Ralph the Leninist

[Max Sawicky]

> [The piece raises two questions: 1) Is this really Ralph's strategy? and
2)
> Is it correct?]

No and no.

I noted before the difference between saying Bush and Gore
are the same and a "worse the better" posture.

There should be no surprise at the idea that a goal of the
Greens/Nader would be to destroy the Dems.  That's the
only way they would come to equal the major parties in
prominence.

Of course, when you provide competitive pressure on
another party, they adapt to meet that threat.  So the
'threat' to the Dems is as much a threat to make them
change as it is to replace them.  THAT'S THE ONLY
WAY YOU APPLY CREDIBLE PRESSURE.  By
contrast, we can all see how Jesse's periodic fits
have worn completely thin.  No threat, no pressure.

It could be that RN is actually calibrating his moves
to cause a Gore loss.  I wouldn't know, but I can
understand why.  As the backbiting escalates, any
Nader symp is likely to feel increasingly p.o.'ed at
the statements of our pro-Gore comrades.  I feel
this every time I read another liberal attack on RN
in the Post, knowing full well no response would
be permitted in the same forum.  There has only
been the obligatory column by RN himself today,
which I didn't think much of, BTW.

Just as the Clinton and Gore White House's have
and would provide no forum for progressives.  Clinton
has feted people like Anthony Robbins and Charles
Murray.  He had a forum on Soc Sec which basically
shut out left critics of the scare campaigns.  Very
annoying, to put it mildly.

So all I can say in response to this sort of attack
is "triangulate this."

mbs


>