James Jacobsen wrote:
> Reference discussion of DFL verses 'Greens' and Ms.
> Khan's
That's "Kahn" not "Khan". You're confusing Phyllis
the legislator with Allie the reporter.
> proposed election bill, The 'Green' victory was more
> a rejection of DFL machine than any new 'green'
> political party. The Green lawn signs and
> bumber stickers to be seen in inner city -election
> past, were more a protest of traditional do nothing
> Republicans
I have to object to this. The problem with the
Republican party in Minneapolis is that its base
decamped to the suburbs, leaving behind those who
couldn't afford to follow or chose to remain in the
city for some other reason. Add in the fact that the
DFL and the media have successfully painted the RPM
as a bunch of racist Anglos and/or crazed religious
loonies, and it's no wonder the Republicans haven't
been a credible alternative to the DFL here in
Minneapolis.
> and machine DFL than a real new party building up.
New parties often arise from dissatisfaction with
single-party dominance. The Republicans became a major
player in politics in the 1850s/1860s because the
Democrats would not deal with the tariff and slavery
issues that were splitting the nation (and the
Democrats) along sectional lines. In the same way, the
Greens are posied to become a major force in Minneapolis
politics because the DFL wants to maintain the status
quo for the benefit of its labor and business supporters
even as the neighborhood activists demand change.
Kevin Trainor
Republican since 1977
..since Southern Democrats aren't what they used to be.
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
