>He got 2,882,955 or 2.74% of the votes, but zero electoral votes (to my knowledge):
>
>http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm#brown
>
>However, Democrats see his votes as votes that would have gone to Gore had Nader not run...

But if Gore did win the popular vote, and Nader got 0 Electoral COllege votes, doesn't the complaint sound a bit hollow?

Is there somewhere where Nader seemed to have put the margin of victory to a Republican (for the Electoral College) over Gore?


>
>
>>>>There seems (still) to be big encouragement - at least by the media - for Bloomberg to run. Why is Nader such a joke?... and such a 'destroyer'?
>>>
>>>Because there's a desperate belief that only Dems can save the country, and yet even though so many believe in it, they still fear that the numbers of disilusioned won't suffice to surpass what these guys (aka GOP) can steal. So Nader is perceived as basically stealing votes from the left (because nobody really expects anybody from the right to even listen to what he has to say) and thus helping them lose again. Ergo, traitor.
>>
>>Well I'm anxious to hear just how many Ectectoral College votes Nader actually got.
>>
>>If it was zero then he really didn't (as I understand it) hurt anyone/anything.