I am extremely sympathetic to Green Party ideals but right now I cannot see them as anything but a suicide party. Ralph Nader says he wants the Green Party to be some kind of "watchdog" for Democrats who move too far into the center, but why then do Greens run against some extremely progressive and environmental Democrats, Democrats who have not compromised their ideals? Not only did the Green Party cost the Dems the presidency [we'll see], but they 3 or 4 house races. Check out New Mexico 1. District 1 New Mexico (as of 5:48 p.m.) Daniel Kerlinsky, Grn 11,182 (7%) x-Heather Wilson, GOP (i) 70,537 (47%) John Kelly, Dem 68,386 (46%) This is the third cycle in a row the Greens have cost the Dems NM 1. Rep. Wilson has a 17% approval rating from the League of Conservation voters and she's going back to the House. District 1 New York(as of 6:03 p.m.) x-Felix Grucci, GOP 124,063 (56%) Michael Forbes, WF 5,872 (3%) Regina Seltzer, Dem 89,297 (40%) William Holst, Grn2,881 (1%) Regina Seltzer was an environmental activist, that was what she had spent her life on, obviously the Green candidate didn't cost her the seat, but what was he doing? Another outrageous one was NJ-12, where the Rush Holt [100% LCV] has a 56 vote lead right now. From what I have read in Sierra Magazine, Greens costing liberal dems seats has been happening all over the country. If it weren't for the Green Party maybe we'd have an incoming Democratic president AND House. Let me repeat, I like the Green Party's platform, and would really like proportional representation so Greens could get elected, but I'd much rather see them working with the system. Jeff Bennett PS According to Rep. Wexler, an enormous # of the Buch. votes in PB county came from retirement communities. Those votes were clearly accidental. The upright thing to do would be to concede.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:43 AM EST EST