Shane Taylor wrote:
>
> Shane Mage wrote:
>
> > But it would be a sign of mental vitality, rather
> > than of brain death, for leftists to imagine the
> > impact of a Paul/Kucinich "Third Party" campaign.
> > How would McCain and Clinton *have* to react to a
> > campaign emphatically based on opposition to war
> > and militarism and support for civil liberties and
> > constitutional government? Wouldn't their demagogy
> > be dragged to the left on the only issues of
> > importance before the country in this election?
>
> ... by a demagogic embrace of inequality. As American
> inequality worsens, Ron Paul says abolish progressive
> income tax, decertify unions, and repeal the minimum
> wage. Rather than go after the Fed for not being
> committed to full employment, Ron Paul calls for
> reinstating the deflationary gold standard.
>
> > And if Paul/Kucinich could get or exceed the kind
> > of vote that that idiot Ross Perot got in '92,
> > wouldn't that be great?
>
> Perot won nearly one out of five popular votes in
> 1992. Neither Paul nor Kucinich has half that within
> their respective parties, much less the general voting
> public.
You and Doug are humorless. Gee. What difference does it make that Ron Paul's politics are reactionary and his finance theories vicious. He's not going to win after all. I often disagree with Shane Mage, but here he is spot on.
You and Doug belong in a graduate seminar in political science, not in a political discussion.
Carrol