politics

You talk about the splintered left and GOP corruption and then you unashamedly defame Democrats in a single breath, wow.

As a reminder, Chief Justice John Roberts as well as Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Amy Coney Barrett all worked the hanging chads case on the side of Bush.

The fact that people still blame Nader instead of the fucks who literally owe their positions to being on the case is such a joke. Like, why does anyone think these pricks ended up Justices? Because they helped steal an election in 2000.

Democrats should win every election by massive landslides. Instead, they spent the last several decades bowing to billionaires and providing controlled opposition that suppressed any actual reform.

And now I no longer hear "vote blue, no matter who" slogan since Chuck Schumer helped the Republicans pass on the budget bill.

I looked at the totals for the 2000 election and found that, had every Nader voter instead voted for Gore, there would have been only two states that would have flipped:

• Florida, by a tally of 2,912,790 Bush to 3,009,741.
• New Hampshire, which would have been 273,559 Bush to 288,546 Gore.

Now, it's entirely possible we still get the ratfucking from SCOTUS and they still throw the state to Bush. But New Hampshire had 4 electoral votes, and had they gone for Gore then it would have been 267 Bush - 270 President Gore.

Bush won because 22,198 people in NH didn't understand that voting for a third-party only hurts the major party that most closely aligns with your ideals.

Truly nothing has changed in 20 years, huh? Still have morons who don't understand first past the post and why we only have two parties.

🎭 Original Claim:

"If it wasn’t for Nader, Al Gore would’ve been our president. So he can fuck all the way off."

🔍 Step 1: Emotional Noise Filter

This claim is loaded with emotional intensity:

It uses blame-framing (“because of Nader”) and moral outrage (“he can fuck all the way off”).

This is outrage induction, not just opinion — it presents Nader’s candidacy as not only consequential, but morally unforgivable.

🛑 Distortion Detected → Emotional Persuasion: The tone demands rejection of a person based on an emotionally charged version of a historical what-if. 📌 Let’s neutralize the distortion using the [[Framing Neutralizer (FN)]]​:

Framed as: “Nader’s candidacy ruined everything, therefore he deserves total dismissal.”

Reframed neutrally: “Some analysts believe Ralph Nader’s third-party run in 2000 may have affected the outcome of the election. The debate remains contentious.”

Notice how that removes emotional judgment and loaded blame, but preserves the subject. 🔎 Step 2: Relevance Check

Is this still a meaningful claim today?

In political history discussions: yes — it’s a key moment often cited when discussing third-party impact.

In personal outrage: less so, unless the speaker is still emotionally processing the 2000 election.

So we ask: is this a political analysis or a grudge statement? 🧩 Step 3: Clarity & Precision Test

Let’s try a mini Precision Breakdown (PB)​:

Core Assertion: Nader’s candidacy caused Al Gore to lose.

Supporting Evidence?: This is debated. Nader got 97,000 votes in Florida; Bush won by ~500. But...

Missing Context?: Gore lost his home state (Tennessee). The Supreme Court intervened. Ballot design confusion (butterfly ballot) also played a role.

Perception Impact: Frames one person as solely responsible — simplifies a complex, multi-factor event.

🧭 Bottom Line via Clarity Compass (CC)​: Direction Assessment Truth Check Partially grounded in historical fact Evidence Check Lacks full context or causal certainty Context Check Oversimplifies election outcome factors Impact Check High emotional impact, blame-focused framing 🪞 Reframed for Clarity:

“There’s debate over whether Nader’s 2000 campaign affected Gore’s loss — but blaming him alone ignores other pivotal factors, like the Supreme Court decision, ballot issues in Florida, and Gore’s loss of key states.”

We can't possibly blame Republicans for ratfucking our country 50 years straight

If Al Gore had gotten out of the way, Nader could have been our president. And where exactly has Al Gore been lately? Did you read Naders post? He makes a lot of good points. Where the eff are the respected leaders on the dem side. They are all doing nothing.

I'm sorry, this has to be satire right? Or are you just 12 years old or something?

You know who should be doing that? The Democrats in the House and Senate. If they cant even do that a bunch of geriatric retired politicians writing a letter to the editor its going to galvanize anything.