<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>> I've had the criticism of too much focus on rallies for a long time outside the electoral context as well.</FONT> <P><FONT face=Arial size=2>So what's your suggestion for protesting the war? Write letters? We do do that too. </FONT> <P><FONT face=Arial size=2>>  And you're right that I think grassroots mass movements and building general organizing strengthn is more important than direct electoral politics, since electoral strength builds on solid organization at the base that can be turned out for elections as needed. </FONT> <P><FONT face=Arial size=2>As I understand it, you're actually advocating machine politics, hmm? That's not necessarily a criticism, just a clarification. But as you see itthe point of grassroots political organizing is to turn out the vote.</FONT> <P><FONT face=Arial size=2>>  But I think those spending their time on third party organizing are not only wasting time but doing active harm the way they've approached the issue (running against folks like Wellstone for example), my attitude is that they should redirect the time if they are infatuated with electoral political work.</FONT> <P>I'm not defending (or discussing) any particular third party tactic, or the idea of third party organization. <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>> As for Dean, if the war goes really badly, I think he has a fair chance of getting the nomination-- the buzz he's getting and the national organization he's building is on a scale no "fringe" candidate has had since Jackson in 1988 and the wide open field in 1976.  And his pro-gun stance could get him some odd cultural conservative support that will broaden his base in some midwest and southern states.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I think you're smoking something funny, me.</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>> And I still have a hard cold prediction that Bush will lose next year, almost regardless of who the Democrats nominate (okay, I think he might be able to beat Sharpton, but that's about it).</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Might do, though the Dems are being so happless and craven that they might blow it again. A lot depends on the state of the economy, whether there's another war -- who do you figure is next? Are these loonies loony enough to after Iran next? Maybe Syria.</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>> My bet is that John Kerry will get the nomination in the end, since his strategic waffle on Iraq and war hero and anti-war hero history means he is in the best position to pull together folks from both the hawk and dove wings of the party.  At this point, Lieberman and Edwards are dead because of their strident pro-war positions, so in my mind that leaves only Dean and Kerry as likely nominees, with Gephardt a possibility if he can pull the AFL-CIO endorsement out of the hat.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As he no doubt can, but he can't elected either. the Dems so far lack a Clinton-quality campaigner.</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>And given how genuinely crazy and dangerous the Bushies are, that's a damn shame.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>jks</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><p><br><hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br> <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/finance/mailsig/*http://tax.yahoo.com">Yahoo! Tax Center</a> - File online, calculators, forms, and more