Its the vote that counts.

In 2000, Ralph Nader ran for president of the United States as the Green Party Candidate. This was the year that the election was almost too close to call, but the Republicans (led by world wide asshole George W. Bush) claimed they clearly won with no debate necessary, and the Democrats (led by now pop culture icon Al Gore) claimed they won but the courts gave it away to the other side. The fact is that with an election that close, neither side has a lot to crow about.
While I clearly favored the Democratic nominee over (rich kid, failed businessman and overall asshole) George Bush, Ralph Nader connected with me a lot more. I went in to the polls knowing that either Bush or Gore would probably win the election, but I voted for Nader anyway. I knew that a "vote for Nader is a vote for Bush" but still couldn't bring myself to vote against my conscious. The fact is, at the time, I didn't really care for Al Gore. There was nothing about him I really disliked, and he clearly was not the (major) asshole George W. Bush was, but given the choices, I felt Ralph Nader would have made a much better president. Actually, as the last six years has shown, it would be hard for ANYONE to do any worse.
What I really mean, I guess, is that it is better to be on the right side and lose, than the wrong side and win. If all people voted for who they honestly thought the best candidate was, regardless of the candidate's supposed "chances" of winning, that the political system (the same one currently led my an asshole named George W. Bush) would work closer to the way it should, and our country would be a better place. Not only would our government more accurately reflect the thoughts and concerns of our nation, but our people would feel a lot better about the system, regardless of winning or losing.

Until next time... Kucinich '08