The only quibble I would add is that while the politics of a clinton and giuliani are in some ways substantially similar, the republican right base is such a massive and fierce section of that party, that I think they would wring concessions out of giuliani we would find quite terrible. Maybe not the rollback of roe v wade, but, on the public sector, civil liberties and unions, I think a giuliani presidency will vastly overshadow even clinton's dismal swinish behavior.
Hopefully giuliani cannot win the r primary. There is no candidate who can beat him in a general election in the swing states. Flat out impossible. It might be an electoral college landslide. I fear he would be, if less drunkenly extreme than the bushies, much more competent--- and thus much the worse for all.
> I think the problem is that one part of the left is focused on the
> Democratic leadership and the other part is more interested in the base of
> the party and its evolution.
>
> Politics at the top is the preserve of the wealthy and successful and
> encourages compromise and collegiality, so that there is little difference
> between a Clinton and a Giuliani, nor could there be since politicians -
> and
> this would also be true of any third party under capitalism - ultimately
> report to the bond markets. On the other hand, as we also know, there are
> very deep political, social, and cultural divisions and goals which divide
> Democratic activists and supporters from their Republican counterparts.
>
> The differences which exist lower down would be more apparent to those who
> think it's important to track and be involved in political activity at
> this
> level, while the similarities at the top would be at the forefront for
> individuals and groups who are yearning for a new party and who
> effectively
> abstain from mass politics - often counterposing the latter to the need to
> "build the movements", as though the activities were unrelated.
>
>