[Peace-discuss] Re: [Peace] Norman Solomon's plea.

Thu Oct 30 12:17:43 CDT 2008

I think y're being very charitable, Bob... and you may be right. Wish I could see it yr way -- it'd help me get rid of a lot of anger and despair.
 --Jenifer

--- On Thu, 10/30/08, Brussel Morton K. <mkbrussel at comcast.net> wrote:

From: Brussel Morton K. <mkbrussel at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Re: [Peace] Norman Solomon's plea.
To: naiman.uiuc at gmail.com
Cc: "peace discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
Date: Thursday, October 30, 2008, 12:01 PM

Interesting conjecture! Perhaps, one should ask Nader about it. --mkb

On Oct 30, 2008, at 4:38 AM, Robert Naiman wrote:

> I don't think Nader and most people in the Nader campaign are
> motivated by a desire to see McCain elected. I think that they are
> trapped by the apparent logic of the political strategy that they have
> chosen. From Nader's point of view, the logic of an independent run is
> the ability to get alternative ideas into the media. But past a
> certain point, the media will only report on the Nader campaign if it
> threatens to be a spoiler. So, in order to get into the media - and
> get people's attention more generally at this point in the campaign -
> they have to threaten to be a spoiler. If they focused on running up
> the Nader vote in Texas, few would pay attention.
>
> This is an intrinsic problem of third party electoral strategies in
> the U.S. at this point in most places. (With the exception, for
> example, of New York state, where fusion parties are allowed.) Most
> people will ignore third party runs, unless they threaten to alter the
> dynamics of an election. So the only way, most of the time, to get
> noticed is to threaten to play the role of spoiler. This dynamic
> pushes third parties to behave in increasingly spoiler-like ways, even
> if they don't start out with that intention.
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Brussel Morton K.
> <mkbrussel at comcast.net> wrote:
>> To which I agree…  The effort should be to prevent a MaCain-Palin
>> administration. As Solomon notes, it is disturbing that
>> The Nader campaign actually seems to be gunning for swing states  
>> in the
>> stretch drive of the campaign, as if to maximize the chances that the
>> Nader-Gonzalez ticket could be a factor in how the electoral votes  
>> end up
>> being divided. Last week the Nader campaign announced that,  
>> beginning on
>> Oct. 28, "Mr. Nader will make his final rounds campaigning in  
>> traditional
>> swing states Florida, Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania."
>> As if he would prefer to see Obama defeated. Will they then  
>> celebrate?
>>
>>
>> Needed for This Election: A Great Rejection
>>
>> October, 30 2008 By Norman Solomon
>>
>> It could be a start -- a clear national rejection of the extreme  
>> right-wing
>> brew that has saturated the executive branch for nearly eight years.
>>
>> What's emerging for Election Day is a common front against the  
>> dumbed-down
>> demagoguery that's now epitomized and led by John McCain and Sarah

>> Palin.
>>
>> A large margin of victory over the McCain-Palin ticket,  
>> repudiating what it
>> stands for, is needed -- and absolutely insufficient. It's a start

>> along a
>> long uphill climb to get this country onto a course that approximates
>> sanity.
>>
>> McCain's only real hope is to achieve the election equivalent of  
>> drawing an
>> inside straight -- capturing the electoral votes of some key swing  
>> states by
>> slim margins. His small window of possible victory is near closing.
>> Progressives should help to slam it shut.
>>
>> Like it or not, the scale of a national rejection of McCain-Palin  
>> and Bush
>> would be measured -- in terms of state power and perceived political
>> momentum -- along a continuum that ranges from squeaker to  
>> landslide. It's
>> in the interests of progressives for the scale to be closer to  
>> landslide
>> than squeaker.
>>
>> As McCain's strategists aim to thread an electoral-vote needle, it

>> cannot be
>> said with certainty that they will fail. Who can credibly declare  
>> that an
>> aggregate of anti-democratic factors -- such as purged voting  
>> rolls, onerous
>> requirements for voter ID, imposed obstacles to voting that target  
>> people of
>> color, inequities in distribution of voting machines, not counting  
>> some
>> votes as they are cast, anti-Obama racism and other factors --  
>> could not
>> combine to bring a "victory" resulting in a President McCain
and a  
>> Vice
>> President Palin come Jan. 20, 2009?
>>
>> Under these circumstances, the wider the real margin for Obama  
>> over McCain,
>> the less likely that McCain can claim sufficient electoral votes  
>> to become
>> president.
>>
>> Progressives are mostly on board with the Obama campaign, even  
>> though -- on
>> paper, with his name removed -- few of his positions deserve the
>> "progressive" label. We shouldn't deceive ourselves into
seeing  
>> Obama as
>> someone he's not. Yet an Obama presidency offers the possibilities

>> that
>> persistent organizing and coalition-building at the grassroots  
>> could be
>> effective at moving national policy in a progressive direction. In  
>> contrast,
>> a McCain presidency offers possibilities that are extremely grim.
>>
>>  Some progressives, as a matter of principle, have come to a  
>> different
>> conclusion. They're eager to cast their votes for a presidential  
>> candidate
>> (Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney) who can't win.
>>
>> Of course people's votes are entirely their own, to do with as  
>> they see fit.
>> But the right to do something is distinct from the wisdom of doing  
>> it.
>>
>> Last week, a mass email from the Nader for President 2008 campaign  
>> began by
>> telling supporters: "Ralph Nader is at 5 percent in The Show Me  
>> State --
>> Missouri. And he's moving up. That's according to the most
recent  
>> CNN/Time
>> Missouri poll." The celebratory tone of the message was notable. 

>> Nader was
>> polling at 5 percent in a crucial swing state -- where polls  
>> showed that
>> McCain and Obama were in a dead heat. No wonder, on the same day  
>> as the
>> email message, McCain spoke at rallies in suburbs of St. Louis and  
>> Kansas
>> City.
>>
>> Nader's potential effect on the election may be too small to  
>> increase the
>> chances of a McCain victory. But from all indications, even if  
>> McCain and
>> Obama were tied in polls across the country, the Nader campaign  
>> would be
>> proceeding as it is now. What does that tell us about the logic of  
>> pressing
>> forward with a vanguard approach even if it might serve the  
>> interests of
>> right-wing forces that most progressives are straining to roll  
>> back in this
>> election?
>>
>> From the 1960s through the '90s, Ralph Nader had an unparalleled  
>> record of
>> fighting for progressive reform. But the 2008 campaign of Nader and
>> running-mate Matt Gonzalez has a frozen-in-time quality. Their  
>> campaign
>> makes an electoral argument that focuses largely on Democrats, not
>> Republicans. Much of Nader's pitch for votes is centering on the  
>> charge that
>> Democrats are as corporate and compromised as ever -- and in many  
>> ways he's
>> right. But he ignores the reality that Republican leaders keep  
>> getting worse
>> and more right-wing; they are clearly more dangerous than many  
>> assumed a
>> decade ago.
>>
>> The historical trend is clear: Bush-Cheney have been further right  
>> and more
>> reckless than even Newt Gingrich, who was further right than  
>> Ronald Reagan,
>> who was further right than his Republican predecessors. And Palin  
>> speaks for
>> herself.
>>
>> My former co-author Jeff Cohen puts it this way: "Focusing on  
>> Democratic
>> corruption is not the problem. The problem is developing an electoral
>> strategy that fails to acknowledge how increasingly extremist  
>> Republicans
>> are. It reminds me of that George Carlin joke: 'Here's a
partial  
>> score from
>> the West Coast -- Dodgers 5.' An electoral strategy has to assess
the
>> current positions of BOTH teams."
>>
>> At this point, is an Obama victory a cinch? Maybe not. Consider  
>> this New
>> York Times reporting published on Oct. 24: "Pollsters say there  
>> has never
>> been a year when polling has been so problematic, given the  
>> uncertainty of
>> who is going to vote in what is shaping up as an electorate larger  
>> than
>> ever. While most national polls give Mr. Obama a relatively  
>> comfortable
>> lead, in many statewide polls, Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain are much more
>> closely matched. Even a small shift in the national number could  
>> deliver
>> some of the closer states into the McCain camp, making an  
>> Electoral College
>> victory at least possible."
>>
>> In fact, it's possible that Obama could win a clear victory in the

>> popular
>> vote while McCain manages to claim enough electoral votes to move  
>> into the
>> White House. Crucial to such an outcome would be Missouri (which,  
>> as the
>> Times notes, "has been a bellwether in every White House race  
>> during the
>> last century except 1956"). Is taking that risk worth the  
>> satisfaction of
>> getting a couple percent of the vote for Ralph Nader for president  
>> in 2008?
>>
>> The Nader campaign actually seems to be gunning for swing states  
>> in the
>> stretch drive of the campaign, as if to maximize the chances that the
>> Nader-Gonzalez ticket could be a factor in how the electoral votes  
>> end up
>> being divided. Last week the Nader campaign announced that,  
>> beginning on
>> Oct. 28, "Mr. Nader will make his final rounds campaigning in  
>> traditional
>> swing states Florida, Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania."
>>
>> All year, the Nader campaign has been asking rhetorical questions  
>> such as
>> (in the words of an Oct. 22 press advisory): "Why is it that so- 
>> called
>> liberals and progressives continue to support Democratic  
>> candidates like
>> Obama whose campaign slogans and rhetoric do not match their stated
>> positions and voting records?"
>>
>> And: "Why do we progressives continue to delude ourselves that we

>> stand for
>> core, liberal values and then work for candidates who demonstrate  
>> that they
>> have no commitment to these values?"
>>
>> This fall, the answers to these largely valid questions revolve  
>> around a
>> truth that trumps many others: A McCain-Palin administration would  
>> be such a
>> disaster that we want to do what we can to prevent it.
>>
>> When I've spoken to dozens of audiences during the two months  
>> since the
>> Democratic National Convention (where I was an elected Obama  
>> delegate),
>> there's been an overwhelmingly positive response when I make a
simple
>> statement about Obama and the prospects of an Obama presidency:  
>> "The best
>> way to avoid becoming disillusioned is to not have illusions in  
>> the first
>> place."
>>
>> Looking past the election, progressives will need to mobilize for a
>> comprehensive agenda including economic justice, guaranteed  
>> healthcare for
>> all, civil liberties, environmental protection and demilitarization.
>>
>> The forces arrayed against far-reaching progressive change are  
>> massive and
>> unrelenting. If an Obama victory is declared next week, those  
>> forces will be
>> regrouping in front of our eyes -- with right-wing elements  
>> looking for
>> backup from corporate and pro-war Democrats. How much leverage  
>> these forces
>> exercise on an Obama presidency would heavily depend on the extent  
>> to which
>> progressives are willing and able to put up a fight.
>>
>> It's a fight we should welcome.
>>
>> Norman Solomon's books include "War Made Easy: How Presidents
and  
>> Pundits
>> Keep Spinning Us to Death" and "Made Love, Got War: Close  
>> Encounters with
>> America's Warfare State." For information, go to:  
>> www.normansolomon.com
>>
>> From:
>> Z Space - The Spirit Of Resistance Lives
>> URL:
>> http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/commentaries/3665
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace mailing list
>> Peace at lists.chambana.net
>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Robert Naiman
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org
> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
>
> Ambassador Pickering on Iran Talks and Multinational Enrichment
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=kGZFrFxVg8A
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20081030/4d45bf88/attachment.htm