Sorry, for the diversion back to getting an anarchist dog catcher elected:)/
Travis
>
> On Apr 1, 2007, at 10:14 PM, tfast wrote:
>
> > Sure BUT. His program as articulated would be supported by most
> > lefties so
> > why not support anyone who is pushing that agenda. I agree that the
> > putative left needs to go local as its only hope of rebuilding
> > itself and
> > having any popular purchase. But there also needs to be some
> > coherency.
> > Otherwise so many points of light and all that.
>
> One of the reasons I voted for Nader twice is that I thought it might
> help build the Greens, or some third party movement. Nader himself
> has enormous credibility, even among the broad U.S. pop, so it looked
> like there was some potential there. But nothing came of it. Kucinich
> lacks even that promise - he has no credibility, no sex appeal, none
> of the sort of smiling optimism Americans love in their politicians.
> He doesn't have the organization, the discipline, nor the money to
> run a serious national campaign. He wants to create a Department of
> Peace, for heaven's sake - that's going to bring the campaign some
> support! So if by support you mean go out and work for the guy, it
> would seem like a waste of time. If you mean vote for him in a
> primary - sure, why not? But it'd be an empty gesture.
>
> The campaign this time is so front-loaded - the money race is
> seriously on, and the nominations are likely to be decided by
> February. The only people who vote will have at most three names in
> their heads to choose from.
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk