Robert Naiman wrote: > If organized correctly, a primary would build progressive power rather > than be divisive, would register and educate voters, would encourage > and boost progressive candidates for Congress, and would strengthen > the base of organizations that do progressive electoral work. ...
it takes two to tango: the opposition to "progressive power" could make the primary extremely divisive whether progressives want it or not. (An example: Obama's no progressive as far as I can tell (though the definition of the key word seems infinitely elastic). In any event, he seems to go out of his way to avoid even the appearance of divisiveness. But the GOPsters make the electoral process divisive nonetheless.) by the way, what does "progressive" mean? Bull Moose? Robert LaFollette? Henry Wallace? what is "progress," anyway? doesn't its meaning depend on one's values? -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
