“There’s no fear of splitting the “left” vote in such a case and having the ‘greater evil’ win, but…“

And the reality is that other than 5-6 swing states with close margins, and another 8-10 states which are somewhat of a toss-up, rest all states are solidly red or blue. That’s exactly why candidates from both major parties focus their campaigning only on a handful of states out of 50.

So there’s no excuse whatsoever for someone who considers herself a true progressive/liberal living in say, California, to NOT vote for a third party like the Green Party (given that her principles and views are more aligned with the GP than the Democratic Party), if she knows and agrees that Democrats are more or less, the same as Republicans. There’s no fear of splitting the “left” vote in such a case, but increased numbers voting for third parties will

a. help that party register 5% and be qualified for federal funds next time around, as well as not waste resources on collecting signatures for ballot access next time around; and

b. when others see a third party getting some significant number of votes on the national scene, it’ll pique their interest and it’s a positive step forward. That’s exactly how I first found out about the Green Party and that led me to explore their platform, compare it to the Democrats, and then to lend my support to GP and people like Nader. So I disagree with the argument (that some give) that GP needs to build itself up from bottoms-up and a top-down approach of contesting a National Presidential election without having grassroots support is meaningless and not productive.

Similarly, for a progressive/liberal living in a state like Texas, there’s no reason to vote for a Democrat. Might as well put my vote to a better use by voting for a third party instead of wasting it on a Democrat candidate.

Also, something to keep in mind that Obama won North Carolina and Indiana because of Barr being in the race. His margin of victory over McCain is smaller than Barr’s percentage share of votes (and making the usual assumption).

I read so many arguments similar to the one made by the author here, as a reason to vote for Obama, and all of them ignore the simple reality that we have a winner-take-all system in states (with a few exceptions), which implies it’s actually somewhat easier to vote with your conscience in slam-dunk states without letting the greater evil come to power.

This election was more about the unmentioned expiation of the white liberal guilt (among other factors), so it was understandable and expected that third parties will have to wait another four years. But I respectfully disagree with all this intellectual reasoning and hand-wringing over justifications to vote for Obama over McKinney (or Nader) knowing how the electoral system functions. No amount of the former can get around the simple fact of the latter.

peace.

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/468.html

Reality is very painfull.

By Joshua Frank

November 06, 2008 — – Tuesday’s celebration hangovers have finally started to wear off, and the pieces are beginning to fall into place. Change will be coming to Washington in January, but it is difficult to decipher what form it will take. Early clues, however, suggest that Barack Obama’s administration will prove unlikely to alter the fundamental political machinery …

Full article

I don’t have a television and have seen zero minutes of the televised coverage of recent events. I listen to National Public Radio and read some web-based news and continue to be basically appalled. So, no, I don’t get caught up in the hype and hysteria– at all.

As an example, a black commentator on NPR yesterday remarked how the Obama election meant that anyone could be president of the U.S., no matter what their race. But then he turned around and complained about Ralph Nader’s repetitive running for President, since he said Ralph did not have a chance to win.

Cynthia McKinney is viewed by women of color as a leader of a movement, not a viable presidential candidate. Jesse Jackson had no chance, nor Al Sharpton. Dennis Kucinich is treated like a joke.

So, when they say anyone can be president, there is a huge qualifier that excludes almost anyone of any race who has integrity.

Then, we turn around and hear Nancy Pelosi discussing how Obama will govern “from the center”. So much for change.

Here are some good ways to analyze what sort of change Obama brings after his first term in office:

1) what will be the ratio of executive salary to employee salary in this country?

2) what will be the ratio of imprisonment of black males versus white males in the society?

3) how many illegal wars of aggression did Obama end by removal of American occupying forces?

4) how much change went into the cabinet composition of the Obama administration from prior Democratic and Republican Administration? — was/is there real change in key personnel?

5) what will be the level of environmental healing under an Obama administration? — will his climate change initiatives benefit climate or pour billions of more dollars into the economy without reducing greenhouse gases?

6) what will Obama do to protect species at risk of extinction that Bush failed to list under the Endangered Species Act by the hundreds?

Any number of other measures of change could be established.

I will be more than happy to give credit where credit is due.

A great start would be to see some executive orders repealing Bush orders that limit American freedom and harm the Constitution.

Let’s see if the Left Media even bothers to provide analyses as they did of the Bush Administration’s egregrious wrongdoing.

Stan Moore
Petaluma, CA

I saw the clips from of the excitement, hope and enthusiasm from overseas.

This guy is really smart and he has to have more morals than Clinton. It’s just hard not to see this as JFK all over again. I am starting to believe that his own ego will not allow him to turn away from this adoration. I don’t think he is going to be tricked for very long, if at all, and so if he makes decisions to betray the hope and excitement that he has inspired, he is going to do it with full knowledge that he is a tool and not the leader that the better part of the nation and the world believes him to be. I’m not sure he can do that. Not with two young kids and the rest of the world looking up to him.

We can hope.

Hey, the guy grew up with Chicago Rules – so he knows how to play hardball.

Although I have some grave reservations about putting hyperpartisan flunkie Rahm Immanuel as White House Chief of Staff, I see him as a conduit that could easily lead to the placement of Hillary Clinton on the Supreme Court for a lifetime appointment. To me, that would be the best place for Hillary Clinton to serve her country (and me) effectively and meaningfully. I would not complain if a second position came up if Obama/Immanuel put Bill Clinton in there with Hillary for the first wife/husband collaboration as justices on the Supreme Court. Probably an impossible proposition, but it would be even nicer if closed circuit monitors were installed in chambers and we could watch the private engagements between the Clintons and Scalia/Thomas and even Alito/Roberts. I wonder if Judge Roberts ever loses his cool…

But seriously, if Obama puts a proactive jurist devoted to the public good (and against the corporate/elite interests) he will have accomplished something substantial that goes way beyond symbolism and really affects people’s lives in a positive way. And he would upset the conservatives and possibly win a second term.

Stan Moore
Petaluma, CA

What about real solutions to Global Climate Change?

My response: in a recent diary on DailyKos.com, I suggested some real solutions to global climate change. I would count it as a political victory if any of you could get these ideas discussed at important political functions. See if you can’t get some group like Americans for Informed Democracy to talk about this stuff — I think I have an “in” with these people and will certainly try. Or maybe you could try to persuade “A Siegel,” an individual on DailyKos.com who posts diaries nearly every day, that capitalism and real ecological solutions do not mix. Anything along those lines would be great.

Rejecting capitalism is only the first step, however, in getting society to recognize its interest in ecosystem resilience. The danger of complete ecosystem collapse is growing yearly with abrupt climate change and with all of the other thnigs capitalist business throws at the natural environment (e.g. overfishing). The ultimate solution, I feel, is to promote a sort of “ecological discipline” by which people would structure their lives around these things, with the understanding that if it has not been integrated into the individual’s corpus of habits, it won’t take a high enough priority to be worth doing often enough to count.

As for the “hope” that people understand in Obama’s election, part of it approximates the feeling one gets when feeling that the torture of life under the Village Idiot may in fact soon come to an end. This isn’t too hard to understand, right?

Of course there are wingnuts, bible-thumpers and the like North of the border as well. They just haven’t been running things for the last 20 years (despite a good strong bid in the person of Harper).

–

Apologies for my long absence, friends. Personal face-space life caught up with me in a big way this summer — a good way, too, but very involving. Have been working on boats (mine and others’), planning a garden, and growing into a new ‘more-than-friendship’. Also cooking for various people on various occasions, starting a worm composting bin, entertaining visiting friends, getting around car-free, continuing to explore my new town, and suchlike usual and customary activities. Somehow there has been little time left for things like blogging, knitting, writing — even reading has been less of a feature in my life than normal.

But winter is upon us (hard frost last night, ice on unprotected pools of water this morning); southeasterly gales tonight, possibly freezing rain. Darkness falls early since the clock change; the evenings are loooong and cold, and rather than rowing all over the local bays, visiting other boats, hiking, etc. I will probably be spending more time snuggled up with the laptop and the wood stove, reporting from my curious little 21st/19th century world.

As to the recent election, I breathe a small sigh of relief; am scheduled to go Stateside for a couple of weeks to visit far flung friends, ex-colleagues and family, and it will be slightly less scary to visit Obama’s America than McCain’s. The border thugs may be slightly less offensive and bullying; the mood of the people may be slightly less fecklessly martial (and more optimistic?). I see no prospect for any President — no matter how intelligent or resolved — to rescue industrial-capitalist civilisation from its structurally inherent death spiral; but I foresee less bad craziness from this gang than we might have expected from the McCain/Palin gang. I know a sigh of relief is not exactly cheering and dancing in the streets, but hey — it’s better than nothing!