The voice of De Anza since 1967.

La Voz News

The voice of De Anza since 1967.

La Voz News

The voice of De Anza since 1967.

La Voz News

    Opposing viewpoints

    Nader won’t win, so vote Gore instead

    Recently, I saw a representative of the Green Party in the Campus Center. He was wearing a humorous T-shirt that said, “BUSH AND GORE MAKE ME WANT A RALPH!”

    I agree with Ralph Nader on several points, including his opinion of Gov. George W. Bush. “George W. Bush we can dismiss with a summary comment: nothing more than a corporation disguised as a human being,” Nader said last week, according to the website

    However, a vote for Nader is clearly a wasted vote, at a time when we cannot afford to waste even one vote.

    This pithy dismissal of “dubya” doesn’t alter the fact that Nader, with all of his high principles, has no chance of being elected president in 2000. Even if he could win, he would make a lousy chief executive.

    Story continues below advertisement

    Some of the skills needed to be an effective president are the ability to build a consensus, the willingness to compromise for the greater good, and the skills to work out a deal to get at least some of what your side wants.

    Nader is obviously not willing to compromise for the greater good, otherwise he would fold up his tent and throw his support to Vice-President Al Gore. Gore shares positions on important issues like the environment and civil rights.

    Even some of Nader’s own campaign supporters have reportedly asked him to concede defeat.

    They are afraid that even his low percentage of supporters could throw this close election and result in a Bush presidency, and even worse, a Supreme Court guided by Bush.

    In our electoral system, getting 270 electoral votes elects a president. Marginalized candidates, like Nader, have no possibility of getting those Electoral College votes. Bush and Gore each have a chance at the White House. While some of us may be attracted to the pure idealism of Nader, this election is far too important to use your vote to “send a message.”

    Four of the Supreme Court Justices are or will be at least 70 years old in the year 2001. The man we elect to the office of the president this November will most likely appoint between three and four Supreme Court Justices during his term in office.

    A woman’s right to control her own reproductive ability, and various gradations of the search and seizure laws are just the most obvious of the laws that could be affected by the choice of Supreme Court Justices.

    If your civil rights or the civil rights of future generations of Americans mean anything to you, it is imperative that you use your vote wisely. Vote for one of the viable candidates.

    Vote for someone you trust to appoint three or four Supreme Court Justices, guiding that branch of our government for decades.

    Don’t throw your one and only vote away on a candidate who is just making a statement.

    Leave a Comment
    More to Discover

    Comments (0)

    La Voz Weekly intends this area to be used to foster healthy, thought-provoking discussion. Comments should be respectful and constructive. We do not permit the use of profanity, foul language, personal attacks or language that might be interpreted as defamatory. La Voz does not allow anonymous comments, and requires a valid name and email address. The email address will not be displayed but will be used to confirm your comment.
    All La Voz News Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest