You May Only Pick One None of that " A and B" stuff.
A. Nader
B. Kerry
C. Bush
D. The American Public
Well the only reason I opened the thread was to smart off by answering “the American people” but you already have that as a choice, so really there’s absolutely no point to this post whatsoever.
D.
That’s a big ‘D’ in case you missed it. 
Numbers wise it will be “D” of course. In terms of severity, if Bush wins, the several members of the SDMB chapter of the Brotherhood of Bush Bashers[sup]TM[/sup] may be the biggest losers. Depending on whether they choke on their own bile, wear their poor fingers off posting in The Pit, or simply smile and revel in the opportunity for four more years of bitchin’. 
D. Definatly D.
I said it 4 years ago, and I say it now.
HOW THE HELL DO THEY KEEP FINDING THE TWO LOUSIEST PEOPLE FOR US TO CHOOSE FROM?
Who is this mysterious “They” that you refer to? As far as I can tell, it was the American people who were active in politics that chose Kerry by, well, voting for him.
And really, there were a LOT lousier choices out there.
I’ll say A.
This time it’ll be .5 % of the vote.
F. Pollsters
G. Rest of the world
D .
C. I simply don’t understand the D responses. The people could have gotten behind any candidate in the Democratic primaries, the people chose Kerry. Bush is there as incumbent. We have an incumbent vs. a challenger of the people’s choosing. If they choose, how is that a loss? If you don’t wind up with the government you want, blame yourself! Don’t claim victimhood.
D, of course.
Led by the So-Called Liberal Media, who constantly said “Dean” and “unelectable” in the same sentence and who never passed up an opportunity to air the Scream. Who implied that Edwards was too young and hot-headed. And so on. The media led people to think that anyone but Kerry was undesirable as a candidate (and, with the exception of Lieberman and Gephardt, this was a bad thing).
Like what, a rock? Kerry is another member of the Democrat Estalishment, and only slightly more exciting than Lieberman or Gephardt. The Dems had a chance with Dean, Edwards, Clark, or even Kucinich, if they supported him…but the Dems never said boo to the media that was busy smacking them all around like a bunch of red-headed stepchildren. They’re like the kids in school that start to cry when the bullies start picking on them. Buncha pansies.
They get no milk and cookies from me this year,
Funny, I was going to say the same thing.
This post brought to you by the “me too” foundation of America.
I “me too” Otto, too.
Anyway, it’s always the American Public that loses and it will continue to be so until something is done about the entire business of politics. That’s what it’s become, a business. Politicians have forgotten what the purpose of being an elected official is all about, doing what’s best and right for the American people. They only seem to remember it at election time when they make sure to quote that statement “doing what’s best and right for the American people” a lot, then they get into office and do what fits their agenda or what their party or big businesses want them to do.
We never seem to be choosing who is best for the job, it always seems to be a choice between the lesser of two “evils”.
Sorry, but not all of us who caucused for Kerry in Iowa were “misled” by the SCLM. Some of us can actually make up our own minds. I made a judgement as to who I thought had the best chance of beating Bush. i beleive strongly in choosing the most electable candidate for the Dems rather than going for ideological purity and another year of defeat. Just because your decision is different than mine does not mean that mine is objectively wrong. I have seen no reason to regret this decision yet.
And so to the question, I say C. I think that Bush is going down.
And going to a Kerrry rally even got me into a picture in Time magazine! (Strangely, the photo makes it look like I am staring at Kerry’s bottom. OK, actually I was, but only because he was standing on a table that I was sitting at.)
I’m not claiming victimhood here, Bob but I think most people would like to feel they had a LOT more control of the outcome of the primary process before accepting personal responsibility for it. I mean, I’m glad John Stewart is the host of the Daily Show, and I wish Rush Limbaugh weren’t on the air, but I don’t think I had a lot of control over those outcomes as well. I can’t take much credit, or feel much blame, for either. Or for who’s running for President.
I don’t think your position makes much sense.
Whichever candidate wins, so does the American people.
Me too. I chose John Kerry as my candidate before Iowa. Nobody told me too; I thought he was the best choice both to beat Bush and to be President. Basically what this comes down to is “Everybody chose and I don’t like their choice, so I will say they were suckered because I am smarter than they. Nobody of sound mine can feel otherwise.” Which is fundamentally obnoxious.
Since nobody else has done it, I’ll pick Nader (A). He already did a great disservice to his reputation in 2000. Now, he can’t even get the Green Party to support him. So I don’t think he’ll play any kind of a spoiler role, but it’s become clear to most people that by running, Nader could have helped prevent the policies he favors from being enacted. It’s made him look small and selfish, and it’s that much worse for his reputation.