>Let's say a Green party activist knocks on my parent's door in Upstate
>NY. My parents are Dems who aren't far-left but aren't happy with the
>Dem party. They share a decent amount of values in common with most
>Greens. Imagine two different conversations:
>
>* The Green activist tells my parents that they're trying to collect
>signatures for an IRV ballot (let's pretend for the moment you can do
>initiatives in NY even if you can't). The activist explains that if IRV
>passes, in the future my parents can send those Democrats who are too
>beholdened to corporations a message
A message? If you just want to get a message to someone then its much less trouble to write them a quick e-mail or give them a call on the 'phone. They'll ignore it of course, because they can, but you'll save your strength.
> and build the possibility of a real
>alternative -- and that next time they could vote their conscience
>without helping Rightwing Republicans get into office & destroy
>everything they care about.
There's be another reason why they can't vote in line with their convictions next time. There's always some excuse.
> And while they're at it, would my parents
>like to give money to a political fund that's funding a grassroots
>campaign for IRV in 15 battleground states so that the Dems and the
>mainstream media have a reason to start paying attention? If my parents
>had heard about this campaign from other friends who'd been visited by
>activists, if the campaign was being discussed at the liberal church my
>mom attends, and if the activist had their act together -- in short, if
>the Greens were running a decent grassroots campaign -- I'm pretty sure
>my parents would sign the iniative and write a check. They might even
>join the Green party in an election or two, if only to give the Dems a
>scare.
>
>* The Green activist tells my parents that they're running Nader or some
>other candidate and ask for support. When asked, why are you doing
>something that might help Bush get reelected, they get a schpiel about
>needing to make the Dems bleed. My mom, who is one of the nicest people
>I know, thinks for a second about smacking the activist upside the head
>with a poker from the fireplace, then tells them to get lost and never
>come back (my dad rants about the encounter & the general stupidity of
>the Left for several days, and I get to listen to this story every
>single f**** Christmas for the next 3 years). The Green Party and Nader
>have now earned two enemies for life.
Hard core Democrats aren't going to like it. But of course it isn't the Greens who are making the Democrats bleed, its actually the electoral system (which the Democrats don't even want to talk about.) I note that you don't want to talk about it either.
You demand that a potential candidate refrain from even standing for election. Your stated reason is to corral voters into voting for your preferred candidate whose position is anathema to them. You say this is necessary, because that is how the electoral system (which you support because it favours you) works.
Bleed. But remember the wounds are entirely self-inflicted. People are entitled to offer up an alternative in an election, that's what elections are nominally all about. Voters are entitled to vote for the candidate of their choice. Your strategy is to keep the system rigged so that voters are confronted with this dilemma, hoping this will force them to keep voting for you. Fine, tell that to green voters and see if they don't tell you to get lost and never come back. Their strategy is at least principled.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas