lbo-talk-digest V1 #3285
john.halle at yale.edu
Sat Aug 26 20:29:49 PDT 2000
> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 16:39:22 -0400
> From: sawicky at epinet.org (Max Sawicky)
> Subject: RE: Gore Joins Max in Spending the Surplus
> Nathan Newman wrote:
> >And if Nader if elected would be any more successful in passing the
> >programs over a GOP/conservative Dem opposition, I would be more likely to
> >take Nader more seriously.
> What about the possibility that Gore will be more successful in
> dismantling programs because there won't be any Dem/liberal
> opposition? Worked nicely for welfare reform, clear-cutting, mass
> incarceration, etc. Doug
> Wrong binary. Nader will not be elected, my herculean
> powers notwithstanding. The question is whether Nader's
> ideas change public opinion. If he is dismissed on lesser
> evil logic, the likelihood of lasting influence diminishes.
> A better vote for Nader encourages the next President to do
> more. Anybody in a state where the Gore/Bush difference is
> more than ten points on November 2 should vote for Ralph.
To do more what? Mouth progressive rhetoric or implement a progressive
agenda? Again, what makes you think there is any connection between the
former and the latter? Who will hold Gore's feet to the fire to act on
even the minimal promises he has made so far? Sam and Cokie?
The only way to make sure that Dems get the message that the triangulation
strategy won't continue to work is to send them the same message which
they got with McGovern's defeat in 72. Larger margins for Bush in a few
states only sends the message that when it comes down to brass tacks, they
can play progressives for suckers one more time.
Votes for Gore also reduce the chance that the Greens will receive the
necessary %5 for federal funding.
More information about the lbo-talk