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
>