Mark Bunster wrote: > > > I don't think the statistical viability rests on a poll of your group > of friends. I voted for Nader, but I certainly would have voted for > Gore in his absence--not of any great love, but because George Bush is > not someone I'm interested in seeing over and over again for the next > four years. Aside from the fact that it really *really* won't make any difference for the next four years, those who desire a progressive movement in the U.S. have to make up their mind. There will not be any such movement until the Democratic Party is destroyed. Its only purpose in existing is to act as a barrier to such a movement. Anyone who voted for Gore in 2000 in effect cast a vote to someone to the right of Buchanan in 2012. I'll be 82 by that election, but Coxes who make it to 70 usually make it to 85+ so I may be around to sneer at those who are at that time claiming that some mild overt racist is really the lesser evil. Carrol
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 11/27/00 EST