmoil.”

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    129
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    17 days ago

    He is an expert, after all. He’s the guy whose 3rd party campaign in 2000 siphoned enough votes from Gore in Florida to flip the state (and the election) to Bush.

    • Mirshe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      17 days ago

      Uhhhh, wasn’t that more due to Jeb! ordering the recount stopped? Like, I seem to recall reading that the recount WAS NOT COMPLETED, and the results that they had at that point had to be accepted, which just so happened to favor Bush.

      Not saying Nader didn’t siphon votes, but I seem to remember that there was actual skulduggery and not just “3rd party go brr”.

      • Hugin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        There was a lot going on. The final count used had bush up by 537 votes out of 5.8 million cast. The close margin triggered a recount and Bush dropped to 327 vote lead.

        Nadar probably cost the democrats more votes then republicans by greater then that 327. But there were other things that hurt Gore. Some intentional some random.

        There were ballot design issues. In areas where the butterfly ballot was used Buchanan (who was also a 3rd party candidate) got way more votes than elsewhere. So if you wanted Gore saw him under Bush and selected the dot below you voted for Buchanan. See below.

        Bush. O

        / O Buchanan

        Gore. O

        In another democratic area the ballot had the presidential race split on the front and back page. 21,000 votes were invalidated because they had multiple selections for president.

        There was a large purge of mostly black felon voters. 15% weren’t felons.

        Then there were lawsuits trying to stop and start recounts in both state and federal court. The state supreme court ordered recounts while they decided if the recount should be used. Then they decided the recount should be used and set a date it was du. Then the US supreme court stopped the recount. Several days later they decided there wasn’t time for a recount and ordered the Bush ahead by 537 count to be used.

        So honestly it probably took all the above to swing the final count to Bush from Gore. I’m guessing if any one had not happened Gore would have been president.

        A personal note I live in Florida and that was the first election I voted in. My vote for president has never be closer to making a difference in who was president. It’s shaped my views on elections and voting.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        Well yeah, you (and the other poster who referenced the Brooks Brothers Riot) are 100% correct in stating the count ended prematurely, but if Nader hadn’t siphoned away those votes, Gore likely would have had yhe lead throughout the recount and Republicans wouldn’t have been in a position to pick a favorable time to stop.

    • Keeponstalin@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      17 days ago

      In the 2000 presidential election in Florida, George W. Bush defeated Al Gore by 537 votes. Nader received 97,421 votes, which led to claims that he was responsible for Gore’s defeat.

      However, Jonathan Chait of The American Prospect and The New Republic notes that Nader did indeed focus on swing states disproportionately during the waning days of the campaign, and by doing so jeopardized his own chances of achieving the 5% of the vote he was aiming for.

      • his wiki

      Yeah fuck Ralph Nader for that. He definitely helped Bush win.

      • zerog_bandit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        17 days ago

        His family was forced out of Lebanon by radical Islam so I think he knows a thing or two about the value of democracy.

        • Keeponstalin@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          17 days ago

          His parents immigrated. The Late Ottoman Empire is responsible for their genocides and ethnic cleansing campaigns. Repeatedly blaming Islam over the political parties responsible is just thinly veiled islamophobia

          Ralph Nader does value democracy. He has accomplished a lot through his activism

          The statement failed to condition this support on the White House’s making immediate enforceable demands on Israel to stop this mass annihilation, including women, children, the elderly, and hospital patients, immediately. There is no indication of any reciprocity, simply a plea without any display of political power on behalf of the Lebanese American community. After all, there are over a million Lebanese American voters that the Democratic Party should be keeping in mind.

  • peppers_ghost@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    17 days ago

    Liberals would choose fascism over adopting left wing elements into the party. They’ve made their choice and will now live with it. Repeated failure by leadership to choose a candidate people actually like is what brought us here. Never forget that.

  • emanresu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    17 days ago

    Move on from the Democrats. It’s over. They had their chance with Bernie.

    • Eezyville@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      17 days ago

      After this term Trump cannot be reelected. What will the democratic message be then? Who will be the new boogie man?

      • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        The Democratic Party will never change on its own. It is run by neoliberals. Neoliberals are moderate conservatives. They will always shift a little right before shifting a little left.

        If the Party is not overtaken by progressives, we will repeat all this bullshit again and again until only far right people remain.

    • littlewonder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      Everyone needs to take their anger straight to their local DNC office. Get involved and stop letting the centrist status-quo motherfuckers steer the party from the local levels. I’m also a member of my nearest DSA group but, until there’s a viable option for third parties to complete in general elections, we need to hold our noses and trojan horse the Democrats to change them from within.

  • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    Yes, the Democratic party is out of touch. They lost due to stubbornness - expecting Muslims to vote for Kamala without her making a plan to end the war in Gaza was a gamble that didn’t pay off.

    Now that the election is over, we need to focus our attention on third parties.

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 days ago

    Honestly I would be okay with it. They’ve been so ineffective and myopic that I’ve been done with the party as a whole for a while now.

  • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    Good. Whatever follows can’t be any worse than the “we need a strong republican party” dems.

  • BigBenis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    16 days ago

    They choose their big money corporate donors over the American people and then are surprised when the American people chose big money over them.