[sixties-l] Sixties-1 Re: Hitchens on Nader

From: Jeffrey Blankfort (jab@tucradio.org)
Date: 11/21/00

  • Next message: Michael Rossman: "[sixties-l] Re: Hitchins on Nader"

    The problem with the analysis by Friedman and others of the same mind is
    that they assume that those who voted for Nader would have voted for
    Gore if the former had not been running. Speaking for myself and others
    I know who voted for Nader, none of us would have voted for Gore under
    any circumstances. Half the electorate who stayed away from the ballot
    box apparently made the same decision.
    Jeff Blankfort
    Neil Friedman wrote:
    > I distrust the use of a complicated anaysis to disprove the obvious. What
    > the Nader candidacy did was take over 78,000 votes in Florida. If Nader had
    > not been on the ballot, Gore would be president. Now, one may argue about
    > whether that would be good or bad for the country. But it would be true. For
    > Nader and/or Hitchins to dispute this is beyond my comprehension. I am
    > trying to make a point about thinking and analysis - how they can be used so
    > cleverly to evade the obvious.
    > - -- Many Blessings

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 11/22/00 EST