"Michael J. Smith" wrote:
>
>
> > 3) Could a leftist by your definition, assuming Sanders isn't one,
> > ever win an election outside Woodstock or Berkeley, or even there?
>
> Dunno, and I don't much care. I'll grant your point, though, at
> least to the extent that there are probably better tasks for a leftist,
> whatever that is, than trying to get elected to the Senate -- at least
> until conditions in this great country change significantly.
When someone explains a policy which will create an overwhelming majority of "leftists" in Congress, a leftist president, and overwhelming leftist majorities in over 2/3s of state legislatures, then we might sit up and listen.
And that will _never_ happen. There will never be a majority of even "left social-democrats" in the U.S. Congress, and no "left" senator will _ever_ do anything more for us than Wayne Morris did. If Sanders were a Wayne Morse, with Wayne Morse's principles and guts, then it might make a difference.
Can anyone tell me how one socialist in the Senate can even add one kopeck to a ruble for one unemployed person in the u.s.? I mean, why all the excitement over what would be _at most_ a purely symbolic 'victory' for the left, any kind of left.
Carrol