[Am-info] Re: questions of 'integrity'

[Hans Reiser]

Mitch Stone wrote:

>I think we agree on the allegations made against Nader and his campaign. 
>Where we disagree perhaps is on whether it is appropriate to criticize a 
>candidate for energizing their own voting base at the expense of another 
>candidate. 
>
>I believe the operating assumption here is that Nader, or any other third 
>party candidate, ought to engage in the same sort of "lesser of two 
>evils" reasoning that we as voters often use; in other words, compromise 
>their own campaign in order to throw the election to the candidate who's 
>views most closely resemble theirs, once it is clear that they cannot 
>win. Of course this sort of reasoning condemns third party candidates to 
>permanent ignominy.
>
>As you'll recall, H. Ross Perot ran his campaigns of 1992 and 1996 
>precisely as he wished, and may well have thrown the '92 election to 
>Clinton as a result. A lot of people cried in their beer over that one 
>too. As a minority president, Clinton recognized that he had to run the 
>country from the political center, and for the most part (despite what 
>the talk radio people say), he did. This is one aspect of being a 
>minority president I believe George W. Bush as not yet reckoned with, and 
>it may well come back to haunt him.
>
> Mitch Stone  
> mitch@accidentalexpert.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>Am-info mailing list
>Am-info@lists.essential.org
>http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/am-info
>
>

The problem is that there is no run-off system for the presidency, and 
the Constitution not Nader is to blame.


Hans