I THINK THAT Supervisor Matt Gonzalez' guest column on voting for Nader/Camejo is right on about the need for diversity, but his remedies are grandiose, false or non-existent ["Why vote for Ralph Nader?" July 14].
Grandiose: "Reform the Electoral College." This requires U.S. and state constitutional amendments, which are not likely. As long as the Electoral College exists, a third-party presidential candidacy is suicidal to one or the other party because of the "winner takes all" rule.
False: "Lack of ideas." If Democrats have no distinguishing policies, then why is Washington in "gridlock" over health care, gay rights, Social Security protection, expansion of unemployment insurance, welfare benefits and the right to sue?
Non-existent: "The two-party system is bad." What party is Nader representing in this election? His own? Sounds like a dictatorship.
The supervisor's well-intentioned piece requires a belief that everything will and must suddenly change. Most observers of American politics take a long view. If you subscribe to the long view, work for it now, while lobbying the major party that is closest to your ideology, to extract concessions for your party's support.
Paul Page San Francisco
Michael Pugliese