Doug Henwood wrote:
> ... are there
> really any passionate Bush or Gore supporters? - but the whole
> process does serve to set the bounds of acceptable discourse. The NYT
> edit the other day chided Nader for spoiling the pure up-or-down
> choice between Bush and Gore; he threatens to spoil the show.l
>
> Doug
The Clinton/DLC takeover of the Democratic Party happened a decade or more ago and yet the most striking thing about this election, beyond the marvel of staged performances, is the real and deepening split between those supporting the Dems and a less marginalized left-wing, visible thru, if not represented by, Nader.
And it seems that media is playing the role of agenda-setting here, tho unwittingly too. In the attacks on Nader you get a sense of an establishment, but not the conservative one. Good heavens, these are all thirtysomething neoliberals who've moved into the pinnacles of power. The NYT's editorial as well as the celebrities, personalities, and groups coming to Gore's defense make visible something like those Bobo, a generation or segment of the population who have achieve positions of power and affluence and who sware-off the radicalism of their youth or of an earlier age. So education, retirement, and cultural decay have become the hot button issues. For breeder bobos with parental concerns.
So is there a left in ascendancy here? I pooh-poohed ChuckO's remark about asteroids but upon consideration is there perhaps a sea change happening? I don't recall the media so put-off by other aspiring outsiders, past or present. Nader's remarks seem to hit a nerve far more than a Perot or Buchanan ever did and the anti-Nader rhetoric seems to me disproportionate to the prospect of a Bush victory. Old hat to many LBO'ers but Pogo's insight is more relevant than ever.
Dennis Breslin