Re: The Best of Both Worlds?
Not that I know everything but this sounds like a wonderful
solution to me. BUT for one thing,,, after the election,
PLEASE let's get everyone working on Mr. Gore and his agendas
if we have to have him as president. They lack so much!!!
Have you all seen the site that helps you set up petitions
online? It was used lately for protesting against the Jaycees
using a site near Native American burials for a Halloween fund
raiser called "the Trail of Fears" (I won't talk about my
feelings ON THAT right now!)
At any rate using this petition site seems like a very
workable solution for helping folks who want to be heard in
congress and helping folks send a message to the president.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ariel Spaeth" <email@example.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 9:14 PM
Subject: [cg] The Best of Both Worlds?
> If you are considering voting for Nader but are worried that
your vote could
> take votes away from Gore,
> If you are voting for Gore but would like to help build a
strong Green Party
> (with matching federal funds),
> Please read the following. If you are not comfortable
"trading your vote"
> via the internet, please discuss trading votes with family
and friends who
> live in states where Bush (or Gore) is overwhelmingly
> NADER AND GORE SUPPORTERS: VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCES AND SUPPORT
> CANDIDATES - TRADE YOUR VOTES IN KEY STATES!
> If you don't want to read this entire email, go straight to
> In these final days before the election, many progressives
> with a difficult choice between Ralph Nader and Al Gore.
Much has been made
> of the similarities between Gore and George W. Bush on
several issues, but,
> realistically, most progressives realize that Gore is an
> overwhelmingly preferable candidate to Bush-particularly for
> term that will likely include the lifetime appointments of
> two or three Supreme Court Justices.
> As close as Gore and Bush are on some issues, their
differences are a BIG
> deal. Because the progressive community is divided, there is
a very real
> danger that Nader votes in key swing states could give this
> Bush. Conservatives know this, and on Monday, October 30th,
> will start running pro-Nader ads in an attempt to siphon more
> from Gore. [Is this verified, or just an email scare
> Al Gore, though NOT progressive on a range of important
issues, is: strongly
> pro-choice; committed in practice to strong domestic
> committed in theory to strong environmental policy
> on critical international environmental issues such as global
> pro-gun control; and far more likely to appoint Supreme Court
> federal judges who will support civil rights, women's
> freedom, affirmative action, and corporate liability.
> Bush, on the other hand, has a terrible environmental and
social record in
> Texas, and has reaffirmed his connections with big oil by
> Cheney as his running mate. His Supreme Court appointments
> conceivably overturn Roe vs. Wade, and his ability to
represent the U.S.
> internationally is extremely questionable.
> Many progressive voters in these swing states would like to
vote for Ralph
> Nader, but are afraid that if they do, Bush may outpoll Gore
and take all
> the electoral votes for their states. Gore supporters in
states where wide
> margins of victory are essentially assured for either Bush or
> frustrated because the reality of the electoral college
system means that
> their votes for Gore will be meaningless in the election at
large, as the
> winner of the popular vote in each state receives all the
> for that state.
> THERE IS A WAY THAT SWING-STATE NADER VOTERS AND GORE
> DECIDED STATES CAN VOTE THEIR CONSCIENCES AND SUPPORT THEIR
> THEY CAN TRADE THEIR VOTES. That is, potential Gore voters
> states can trade votes, unneeded in their state, for
> Gore votes in the key swing states. In return, potential
Nader voters in
> those swing states will commit to voting for Gore in exchange
> commitment from the Gore voters to vote for Nader in their
> elections. This way both agendas can be advanced.
> Using this strategy:
> 1. We can maximize the Nader vote, hopefully pushing beyond
the level of
> 5% of the national popular vote that the Green Party needs in
> receive matching federal funds in the 2004 Presidential race.
> 2. At the same time, we can diminish the chances of Bush
winning a close
> race in a swing state because the progressive vote has been
> Gore and Nader.
> Several groups have set up vote exchange sites, but the best
one is at
> www.voteswap2000.com <http://www.voteswap2000.com>.
> PLEASE VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE AND PROTECT THE PROGRESSIVE
AGENDA by helping
> build a strong Green Party (with matching federal funds) and
> candidate by whom we will be better represented than Bush,
and with whom we
> can collaborate on many critical issues. If you have
questions about this
> concept, feel free to email firstname.lastname@example.org
> * * * * *
> CALIFORNIA VOTERS: If you live in California, you are not
> exchange votes through voteswap2000 right now because
California is neither
> a swing state nor a state that is locked up for either Gore
> However, polling shows that THE CALIFORNIA RACE IS MUCH
CLOSER THAN IT
> SHOULD BE.
> You can still arrange to swap votes informally with friends
and family in
> other states. See www.nadertrader.org
> One Nader supporter writes, "Personally, I'm voting for Gore
> in exchange for both of my parents voting for Nader in Utah
(a state that
> abcnews.com calls 'as republican as they come'). Nader gets
twice the votes
> toward the 5% for federal matching funds, and I know that
there is no way
> that I will contribute to Gore losing in California, a state
> ONE FIFTH OF THE NATIONAL ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES."
> * * * * *
> community_garden maillist - email@example.com
community_garden maillist - firstname.lastname@example.org