A Vote for Nader

Is a vote for Bush. Mostly. Let's put that post on embracing complexity to work for us. If you're the sort of person who:

-- actually votes, and you usually vote Democrat, then yes, your vote for Nader is a vote for Bush.

-- actually votes, and you usually vote Republican, then no, your vote for Nader is not a vote for Bush.

-- doesn't usually vote at all, but you've been motivated to vote for the only candidate to host SNL, your vote for Nader is not a vote for Bush, but you're certainly missing an opportunity to vote against Bush.

-- doesn't actually vote, but you like to complain loudly about the Bush Administration, your vote for Nader or your couch is not only a vote for Bush, it's also clear evidence that you need to be kicked in the head.

Let's put it this way: If you want to eject GWB from the White House, your only real choice is whichever shmuck the Democrats choose at the Primary Convention. Ralph's not going to win. The best he can hope for is to gain 5% of the vote, and it's pretty clear that the only people who are going to vote for him are the ones who already oppose the Bush presidency. Since we don't have Instant Run-off Elections (a rant for another day), a split in the voter base of any candidate is bound to lead to that candidate's loss. Ralph is a splitter.

If you want to do some real good for third-party candidates, support your local third-party candidates. If you get enough of them elected, you can change the political landscape.

Voting for a third-party candidate in the Presidential Election is not going to change the political landscape. Deal with it.