I agree. However, I was making my argument in the context of a larger discussion on this list whether we should vote for Nader. He might be a hero of corporate wars, but his presidential campaign is phony - a safety valve for disgruntled intellectuals to air their discontent with little organizational or social base. His chance of winning the preseidential election are in the same order of magnitude as dying in a plane crash. Thus the resources wasted on a stillborn presidential campaign would be better spent on building grassroots movements at local levels and either endorsing or running progressive candidates as you suggest.
I can understand that Nader's campaign might be a strategy to pass the 5% treshold to receive federal funding - but that is an entirely different ball game than whether we should vote for Dems or for Nader. That implies a different strategy, aptly suggested by one of Doug's posting which suggested that in the states where either Bush or Gore have a solid lead progressives should vote for nader, otherwise - for Gore.
Doug, BTW, would do us a big favor is he told the list which state is which (MD used to be solid Democrat but the higher "education" industry is producing conservatives and reactionaries at an astonishing rate) instead of hoarding his proprietary model to the paying clients of his.
That would be one of the areas where cooperation between Greens and Dems would really help building a progressive movement.
wojtek