>I don't know who this "Bill" is you are responding to, but he doesn't
>give a very good presentation of the case against supporting Kerry.
You idiot, if you haven't read what I said, then how on earth can you dare to make any judgement about the case I make. In fact your premise that I was making any such case (a premise apparently based entirely on the response of someone else to what I wrote) is wrong. Personally I don't have any preference between Nader and Kerry. It merely offends my sensibilities that those who do prefer Nader are being blackmailed to support Kerry.
I wasn't making a primary case against supporting Kerry though. I was merely responding to the suggestion that those who prefer Kerry over Bush, but prefer Nader over Kerry, are obliged to vote for Kerry rather than their first choice because under the electoral system the votes of those who fail to vote for one of the two major parties are not counted towards the final result.
Brian's response deliberately ignored my arguments and tried to change the subject. Instead he blathered about irrelevancies in a desperate attempt to change the subject. If you want to comment on my arguments, then read my arguments. If you don't want to read my arguments, then shut up about them.
Personally, I'd prefer Bush to succeed, because he's an incompetent moron who (in the long term) poses a far greater threat to US capitalists and American hegemony, than (in the short term) he does to gays and blacks in America. Though in the short term it has to be said that American gays and blacks aren't the people being shot down in the streets, or interned without trial in concentration camps by Bush, so their complaints can't even be considered a high priority in the short term.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas