doesn't matter which alternative candidate one votes for in so-called safe states (for either kerry or bush), vote for nader in such states is no more significant than vote for swp, wwp, sp, etc...
such prez vote takes little, if any, political will at all, what do folks do for 'down' ballot elections, from u.s. senate, u.s. house & state governor to state cabinet, state leg., and local partisan races...in most cases, folks vote dem because they have no other choice except to not vote, and if alternative candidate exists, they face familiar dillemma - if i vote my top choice, i may be helping rep win... fwiw: i've been making this argument for as long as i can remember, florida has not been 'in play' for most prez elections, having gone rep except for a couple of times since eisenhower was elected in 52, of course, 2000 was different and appears that 2004 will be as well, florida is perhaps idiomatic 'split' state... fwiw2: florida dems still hold lead (43% to 41%) over reps in voter reg (down from about 75% to 25% 30 years ago), dem percentage includes 'dixiecrats' who have never changed registration but vote republican... michael hoover (who is checking in from ann arbor these days where young, alternative (albeit spruced up a bit, kinda neat & tidy) looking folks are doing legwork for kerry, reminds me a bit of 'clean for gene' in 68, of course. mccarthy was opposed to that war) June 25, 2004 Contrary to What You've Heard... Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn Plan to Vote for Ralph Nader By GREG BATES (Common Courage Press) Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn have stated many times that they favor ousting Bush this election, even if John Kerry is "Bush-lite." And that stand has been repeatedly used by progressives opposed to Ralph Nader's campaign. However, Chomsky and Zinn, both residents of John Kerry's home state of Massachusetts, say they plan to vote for Ralph Nader. This may come as a surprise to those who have trotted out Chomsky in an effort to blunt Nader. One example is Jeff Cohen, the founder of the media watch group FAIR (and by way of disclosure, is an author along with both Chomsky and Zinn at Common Courage Press at which this reporter is Publisher). As Cohen stated on Commondreams.org May 7, "Progressives need to be a bridge forward, not an obstruction. Noam Chomsky has described the choice we face: 'Help elect B ush, or do something to try to prevent it.'" To cite another example, Doug Henwood, the publisher of the Left Business Observer wrote in April, "...as Noam Chomsky puts it, to the distress of his many fans, given the magnitude of U.S. power, 'small differences can translate into large outcomes.'" But in response to an email query from this reporter, Chomsky wrote, "Voting for Nader in a safe state is fine. That's what I'll do. I don't see how anyone could read what I wrote and think otherwise, just from the elementary logic of it. Voting for Nader in a safe state is not a vote for Bush. The point I made had to do with (effectively) voting for Bush." Chomsky also made clear how he views the election in the context of other efforts for change: "Activist movements, if at all serious, pay virtually no attention to which faction of the business party is in office, but continue with their daily work, from which election s are a diversion -- which we cannot ignore, any more than we can ignore the sun rising; they exist." In another email exchange, Howard Zinn stated, "I will vote for Nader because Mass. is a safe state. And voters in 'safe states' should not vote for Kerry." He also notes, "I don't have faith in Kerry changing, but with Kerry there is a possibility that a powerful social movement might change him. With Bush, no chance." The question of Kerry's receptivity to social movements deserves serious consideration, discussed further in the book from which this article is adapted. But returning to the issue of voting for Kerry in safe states, the impact of the Electoral College is virtually absent in discussions about Nader's run. As BusinessWeek June 14 2004 points out, 75% of voters live in safe states. Voters casting a ballot for Kerry in those states, regardless of the message they intend to send, will be perceived by the Democratic National Committee as endorsing the Kerry platform of war and moving the Democrats to the right. Meanwhile, voters in safe states have the opportunity to send a message that Kerry's platform is unacceptable, without risking throwing the election to Bush. Greg Bates is the publisher of Common Courage Press and the author of Ralph's Revolt: the Case for Joining Nader's Rebellion, from which this essay has been excerpted. Bates can be reached at: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------- Please Note: Due to Florida's very broad public records law, most written communications to or from College employees regarding College business are public records, available to the public and media upon request. Therefore, this e-mail communication may be subject to public disclosure.
