Since someone is inevitably going to see this and spout off the same tired argument that Nader is responsible for electing George W. Bush and everything bad that's happened since then, here's my response in a nutshell:
1. Gore won. Bush stole the election. Which is more reprehensible: stealing an election, or exercising a constitutional right to run for office?
2. By saying that Nader "stole" votes from Gore, you're implying that Gore was entitled to victory from the beginning, since theft means to take the property of another person. No candidate for anything owns any votes. They have to be earned.
3. Would you have called Bush a spoiler because 10 million Democrats voted for him in 2000? Or do you only believe in the concept of "spoiler" when it comes to third party candidates?
4. Congress, Bush, and his cronies are responsible for the horrors of the Bush administration. I don't know how people can rationally believe that Nader is responsible for the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, the suspension of habeas corpus, etc.

I could go on, but I'll leave it at that for now.
Enjoy(or not).
[link]