Nader: Unsafe in any state

I learned the hard way back in 1996 that voting outside the two-party system simply to enjoy the luxury of "sending a message" can backfire big time.

I was (rightfully) disgusted with both major parties over fundraising corruption -- and despite what has been reported, the Republicans were just as corrupt, if not more so, than the Democrats that year -- and figured Clinton had such a large lead here in Florida that it wouldn't hurt if I indulged my outrage. I voted for crazy Perot. Not because he was my choice, but to register my disgust with the major parties.

Guess what? My vote was one of those that resulted, four years later, in Pat Buchanan getting $12 million from the public till to boost his hateful agenda.

I am mortified. And will remain so the rest of my life.

"Sending a message" in the voting booth is a luxury this nation can ill afford.

There's a real lesson here for you Nader supporters.

-- Rod Proctor

Thank you, thank you, thank you, Todd Gitlin!

Your clear-eyed assessment of the political landscape should be required reading for anyone who is disappointed in Gore and wants to resurrect the '60s. If Bush wins because left-wing purists can't stomach Gore, then they are responsible for the rise of the right wing under Bush.

I'm so tired of left-wing purists who can't take a long view or a realistic view of America. Most of them are safe in liberal districts. I'm not. I work with right-wingers and know that Nazi skinheads live in my part of Ohio. They are all too happy to vote for Bush and against a Jew. Wake up, liberals! The life you save may be your own. Vote for compromise. Vote for Gore!

-- Michael Allen

I find Todd Gitlin's arguments in favor of Al Gore's candidacy convincing. Lots of liberals/progressives are frustrated and would prefer another choice. Nader, although I voted for him in 1996, isn't the answer this time. Gore has made some embarrassing compromises along the road to power, as all politicians must do, unfortunately. But I don't doubt he is the best choice for common sense and common decency in this election. Nader is a great man but shouldn't be allowed to play the spoiler's role in this election. Gitlin is correct in referring to Bush as a "country club airhead." I urge those considering voting for Nader to think again as responsible mature persons. Al Gore deserves our support.

-- Michael McDonald

As a lifelong progressive voter who takes the act of voting seriously, I was, up until a week ago, incredibly conflicted about who I was casting my vote for, Nader or Gore. Not because of any ambiguity between the two on the issues -- Nader is clearly more deserving of the presidency than anyone else running in any other party, as far as I'm concerned. Problem is, as Gitlin and others in Salon and elsewhere have pointed out, Bush and his Cold War handlers threaten to take this country politically, economically and socially back to the Stone Age. I know who I must vote for (although I'll be holding my nose the entire time, if not the next for years): Gore.

I'm an African-American man who cares deeply not only for other African-Americans but for all people of color, the poor and the working class. The Clinton/Gore administration has, for the most part, addressed the issues of these groups with short-term superficial benefits while hypocritically implementing other policies that will result in long-term, potentially irreversible damage. The thought of voting for Gore makes me want to retch. The thought of Bush winning, however, terrifies me to the bone. I ask -- fuck it, implore -- all Nader supporters and fence-sitters who truly care about progressive causes to vote pragmatically this election. Vote Gore, then continue to fight for real change in the myriad of ways that Nader and other great Americans like him have led the way on.

-- Roland Poindexter

Maybe Ralph Nader doesn't understand the nature of the American political system: that we don't live in a Western European-style parliamentary democracy; that small third parties only serve the role as spoiler in our system; that if the Republicans gain control of the executive branch of our government, they will fundamentally affect the American national policy regarding a woman's right to choose, the environment and taxation.

But I think not. Nader is a smart guy, and that makes his decision to lie about the issues in this campaign all the more repulsive. He knows that there are choices in this election. But his decision to feed his ego, and pretend that if voters don't believe 100 percent in his views that they are irrelevant, makes him the biggest hypocrite in the race and erases whatever good he has done over the last four decades. What a sad end to a person who has done so much for progressive politics, to end his career as the left-wing Jerry Falwell.

-- Dan Tyack

• View blog reactions