So what if voting for Nader will make a difference in the election? If you
aren't voting for the person who most accurately reflects your views, isn't
THAT a wasted vote? In my view not voting your concience is sad. Vote for
who you want to see in office.
Peter Horton
DJ DDX KXUA 88.3
www.kxua883.com every Friday night from 10 to Midnight central
members.tripod.com/djddx/djddx
----- Original Message -----
From: Andrea Leistra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 7:33 PM
Subject: Re: discrepancy between Presidential polls
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Erik Reuter wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:00:35AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > > As for Voting for Nader, again, unless you live in one of the
> > > battle ground states (of which there are only 8 at last check) a
> > > vote for Nader is a vote for Nader, it won't affect the outcome.
>
> > Those 8 states account for more than 100 electoral college
> > votes. This is a close election for Gore and Bush, and every little
> > bit is going to count.
>
> There are a lot more than eight, too; according to CNN's count as of
> today, the too-close-to-call states are AR,FL,IA,MI,MN,MO,NH,NM,OR,PA,
> TN,WA,WI, and WV, accounting for 154 electoral votes.
>
> And the Republicans plan to start running pro-Nader ads on Monday in
> OR,WA,and WI, according to an AP article this afternoon. You're deluding
> yourself if you think it doesn't make a difference in those cases.
>
> --
> Andrea Leistra [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> If we could put a man on the moon, why can't we do it again?
>
>
>
