What evidence is there that Nader voters were in fact potential Gore voters?
That is, is there any data to show that had Nader not been an option, the
people who voted for him would have voted for Gore? Surely that is the
correct question to ask. Nader voters may simply have stayed at home
Hey, Mark, don't bother. The Demicans can't face up to the fact that they
lost because they ran like Repugs, as well as running a generally sorry,
suckass candidate who blew what should have been a sure thing, and they are
deeply resentful because they think they own the votes of the left.
National exit polls said that half of Nader voters would have supported Vice
President Al Gore had Nader not been on the ticket. Thirty percent said they
would not have voted and the rest would have gone for Bush.
In Florida, that would have translated into an additional 30,000 vote margin
for
But the idea that the left cannot be taken for granted is profoundly
frightening to Dems.
And profoundly heart-gladdening for Republicans.
The idea that we might be able to exercise real power is absolutely
terrifying. If we are to put together a winning party, it means
taking votes from
National exit polls said that half of Nader voters would have supported Vice
President Al Gore had Nader not been on the ticket. Thirty percent said they
would not have voted and the rest would have gone for Bush.
Oh, you are bringing in *facts*. You do understand that that isn't
allowed here?
Nathan wrote:
...It just does not cut it to argue that Nader voters did not help elect
Bush
We could only have "helped elect" Bush if Bush had in fact been elected.
Which, of course, was the opposite of what happened...
National exit polls said that half of Nader voters would have
Brad, this is old ground. You think we cannot get beyond the Demicans. We
are just stuck with them. You don't think that is too bad, because you
think they are bascally OK; you haven't a fundamental objection to the way
things are run. You'd like more social democracy, but basically, it
Why do we have to rehash the question of the two-party system? PEN-L'ers
have made up their minds on this question long ago. It seems to me that a
mailing list can best be used to provide new information that will people
to form their own opinions.
Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list:
Couresy of Johnson's Russia list...cheers, Ken Hanly
Putin versus the Oligarchs: Shadowboxing
By Donald Jensen
Donald Jensen is associate director of broadcasting at Radio Free
Europe/Radio Liberty.
President Putin has been widely acclaimed in recent months for reducing the
clout of Russia's
from SLATE: Picking up on Paul Gigot's column in Friday's Wall Street Journal, the NY
[TIMES] front reports that all is not well between President Bush and Senator John
McCain.
A blustery McCain pushed campaign finance onto the Senate floor, disrupting the
President's preferred agenda. More
- Original Message -
From: "Shane Mage" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
National exit polls said that half of Nader voters would have supported
VicePresident Al Gore had Nader not been on the ticket. Thirty percent
said they
would not have voted and the rest would have gone for Bush.
In Florida, that
Russian health experts present latest "shocking figures" - newspaper
Source: Obshchaya Gazeta, Moscow, in Russian 1 Mar 01
A general meeting of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences is now under
way
in Moscow. In addition to addressing organizational issues and electing a
president and
Here, here.
Some of us are old enough to remember the actions of variously named
demican-repugnicrat national administrations operating in the name of
"peace" which in fact continued an economy of war that is still with us.
This does not prevent us from lobbying for campaign finance reform,
Mark Laffey wrote:
What evidence is there that Nader voters were in fact potential Gore voters?
That is, is there any data to show that had Nader not been an option, the
people who voted for him would have voted for Gore? Surely that is the
correct question to ask. Nader voters may simply have
It was the Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas who
noted that FDR carried
out the Socialist program "on a stretcher." But without the
Socialists, the Communists,
and other insurgent forces, the New Deal would have dwelt on National Recovery
Administration-type corporatist
...the costs of not trying, which is what you recommend, are the
same as the costs of failing.
You can think better than that.
First of all, there are lots of ways of trying which do *not* involve
handing elections and offices on a platter to the right-wing
candidate.
Second, the costs of
On Sun, 25 Mar 2001, Doug Henwood wrote:
Mark Laffey wrote:
What evidence is there that Nader voters were in fact potential Gore voters?
That is, is there any data to show that had Nader not been an option, the
people who voted for him would have voted for Gore? Surely that is the
Nathan Newman wrote:
For those who will suffer in pain from RSI injuries without compensation,
those losses will be very real.
Good thing Clinton set right into addressing that problem from his
first day in office, until waiting til the last minute, when he was
distracted by the urgent matter
There have been a number of threads recently on Pen-l which
reflect the super-nationalist navel gazing of Americans.
First, I would ask Brad De Long. If he had a ballot for president
that included Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Ramsey McDonald,
who would he vote for?
Second, I would
The founder of Time magazine, Henry Luce, saw America's historic duty
as the Christianization of China. This sort of thing would necessarily
entail a lot of bloodshed. He'd be very proud of the Bushwa
administration.
The "get China" policy is ridiculous. Historically, China has almost
never
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Second, I would ask Doug why we shouldn't hope that the
American working class doesn't get hammered into poverty,
disease and death since they have been supporting governments
and policies that have been prescribing such medicine for the rest
of the world.
While
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Second, I would ask Doug why we shouldn't hope that the
American working class doesn't get hammered into poverty,
disease and death since they have been supporting governments
and policies that have been prescribing such medicine for the rest
of the world.
The more I
Can Bush be any worse for the rest of the world than Clinton/Gore?
If so in what way. Will the civilians of Yugoslavia and Iraq be any
less fearful of their lives? Will the peasants of Columbia be more
fearful for their lives? Will Canadians fear more for the loss of their
jobs, pollution
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Second, I would ask Doug why we shouldn't hope that the
American working class doesn't get hammered into poverty,
disease and death since they have been supporting governments
and policies that have been prescribing such medicine for the rest
of the world.
A couple of
Yea Doug, a typical American reply. It ain't us, it is all you
foreigners.
I am no apologist for Canadian domestic and foreign policy, indeed
I have a reputation for the opposite as you might surmise, but I
would remind Doug that all these legislative measures were taken
as a result of
Doug,
This is repugnant. You have never heard me defending Canadian
policy on this list. Furthermore, if you knew what I have been
doing, I have been crossing the country speaking and denouncing
Canadian policy in this area.
Paul Phillips
Date sent: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 13:47:23
Doug writes,
A couple of more questions occurred to me while I was in the shower.
Do the 32 million members of the U.S. working class who live in
officially defined poverty deserve their fate? Or worse? How about
the 20-30 million more who live close to poverty? How about the - I'm
On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yea Doug, a typical American reply. It ain't us, it is all you
foreigners.
Hold it, now where did Doug say that? Not even close.
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Henwood" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathan Newman wrote:
For those who will suffer in pain from RSI injuries without compensation,
those losses will be very real.
-Good thing Clinton set right into addressing that problem from his
-first day in office, until
Yes, but in your reply to Doug's transparently sarcastic remark on
Candaian innocence, you seem to be taking Doug as an ardent defender of US
foreign policy...
Doug's displeasure, if I'm reading it correctly, is with the idea that
wishing any working class any kind of economic decline is not a
A healthy US economy would benefit the world's poor. A Gore
Administration would been far more deft in its handling of the current
economic crisis. They would have brought in people with actual civil
service experience, for example. Fiscal policy is a good concrete
example. Reduced taxation on
On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 13:44:52 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So Canadians are responsible for this? Get a life Doug. What the
collapse of the American economy will do is discredit American
imperialism through the rest of the world thereby improving the long
run prospects of the rest of the
On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 12:40:12 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Second, I would ask Doug why we shouldn't hope that the
American working class doesn't get hammered into poverty,
disease and death since they have been supporting governments
and policies that have been prescribing such medicine for
-In the last year, world stock markets have lost US$10 trillion in
value
-If both the US and Japanese economies enter recession, it will be the
first time since 1974 that both of the world's two biggest economies
have been in recession
- The net worth of American households shrunk in 2000, for
NY Times Magazine, March 25, 2001
Julian Schnabel's Lust for Life
By PHILIP WEISS
On a snowy night in Albany last month, 600 people packed a hall at the
State University of New York for a screening of the movie "Before Night
Falls" and cheered wildly when the filmmaker Julian Schnabel came
An economic decline is not just the foundation for non-left alternatives, it
is also the potential foundaton for left alternatives.
As long as capitalism is able to provide a degree of prosperity for a
significant part of the working class there is almost no hope of a left
alternative to the left
Andrew wrote [in a message originally titled "[PEN-L:9466] Re: Re: Re: Demicans or
Repugnocrats (was: ergonomics, etc."]:
A healthy US economy would benefit the world's poor.
Assuming that by "healthy," you mean "like during the period 1992 to 2000," this
benefit
is only by increasing the
We picked up our daughter yesterday. I am just now of wading through a
ton of e-mail.
The tone of this thread is pretty bad. Too much noise relative to the
signal. It's too late to point fingers at its origins.
So for now let us just stop it. No more recriminations.
Canada is bad. Nader
Comments are after different sections
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
, etc.
A healthy US economy would benefit the world's poor. A Gore
Administration would been far more deft in its handling of the current
economic crisis. They would have brought in
On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 21:21:09 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A healthy US economy would benefit the world's poor.
Assuming that by "healthy," you mean "like during the period 1992 to 2000," this
benefit
is only by increasing the demand for non-US countries' exports, the benefits of which
Do you really believe this? I guess this is really what I am
complaining about, US intellectual imperialism. Ugh.
Paul Phillips
From: "Andrew Hagen" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date sent: Sun, 25 Mar 2001
Andrew Hagen:
Nevertheless, we can't stop globalization. We can only soften its
impact. The traditional economies are everywhere in decline. Better
that some people have jobs. In capitalist economies the surest measure
of well-being is employment. The repressive nature of maquiladoras is
Of course you could. But why would Americans since they are the
prime beneficiary. This is the kind of ... agh never mind.
Nevertheless, we can't stop globalization. We can only soften its
impact. The traditional economies are everywhere in decline. Better
that some people have jobs. In
Well, yeah, but it's a stretch to say that this is anything close to the
argument Doug was making...
Steve
On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you really believe this? I guess this is really what I am
complaining about, US intellectual imperialism. Ugh.
Paul Phillips
Jeez, US involvement in Vietnam surely pre-dated the Gulf of Tonkin
pretext. Get your history straight at least. And Serbian genocide?
Sort of cheapens the word, no?
Michael Yates
Louis Proyect wrote:
Andrew Hagen:
Nevertheless, we can't stop globalization. We can only soften its
Only if you think that these issues don't matter can you be proud of
a vote for Nader in 2000. And if you don't think that these issues
matter, I don't know what you are doing here...
So, only Demicans are welcome on Pen-l, an interesting view, if a
contemptible one. All persons of good will
Mark Laffey wrote:
What evidence is there that Nader voters were in fact potential Gore voters?
That is, is there any data to show that had Nader not been an option, the
people who voted for him would have voted for Gore? Surely that is the
correct question to ask. Nader voters may simply have
There have been a number of threads recently on Pen-l which
reflect the super-nationalist navel gazing of Americans.
First, I would ask Brad De Long. If he had a ballot for president
that included Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Ramsey McDonald,
who would he vote for?
If you meant Ramsey
Only if you think that these issues don't matter can you be proud of
a vote for Nader in 2000. And if you don't think that these issues
matter, I don't know what you are doing here...
So, only Demicans are welcome on Pen-l, an interesting view, if a
contemptible one... --jks
I presumed that
Can Bush be any worse for the rest of the world than Clinton/Gore?
If so in what way. Will the civilians of Yugoslavia and Iraq be any
less fearful of their lives? Will the peasants of Columbia be more
fearful for their lives? Will Canadians fear more for the loss of their
jobs, pollution of
We picked up our daughter yesterday. I am just now of wading through a
ton of e-mail.
The tone of this thread is pretty bad. Too much noise relative to the
signal. It's too late to point fingers at its origins.
So for now let us just stop it. No more recriminations.
Canada is bad. Nader
If it were just a question of their going into denial, and by
forgetting history being condemned to repeat it, I would not care so
much. But I fear that they are going to try to make me repeat it
with them.
Brad DeLong
Why do you not simply accept that your political goals means are
not
Stop it, Brad. "Assassin," insinuations that only Democans carea bout good
things, etc. This is getting hysterical. You never did answer my remark that
you in particular approve of the existence and power of capitalist bosses,
wage slavery, vast inequalities, etc.--like most Demicans. Nathan
At 3:18 PM -0600 3/25/01, Ken Hanly wrote:
As long as capitalism is able to provide a degree of prosperity for
a significant part of the working class there is almost no hope of a
left alternative to the left of Nathan and/or Brad. The valid point
in Paul's remarks is that as long as the the
Brad, that 3 percent of the vote was enough to sink the Gore campaign is a
sad commentary on what the Democrats had to offer. With regard to voting for
Nader at no cost to Gore, Nader voters in California certainly had no effect
and knew it before hand.
With regard to the dimes worth of
[let's avoid the use of the hated N-word, the name of Brad's scape-goat.]
I wrote: It was the Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas who noted
that
FDR carried out the Socialist program "on a stretcher." But without the Socialists, the
Communists, and other insurgent forces, the
Stop it, Brad. "Assassin," insinuations that only Democans care
about good things, etc.
It's not my "insinuation.": It's your statements, statements like:
... Brad, hang it up. The thing is, we don't accept your iron cage.
We don't accept defeat. We won't go away. Maybe we're mad, whether
Brad, that 3 percent of the vote was enough to sink the Gore campaign is a sad
commentary on what the Democrats had to offer. With regard to voting for Nader at no
cost
to Gore, Nader voters in California certainly had no effect and knew it before hand.
right! It's like those Democrats who
Brad, that 3 percent of the vote was enough to sink the Gore campaign is a
sad commentary on what the Democrats had to offer.
Muddled thought. I think--I have always thought--that Gore was a poor
candidate who ran a lousy campaign. That Gore was a poor candidate
who ran a lousy campaign means
If your camel is sick, you *might* want to nurse it a little. You
don't always want to pull out your shotgun and blast it with both
barrels immediately.
Unless, of course, you believe that angels will instantly appear
singing sweet hymns and airlift you a newer and better camel
Given that Brad has a cogent critique that he is willing to explain and
unpack in response to challenges, this is yet another abuse of
moderating authority. I have no idea what this list is for any more,
save idle chat among the like-minded. Every time a discussion gets into
any critical depth,
Yoshie:
American workers -- even in the midst of neoliberal capitalism's best
boom times ever -- were not as comfortable as many PEN-l posters
imagine them to be (and now the boom is practically over -- we only
wonder how bad how long the coming recession will be). Therefore,
I conclude
If your camel is sick, you *might* want to nurse it a little. You
don't always want to pull out your shotgun and blast it with both
barrels immediately.
Unless, of course, you believe that angels will instantly appear
singing sweet hymns and airlift you a newer and better camel
Brad, what you call muddled, I would call refusal to buy into the lesser of two
evils trap.
Brad DeLong wrote:
Brad, that 3 percent of the vote was enough to sink the Gore campaign is a
sad commentary on what the Democrats had to offer.
Muddled thought. I think--I have always thought--that
Lou says:
Yoshie:
American workers -- even in the midst of neoliberal capitalism's best
boom times ever -- were not as comfortable as many PEN-l posters
imagine them to be (and now the boom is practically over -- we only
wonder how bad how long the coming recession will be). Therefore,
I
I agree that Brad has a cogent critique. The problem is that he has
repeated it any number of times. I myself just made the mistake of
responding. I was wrong.
I don't mind disagreement all. I probably don't agree with one percent of
what David S. believes, except -- from what I infer from
Nevertheless, we can't stop globalization. We can only soften its impact.
Who's in favor of stopping globalization? Not I. Rather, I want democratic
globalization
from below, not the current kind of capitalist globalization imposed from above.
The traditional economies are everywhere in
Please forward and circulate widely.
For those who lost a significant sum of money in
the
stock market's recent plunge, it appears that
major
brokerages, banks, and other financial advisors
may
be liable for some of these losses.
The legal issues here are reasonably
straightforward.
There was
(German translation below)
Dear comrades,
we appologize for this 'spam' message, but want to let you know that from today we are
going to update http://www.communards.de with various news again. We hope that the
site will be of some help for your daily political struggles and word.
We also
Jim D. says to Brad:
And if you don't think that these issues matter, I don't know
what you are doing
here...
who elected you the Dictator of pen-l, deciding who should or should
not be on the list?
The way to build political hegemony is to define what politics is,
what political issues
Lou writes:
You can't tell workers that they are exploited because of a formula in
Wage-Labor and Capital. Some people, using the math in a perverse fashion,
have even argued that workers in the US are more exploited than they are in
places like Mexico since they produce more surplus value here
71 matches
Mail list logo
