>Before everyone stampedes to focusing on the election, I would like to
>see someone at least attempt an argument that it will make a difference
>in the outcome in November. Yoshie has argued on Pen-L that a Democrat
>in the whitehouse would tend to "demobiliz[e] liberal activists from
>protests." I think I disagree on that, but I do fear that the _campaign
>will have such an effect -- and still not affect the electoral outcome.
>Notice, I am NOT arguing that there is no difference between DP & RP; I
>am arguing that the efforts of marxists (and other radicals with
>organizing experience) will be wasted in the campaign, wasted in the
>sense that they will not make a signfiicant difference in the vote,
>while their continued activity within the anti-war movement _would_ have
>an appreciable effect.
>
To be really frank, _none_ of our individual votes, Marxist or not, are
going to make much of a difference. This is an ugly fact that kind of
undercuts every bit of "strategic voting" we worry over.
I mean, here we are, more or less on the leftish end of things, and we're working ourselves into all kinds of odd cul-de-sacs of reasoning because we're trying to find a vote that we can live with. Do we vote for Dean or not? Do we try to support the Greens? Which vote can I cast that will force the Democrats to take notice of us? Why not Kucinich? Do we support one guy in the primaries, with the hope that he'll exact concessions from the guy who actually _does_ get the nomination? Do we adopt the "Vote Democrat, unless it's Lieberman, and only then, vote for the Greens" strategy?
But what does this do for any of us? Not a hell of a lot, really. For one thing. does any of this strategizing actually _result_ in anything? I don't think Howard Dean'd give a shit about my reasoning, even if I reached subtle and complex levels of analysis that Bertrand Russell'd envy. If I tell a candidate that I'm voting for him, or not voting for him, well, that's all _he_ really wants to hear. End of discussion.
So what is all this strategizing _for_? Maybe it's just a way of shunting us into more manageable aggregates; the Dean campaign does recognize that the DLC's distaste for him is an asset, and they can play up the angle of "If you want to see the Democrats get their balls back, support Dean." It'sa nice way to entice people away from voting their consciences too quickly.
But I really think it's not so much strategizing as it is self-delusion. Dwelling on these points may not be constructive, but it does help us tell ourselves that we are _smart_, that we're not just voting along party or tribal lines (even when we do). When we overstrategize our votes, we are actually pretending to be a political strategist. We're playing at being a Pat Caddell or a James Carville or a Karl Rove.