-False. I'm going to vote for Kerry, but I won't walk across the street to -campaign for him unless and until he promises something worthwhile. He has -not done so yet.
Which is just the bizarre position for any progressive to take. Your individual vote is almost meaningless, but whether you campaign for a candidate-- even to the extent of praising or dissing him in emails-- has the potential to have a far greater effect by changing multiple votes.
So if it's worthwhile to vote for a candidate, it's worthwhile to campaign for him or her (or at least refrain from campaigning against them). That's where my comment about individualism among the far left comes from-- folks talk about their individual actions but seem to have no sense of collective organizing and the cumulative effects of that individual campaigning. The rightwing is very clear about those effects: they lay out their talking points, broadcast them, then watch their foot soldiers magnify the message across every media source, radio show and Internet source possible.
Seriously, I understand the use of holding a post mortem on the Kerry campaign after November 2nd to evaluate what went right or wrong, but at this point the rightwing is spending all their time analyzing how they can help to attack Kerry and elect Bush, not secondguessing the Bush strategy. I've said in passing that I think Kerry was not aggressive enough in August but what's done is done-- the question is how to emphasize the weaknesses of Bush and the strengths of Kerry's positions in the next two months.
Nathan Newman