portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts global

government | imperialism & war selection 2004

Nader is Kicking Bu$h + Kerry's ASSES in US Election for the Rest of The World

The US Election for the Rest of The World

Only one vote counts and you must be in a country other than the U.S.A.

See how each country is voting  http://worldpeace.org.au/virtualElection.asp#country votes

Let's help the U.S. figure out who their president should be.

Lord knows they spend a lot of time 'helping' other countries with theirs.

Vote Now!!
42.89% with 1,061 votes
42.89% with 1,061 votes
50.77% with 1,256 votes
50.77% with 1,256 votes
6.35% with 157 votes
6.35% with 157 votes
Votes so far by country

(The % are approx as the first 50 votes or so were not broken down to the candidates)

Kerry Nader Bush

Argentina 23 34.78% 65.22% 0
Australia 515 53.71% 39.84% 6.45%
Austria 7 57.14% 42.86% 0
Bahrain 3 0 100.00% 0
Belgium 37 51.35% 48.65% 0
Brazil 10 30.00% 70.00% 0
Canada 353 32.56% 63.11% 4.32%
Chile 4 25.00% 75.00% 0
China 7 14.29% 71.43% 14.29%
Costa Rica 3 66.67% 0 33.33%
Cyprus 1 0 100.00% 0
Denmark 7 42.86% 57.14% 0
Egypt 3 0 66.67% 33.33%
Estonia 2 0 0 100.00%
Finland 11 27.27% 54.55% 18.18%
France 84 36.05% 58.14% 5.81%
Germany 62 39.06% 56.25% 4.69%
Ghana 1 100.00% 0 0
Greece 3 66.67% 33.33% 0
Hong Kong SAR, PRC 7 62.50% 25.00% 12.50%
Hungary 65 49.23% 38.46% 12.31%
Iceland 3 33.33% 66.67% 0
India 72 37.50% 62.50% 0
Indonesia 10 44.44% 33.33% 22.22%
Ireland 47 37.21% 53.49% 9.30%
Israel 1 0 100.00% 0
Italy 42 26.83% 65.85% 7.32%
Japan 19 42.11% 57.89% 0
Jordan 6 0 100.00% 0
Kuwait 3 66.67% 33.33% 0
Latvia 1 0 100.00% 0
Lebanon 1 0 100.00% 0
Malaysia 6 50.00% 50.00% 0
Malta 1 0 100.00% 0
Mexico 12 58.33% 41.67% 0
Morocco 1 100.00% 0 0
Mozambique 2 50.00% 50.00% 0
Netherlands 108 21.30% 50.93% 27.78%
New Zealand 105 38.32% 59.81% 1.87%
Norway 20 35.00% 60.00% 5.00%
Peru 3 66.67% 33.33% 0
Philippines 3 33.33% 33.33% 33.33%
Poland 2 50.00% 50.00% 0
Portugal 3 0 100.00% 0
Puerto Rico 1 0 100.00% 0
Romania 13 30.77% 53.85% 15.38%
Saudi Arabia 9 0 100.00% 0
Singapore 5 20.00% 80.00% 0
Slovenia 1 0 100.00% 0
South Africa 46 54.35% 45.65% 0
Spain 19 21.05% 73.68% 5.26%
Sweden 23 30.43% 69.57% 0
Switzerland 38 44.74% 55.26% 0
Thailand 1 100.00% 0 0
Turkey 6 16.67% 83.33% 0
Ukraine 1 100.00% 0 0
United Arab Emirates 6 33.33% 66.67% 0
United Kingdom 259 41.84% 53.97% 4.18%
Country is unknown 194 65.43% 25.53% 9.04%

homepage: homepage: http://worldpeace.org.au/virtualElection.asp#country%20votes
address: address: The fragrance always remains in the hand that gives the rose - Heda Bejar

Dear simple shit 26.Mar.2004 15:28


They are right unfortunate they don't vote here. Or didn't you know that. When you hand the election to Bush ask them how they feel. Not now during your game, ask them when the bombers are in the air and you can say 'See that We helped it happen'.

'jlii' - Bush Was NEVER ELECTED IN THE FIRST PLACE. 26.Mar.2004 15:36

Why Don't You Expend Your Sour Grapes On THIS:

jlii's projecting again 26.Mar.2004 15:42

as are many democrats

jlii, when you Kerry supporters hand the election to Bush because your candidate has no appeal to anyone who actually opposes Bush's policies are you just going to whine about Nader for the 4 years? Are you really that gullible?

Dear Posters 26.Mar.2004 16:14


Not sour grapes (remember I voted for Nader in 2000), and I'm not a Democrat. No the reason we disagree is I can count. If Nader was a greyhound they call him a 'bumper'. A good dog but can't go the distance so you train him to take out the competition. Of course the world loves Nader who wouldn't, but that is no reason to leave Bush in office.
I'll stay with this one but let me, what was it expend my sour grapes on ... " voting as a Symbolic Act Fuck off voting's too important to be an Act

as are many democrats 26.Mar.2004 16:22


I don't blame you for not using a name, if I wrote what you do I wouldn't either. I have explained before that there was no reason to blame Nader for FL in 2000. The reason was 60,000 people of color were not permitted to vote nothing else that happened measures up to this crime. So for the record again, not that it matters to you nadir did not fuck it up in 2000. But he can now. But it is good to note how many of you quickly pass over the 60,000 people of color by not counting them as the reason.

I can count too 26.Mar.2004 16:42

counting on relevance

90,000+ voters illegally removed from the rolls
46,000+ overvotes for Gore not counted (mostly from heavy minority counties)
-16,000 votes Gore was getting early in the election night in 1 Florida county
5 US Supreme Court justices who agreed that counting the votes would harm Bush's legitmacy as president
2 court orders Jeb Bush was under for illegally removing voters prior to 2000
300,000+ democrats who voted for Bush

really? 26.Mar.2004 16:48


"So for the record again, not that it matters to you nadir did not fuck it up in 2000. But he can now."

So you're saying that after the massive success of the coup in 2000 (not to mention 2002) all of a sudden the republicans are going to let a fair election ahppen in which Nader could act as a spoiler. Whatever you're smoking jlii where can I get some of that; I'd love to believe we were headed for a fair election but it ain't gonna happen this time around. If you're bashing Nader your work is counter-productive to what needs to be done to remove Bush from office, which is to work to ensure a fair elections process.

Great that makes two 26.Mar.2004 16:56


counting on relevance

One relevant fact is Nader's in depth plan to take all 50 states, not in the election just getting on the ballot or ballet. The question is for everyone, if he does not are you going to leave Bush in office. If your candidate is not on the ballot he won't win or are you expecting a write in independent victory? Certainly this is not a confusing issue. What is it, yes or no

surprised 26.Mar.2004 17:01


In answer to your question NO.

Nader's acting as his own spoiler.

well then 26.Mar.2004 17:08


If "Nader's acting as his own spoiler" then how can he "hand the election to Bush"?

Simple math 26.Mar.2004 17:17


Nader's going to pull what 5%-8% if he is on the ballot. That could be enough to keep Kerry out. I'm sure some will say No, Kery's keeping Nader out by pulling 38%-42% of the non Bush votes away. Same result Bush WINS. Some people, clearly not all, think it is easier to move 5% than 42%

a question for jlii 26.Mar.2004 17:23

undecided voter

I voted for Nader in 2000. If Nader hadn't run I still wouldn't have voted for Gore. Implicit in your argument is the assumption that Nader will pull votes exclusively from Kerry. The realisty is that, like in 2000, Nader's strongest pull will be from people who wouldn't have voted for either corporate candidates, and an equal pull from Kerry and Bush (just as in 2000 there was a large pull from both Gore and Bush). Since I don't see Kerry as being worse than Gore it's hard to imagine any democrats who voted for Gore voting for Nader this time around. It is much easier to envision republicans who are sick of Bush voting for Nader (or libertarian). Just something to consider.

undecided voter 26.Mar.2004 17:42


My vote in 2000 was for Nader because I wanted the 5% limit reached for the Greens. If there was no Nader than I would have had to vote for Gore. My beleif is that you must always vote. Some will say 'that's just playing into the system'. And their right, but no one has ever won by not being vote for. Granted not winning the most votes and winning happens.

Kerry has the best shot. But the people who say they won't vote for either will they also not vote in local elections? Take back the country one county at a time. Thanks for your views.

Florida, Again 26.Mar.2004 18:31

simple math


13% of Florida's democrats voted for Bush.
8% of Florida's republicans voted for Gore.
Of those who voted for Clinton in 1996, 16% voted for Bush in 2000.
Of those who voted for Clinton in 1996, only 1% voted for Nader in 2000.
Of those who voted for Dole in 1996, only 4% voted for Gore in 2000.
Of those who voted for Dole in 1996, only 1% voted for Nader in 2000.
Of those who voted for Perot in 1996, 10% voted for Nader in 2000.


Some things for democrats to keep in mind if they are uncomfortable confronting the idea that Bush stole the election, as documented by greg palast here:



He discovered that ninety-four thousand (94,000) people -- over half of them African American --were put on a "scrub list" in Florida by then Secretary of State Katherine Harris and Governor Jeb Bush. This criminal behavior resulted in the people on the scrub list being blocked from voting in the 2000 election.

When the NAACP sued the voting data company, ChoicePoint's DBT, for violating the civil rights of thousands of Florida black citizens, they won their suit. DBT admitted that only 5% of the people listed on the "scrub list" were unqualified to vote. In other words, 89,300 voters on the 2000 scrub list should be re-entered on the Florida election rolls as qualified voters. Florida did not rectify this mistake and reinstate the illegally disqualified voters by the time of the 2002 election. And as yet there is no evidence to indicate that they have been reinstated for the 2004 election.

The fact that Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris were never prosecuted for this heinous crime is part of the Bush II junta's long line of illegal activities, which include the non-prosecution of such criminals as Bush friend, Ken Lay.

1) For all this anger directed at people who voted for Nader, is there any for the 310,082 Democrats who voted for Bush in Florida (13% of the democrats in the state, up 5% or 120,000 votes from 1996)? Because it seems that Gore's loss of democrat votes hurt him much more than Nader's votes.

2) Polls in Florida that asked "If these were the only two presidential candidates, who would you vote for?" Bush still came about ahead by 2% (49 to 47). That seems to negate any argument that if Nader hadn't been running Gore would have picked up votes.


So to those who say Nader cost Gore the election, can you offer any evidence to support your claim?


Many African-Americans were denied the right to vote at all, either through intimidation delivered by a highway patrol checkpoint that just happened to be set up near a polling precinct in Leon County, or through policies that incorrectly purged many African-Americans from the voting rolls and then denied them the chance to correct the errors on Election Day 2000.

"That election was a coup," says the Rev. Griffin Davis, 64-year-old pastor at Hilltop Baptist. "It was unspeakable, OK? It was a power thing, a political thing, a hostile takeover."

According to the Miami Herald, more than 170,000 Florida voters "ruined" their presidential ballots by either voting for more than one candidate or by not marking their ballot in a way that could be read by ballot-counting machines. In a June 2001 report, the U.S. Civil Rights Commission found that disenfranchisement "fell most harshly on the shoulders of African-American voters." One newspaper review of voting records shows that nearly 9 percent of the votes cast in majority-black precincts went uncounted in Florida in 2000, compared to "just" 3 percent of the votes statewide. The Civil Rights Commission cited estimates that black voters were nearly 10 times more likely than whites to have their ballots rejected.


The dismayed reaction to Nader's candidacy has its origins in the election of 2000. Nader won 2.7 percent of the vote that year as the Green Party candidate. According to the Nader-as-spoiler myth, Al Gore could have won in Florida with fewer than a thousand of Nader's 97,000 votes. And if one-third of Nader's voters in New Hampshire had marked their ballots for Gore instead, Bush would not have won that state's electoral votes and the presidency.

It's presumptuous to assign Nader supporters' votes to any other candidate. Each made his or her own decision, and surely most fully understood that the race between Gore and Bush was extremely close. The closeness of the race hurt Nader more than anyone - he had hoped to win 5 percent of the vote nationwide, elevating the Green Party's status. Instead he received about half that, because many supporters decided in the final weeks that a vote for one of the major party candidates could make a difference.


Here's a bit of advice for those who don't support Nader or other Greens. If you don't like the Green candidates, don't vote for them. And if you want to win an election, go out and get some folks to vote for you -- like that 50 percent of the American voters who represent the largest party in America, the nonvoters. On the way, you might build a party and a platform with some integrity, not just insults.

Jim Crow revived in cyberspace
Help America Vote Act (HAVA) which KERRY VOTED FOR

Simple 26.Mar.2004 19:10


Love your Math. Did you know that of the 50 states only 48 are connected?

If the Greens think not voting for the strongest candidate against Bush is the way to go. I promise to stop voting Green. I know, I know you don't need my vote you keep saying so. But I have to tell you the ones that win without the votes look alot like Bushes. It no surprise American politics like American cars nothing but recalls. If America leaves Bush in office the world should fence it off.

As a FL voter in 2000 . . . 26.Mar.2004 19:12

dumbasses for nader

Yup, I voted for Nader - - in FL - - in 2000. Fact was that I really didn't see FL being as close as it was going to be (check the history - no polls showed it that close - hell, Micheal Moore told a huge crowd in Tallahassee not to waste a vote on Gore, he already had the state sealed) I'm a Dem, but like so many, we were so UNinspired by Gore in 2000, that we voted for Nader. I wanted him to get the 5% which he needed for the Greens to EVER gain credibility in the future. He didn't. Green's didn't.

You Green's taking up this line about there being no proof that Nader pulled votes form Gore - - give me an F-ing break.

I like what the Green's stand for. The fact remains that to enact REAL change, we can not WASTE our votes on issues alone. It's babysteps and yes, I hate it as much as you. The fact that Joe Lieberman and Dennis Kucinich can stand on the same stage representing the same party is a farce. What we need to do is make sure we elect those Lefty Dems, not throw away a vote on someone like Nader.

That being said, I am not inspired by Kerry. He will lose in Nov for that very reason. The problem that so many face in this political microcosm that is Portland, is NO ONE seems to understand there is a HUGE part of this country that does NOT HATE BUSH. Maybe they don't love him, but that doesn't mean they're inspired by Kerry to vote against him. Nor are they stupid enough to vote for Nader.

And either am I.

how many ****ING TIMES 26.Mar.2004 20:34


Bush was never elected.

corrupt SCOTUS decision appointed Bush to the White House (with help from Diebold voting machines, his brother Jeb, Governor of Florida, and racist oppression of voters by Secretary of State Katherine Harris).




so not only is Bush the first pResident to debut at White House with a convicted criminal record [cocaine],

he was never legitimately elected by vote of the American people, or by vote of Electoral College.

"You Green's taking up this line about there being no proof that Nader pulled votes form Gore - - give me an F-ing break."

--"this line"???!??????!??? there ISN'T ANY PROOF OF IT. the irrefutable numerical proof of what happened in pResidential Selection 2000 is posted above. and it's going to take a lot more than cavalier statements like "give me an F-ing break" [or 'jlii's "Love your Math. Did you know that of the 50 states only 48 are connected?" __WHATEVER__ the **** that's supposed to mean] for you to make your non-existent case.

i'd just like to stop here for a second:

CAN EITHER OF YOU - 'jlii', 'dumbasses for nader' - READ THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE?

because for the second time in this comment, the evidence and reference links are all in very plain sight, already posted above [see Florida, Again comment].

310,082 Democrats voted for Bush in Florida (13% of the Democrats in the state, up 5% or 120,000 votes from 1996) in 2000.

theorize unsubstantiatedly all you want.

blab about Nader, Democrats, 'two party system' (ha ha for REAL dreamers) and even the corporate-media-brainwashed unreachable lost cause [yeah, *YOU* gonna 'convert' all of 'em *personally*, 'jlii' and 'dumbasses for nader'??] Bush-toting masses all you want.

Bush is not a legitmately elected holder of White House pResidency.

He rigged the last election - with the help of Diebold, his Brother Jeb and Florida Sec. State Katherine Harris.

and he will rig this one - with the help of Diebold  http://www.verifiedvoting.org, AAA-HH-Nold (California) and Brother Jeb (Florida).

with - or without - Nader, Kerry, Kucinich, Edwards, Dean, you, me, 'jlii', 'dumbasses for nader', or anyone else.

and for 'jlii' and 'dumbasses for nader' -

all the facts and references presented on this comment thread should be setting off LOUD ALARM BELLS (assuming you can deflate your egos for even a microsecond) that the remaining shreds of 'democracy" in America are being flamethrowered as we speak.

if you want to do something about it:  http://www.verifiedvoting.org

http:// http://www.ericblumrich.com/gta.html
if you are not transforming, you are forming trance
portrait of 'dumbasses for nader' in his natural habitat
portrait of 'dumbasses for nader' in his natural habitat

This is boring 26.Mar.2004 21:44

George Bender

Democrats remind me of battered women who just can't bring themselves to leave their abusers.

We've already had this debate. If anyone is just tuning in, go back to the homepage and type "Nader" into the search engine at the top right. You can then spend hours reading all the standard arguments pro and con. I don't see any point in doing it all over again. We've made up our minds. The Nader train is leaving the station and Democrats have no power to stop it. We don't need their votes.

The next task is to get Nader on the Oregon ballot. To do that we need to get 1,000 registered voters together in one place at the same time. Join us on April 5, 6 p.m., Roseland Theater, 8 NW 6th Ave. It's free. If you're not already registered to vote you can register there.


what George said 27.Mar.2004 01:13

simple math

and thanks again George for your assertion of common sense and focused energy.

to anyone reading this who doesn't particularly care about any of the Presidential candidates' campaigns, but still wants to help protect democracy - please go here:

Where was Gore 27.Mar.2004 07:28


I think it would be laughable if it wasn't so serious. Nader did not cost Gore the election. GORE COST GORE THE ELECTION. At some point Gore will have to take the full blame for his own campaign. I mean the guy agreed with GW (Global Warming) Bush on thirty-two major points in the 2000 presidential debates. As one commentator described it it was more of a love fest than a debate. Hell Gore couldn't even carry his own home state. I am sick and tired of all the idiot democrats blaming Nader for GW being in the White House. Now we have Kerry, cut from the same cloth as GW. Insider, bonesman and all. F..k Kerry. I'm voting for Nader.