Re: RAT At least do no harm

[The Independent Eye <bards@independenteye.org>]

>Nader won't take any Bush votes.  He's left on money and social issues.  What
>republican would vote for that?  Buchannan and the Libertarian candidate will
>pull from Bush, but not as much as Nader's pulling from Gore.

You may be right.  But I feel this argument depends on the assumption that
Left and Right have very clearly defined constituencies.  They do, but only
at the far wingtips.  Bush is working hard to sound pro-compassion,
pro-environment, pro-education, pro-average-Joe, etc., because he sees
votes there that he desperately needs.  I think voter repudiation of
left-wing politics is due more to (a) counterproductive left-wing rhetoric
and (b) the popular perception that the Left just doesn't care about issues
like crime & taxes.  I don't think we have (yet) a nation of 51% staunch
Republican ideologues.  Are single-payer health care or corporate
accountability "left-wing" issues?  Only if they're branded as such, or
clothed by the Left in rhetoric that makes everybody cringe.

By the way, there are good columns in the July 24/31 issue of The Nation on
the Nader factor.  Katha Pollit is pretty critical, and lays out a full
case for the disasters of a Bush Presidency.  Cockburn reviews Supreme
Court choices for the past 50 years and makes a strong case that the Dems
have given us Justices as bad or worse than the Repubs - and that gems like
Clarence Thomas, though appointed by Bush Sr., were approved by a
Democratic Senate.  And Hitchins argues that it may be time to vote our
consciences rather than our nightmares.

Well, back to work.

Cheers-
Conrad




Visit The Independent Eye's website
at <http://www.independenteye.org>.