[lostinny]

537 votes. That was the official difference between Bush and Gore in Florida, out of almost 6 million votes cast. Nearly 100,000 people voted for Nader.

These Nader supporters of course had every right to vote how they wanted, but the prevailing argument at the time by Nader was that there was essentially no difference between Gore and Bush and it was time to send a message to the "establishment."

However you feel about Bush, I think history makes it plain that 1) there was likely a huge difference between a Bush and a potential Gore presidency, and 2) while it may be nice to simply send a message with your vote, we should remember that 0.0000895% of the electorate of a single state can determine the outcome.

[Diederich]

Right. I've engaged in a couple of such discussions on reddit. To say I'm unhappy with the two major candidates would be a huge understatement.

But no matter how strong our emotions are about such things, should be extremely clear-headed about what our vote means. And, the point I try to hammer home, that we each need to take full responsibility for the result of our vote.

If you want to vote to 'let the world burn', as quite a few Bernie supporters are talking, so be it.

If you want to vote to 'send a message', so be it.

If things go very badly after November, then you're not allowed to say "my vote didn't really matter" or "I had no choice but to vote the way I did."

Own your vote; make it, and accept responsibility for your portion of the outcome.

537 out of 100,000 Nader voters in 2000 changed the world, and not in a good way, in my strongly held opinion at least.