Press Action

Monday, August 09, 2004

Electoral Pains and Movement Gains: Why the 2004 Election Pretty Much Sucks

By Josh Frank

Read full article...

Posted 08/09 |

Comments:

You must register to comment.

I feel your pain bro’ and I thank Josh for following this story so closely for so many months.

After reading the two Jeff St. Clair stories about the “demise” of the Greens, along with another article posted at CP yesterday about how the entire system for selecting candidates in the Green party is rigged and undemocratic, I fear the US Greens are no longer - if they ever were- a vehicle for radical change. It was pretty obvious a couple years ago that the Greens were in trouble when they split to become the Greens USA and the Green Party of the United States - the former more radical Leftists and the latter more closely resembling the reform Democrats like Kucinich.

The Cobb-Greens will go on as an ABB “strong progressive force” (as Thom Hartmann calls them at commondreams) which means they have been successfully coopted by the Dems and have properly learned their subordinant place in the political scheme: ie., potted planted window dressing for the Dems (no chemical pesticides please).

Posted by Rhino Rick from Tokyo, Japan on 08/09 at 06:27 PM

If Camejo leads, who will follow? He tried to lead the California deligates--angrily demanded their votes no less. They wisely saw the foolishness of endorsing the candidacy of someone who was never committed to their party, had spurned their nomination and their convention. Camejo can spout out his indignation all he wants, he has no entitlement, despite his healthy sense there of. His attempts to change the results of the convention after the fact--when he couldn’t be bothered to campaign before--just reveal him to be an egotistical jerk. He would rather try to rip appart the Green party than accept the fact that we won’t bow to his will and kiss his posterior.

Posted by Shane Cutler from on 08/09 at 11:21 PM

No doubt this is a difficult time, but I’m afraid it has been this way electorally for a long time. Shane, how many ballot lines are the Greens risking by having Cobb at the head of the ticket? It is almost guaranteed that Cobb will not get the one percent needed in Wisconsin--especially since most of his natural support will vote for Kerry.

What happens after November is not really up to Nader--it’s up to us. You can’t build a party around a 70-year-old man, but neither can you build a party by saying “Uh-oh, too many people are voting for our presidential candidate. We’d better stop that!”

So let’s build a party that is unequivocally for the Bill of Rights, single-payer health care, repeal of Taft-Hartley, a living wage and free education. Let’s build a party against racism, sexiam and imperialism in all its guises. And most important, let’s build a party unafraid of building itself from President to dog-catcher. Will it be the Greens? The Labor Party? The “Better Life” party (as it will be called in Wisconsin)? Or something else? I don’t know, but we’re more likely to get it supporting Nader-Camejo in 2004 than anyone else on the ballot.

Posted by workingwriter from on 08/11 at 10:07 PM