[lbo-talk] Getting Our Money's Worth (Left Behind: Nader numbers)

Yoshie Furuhashi furuhashi.1 at osu.edu
Wed Feb 25 20:54:06 PST 2004


>[lbo-talk] Left Behind: Nader numbers
>John Lacny jlacny at earthlink.net, Wed Feb 25 05:50:06 PST 2004
>
>Lance Murdoch:
>
>>Exit polls show that Nader got more votes from people who would
>>have voted for Bush or who wouldn't have voted than who would have
>>voted for Gore if he hadn't run. Anyhow, he took 1.4% of eligible
>>voters. 48.7% of eligible voters did not vote
>
>And the point is, we need as many of those people as possible to
>come out and vote to actually defeat the Bush regime. That is,
>defeat it in real life, not just "send a message" so that those who
>voted for Nader can feel good about themselves even as the gaggle of
>New Right fanatics maintains control over the reins of power and
>proceeds to destroy Medicaid and Medicare, and then move on to
>Social Security. These are real threats; this is not some silly
>little game.
>
>>Nothing can show me what's going on in the DLC, DNC rather, mind
>>then this attempt to alienate, or at least ignore, the 48.7% of
>>people who do note vote
>
>Is anyone nodding off at their keyboards right now? Because the
>people who keep making this "argument" are just that boring. All of
>us know that the DLC and DNC are lazy and clueless and -- in fact --
>too afraid of the masses to do what it takes to actually defeat
>Bush. All that means is that we have to do it for them. The programs
>of the 527s in the various battleground states are targeted to voter
>registration and turnout in heavily Democratic areas -- which means
>poorer areas, and especially nonwhite areas. This is stuff that is
>actually happening, on the ground, right now.

"Organized labor gave $85 million to the Democrats during the 2000 election cycle, but the Democrats still lost the White House and, even with another $90 million of labor money in 2002, are the minority party on Capitol Hill" ("Labor: Background," <http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/background.asp?ind=P>). I don't know how much other liberal interest groups spent on the Democratic Party in 2000 and 2002. Anyone got the estimates? Also, I'd like to know exactly on what the money was spent. Anyone has any information?

Anyhow, the question that I would like to ask is if organized labor and other liberal interest groups that contribute money to the Democratic Party are getting their money's worth. Can't they spend less on votes for the Democratic Party and receive higher policy returns at the same time?

What if organized labor and other liberal interest groups concentrated their efforts to register new voters and to get them to vote for the Democrats only in the following thirteen states?

***** STATE RESULTS

FLORIDA BUSH 2,912,790 (48.85%) GORE 2,912,253 (48.84%) NADER 97,488 (1.63%) OTHERS 40,539 (0.68%)

IOWA BUSH 634,373 (48.3%) GORE 638,517 (48.6%) NADER 29,374 (2.2%) OTHERS 12,131 (0.9%)

MAINE District 1 BUSH 148,618 (42.6%) GORE 176,293 (50.5%) NADER 20,297 (5.8%) OTHERS 3,743 (1.1%)

MAINE District 2 BUSH 137,998 (45.6%) GORE 143,658 (47.4%) NADER 16,830 (5.6%) OTHERS 4,380 (1.4%)

MAINE At-Large BUSH 286,616 (44.0%) GORE 319,951 (49.1%) NADER 37,127 (5.7%) OTHERS 8,123 (1.2%)

MINNESOTA BUSH 1,109,659 (45.5%) GORE 1,168,266 (47.9%) NADER 126,696 (5.2%) OTHERS 34,064 (1.4%)

MISSOURI BUSH 1,189,942 (50.4%) GORE 1,111,138 (47.1%) NADER 38,515 (1.6%) OTHERS 20,315 (0.9%)

NEVADA BUSH 301,575 (49.8%) GORE 279,978 (46.2%) NADER 15,008 (2.5%) OTHERS 12,409 (2.0%)

NEW HAMPSHIRE BUSH 278,559 (48.6%) GORE 266,848 (46.2%) NADER 22,188 (3.9%) OTHERS 5,700 (1.0%)

NEW MEXICO BUSH 286,417 (47.8%) GORE 286,783 (47.9%) NADER 21,251 (3.6%) OTHERS 4,154 (0.7%)

OHIO BUSH 2,350,363 (50.0%) GORE 2,183,628 (46.4%) NADER 117,799 (2.5%) OTHERS 50,208 (1.1%)

OREGON BUSH 713,577 (46.6%) GORE 720,342 (47.1%) NADER 77,357 (5.1%) OTHERS 19,273 (1.3%)

PENNSYLVANIA BUSH 2,281,127 (46.4%) GORE 2,485,967 (50.6%) NADER 103,392 (2.1%) OTHERS 41,699 (0.8%)

WASHINGTON BUSH 1,108,864 (44.6%) GORE 1,247,652 (50.2%) NADER 103,002 (4.1%) OTHERS 27,915 (1.1%)

WISCONSIN BUSH 1,237,279 (47.6%) GORE 1,242,987 (47.8%) NADER 94,070 (3.6%) OTHERS 24,271 (0.9%)

<http://www.presidentelect.org/e2000.html> *****

Hiring workers to collect signatures costs at least $1 a name. To simplify our calculation, let's say that organized labor and other liberal interest groups want to register one million new voters each in Florida, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Wisconsin; and 300,000 to 500,000 in each of the other six battleground states. Wouldn't $26 million be more than enough for voter registration and turnout efforts for the Democratic Party (especially given that organized labor and other liberal interest groups contribute manpower in addition to money)?

$85 million - $26 million = $59 million

What if organized labor diversified its electoral investments and spent a saving of $59 million on building up the Green Party in the rest of the nation, where regular voters are either decidedly Republican or doggedly Democratic, with other liberal interest groups pitching in here and there?

That way, organized labor and liberal interest groups can make sure that the Democratic Party presidential nominee will carry the electors of the battleground states while putting organized electoral pressures on the Democratic Party to move to the left -- thus getting more policies favorable to the working class without spending more than before. -- Yoshie

* Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/> * Calendars of Events in Columbus: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html>, <http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/> * Student International Forum: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/> * Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio> * Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>

More information about the lbo-talk mailing list