[SfN] Re: Coles County Greens (Questions for the Day)

[Lonnie Brown]

Jim, et al;

I'm loving the emails re: the "polls".  Having studied
statistics, polling in grad school, I'm happy that I
paid attention and remember same.

Question:  (and I'd like input soon please0

The latest I'm hearing from folks, typically long time
Democrats, is the Supreme Court issue.  It goes like
this.."I have to vote for Gore bec. if Bush is elected
you know what that means for the future of our liberty
regarding things like Roe v. Wade, search and seizure
protections, possible Due Process rights. After all,
the next president could likely appoint possibly 3 new
justices.  

As a continuing student of Con Law, I have specific
responses but would appreciate your input as well as
that of our Green Friends.

Hope all is well in Champaign. FYI, meeting (again)
with EIU students this evening for more organizing. 
Will probably need to come to Champaign agaion soon
for more literature and signs.. Going quickly..Write
soo, take care.. 


Lonnie







--- Jim Buell <jbuell at uiuc.edu> wrote:
> Very well put re the falseness of polls, Arun. BTW,
> your great letter re 
> the falseness of Gore's environmental record (with a
> plug for the 
> Cockburn/St. Clair book) ran today in the
> News-Gazette.
> 
> There's also an article in the same paper about a TV
> station poll out of 
> Chicago (sample size a few hundred) that claims to
> show a narrowing of the 
> Gore-Bush gap in this state, but I agree with you
> that these polls are 
> largely meaningless or worse.
> 
> jb
> 
> 
> 
> >Chicago Tribune's website's latest figures had Gore
> above Bush by 8
> >points (47-39), but that figure is more than a week
> old.  Chicago had
> >85% supporting Gore.  But polls are meaningless. 
> They sample 1000 people
> >to reflect 100 million, and they're only sampling
> "likely voters."  I don't
> >know anyone that's ever been polled, and I'm not
> sure I know anyone that
> >knows anyone that's been polled.  Only statewide
> polls matter in national
> >elections due to the electoral system, anyhow, but
> those polls tend to be
> >less accurate and less frequently conducted.
> >
> >I'm not sure if polling is good or bad for the
> Nader campaign.  In a blind
> >vote, perhaps all but the courageous would vote for
> Gore to keep Bush
> >out of office.  On the other hand, polls are
> necessary for those to vote
> >for Nader if Gore leads by a "safe" margin.
> >
> >Polls are evil.  Paul is exactly right that polls
> perpetuate the two-party
> >system as much as any of the other devices --
> corporations, corporate media,
> >genetic memory, etc.  Polls have people voting
> their fears, not voting their
> >conscience.  Media coverage of debates are just as
> silly; the major concern
> >is always "who was the winner?" because that can
> sway some people's votes
> >more than discussing issues.  Of course, there's
> little to actually talk
> >about in terms of difference of issues.  I see this
> covered everywhere
> >in the media.  "Once again, the debates were a
> snooze as the candidates
> >refused to acknowledge a substantial difference of
> opinion."  It almost
> >sounds like every reporter is voting Nader or not
> voting at all.  It doesn't
> >matter which of the two candidates get elected --
> we're going to get roughly
> >the same end result.  The only difference is which
> corporations get served
> >best in the end, and many corporations have hedged
> their bets on both sides.
> >
> >I don't trust Bush or Gore, I really don't know
> where they truly
> >stand.  Bush and Gore are both trying to sound like
> populist
> >centrists, yet I know their records both show
> otherwise (really, they
> >both fall on the same side), so who knows what to
> expect from either
> >of them?  Have you seen their campaign ads?  They
> both say the same
> >things.  I really don't see what everyone fears
> about Bush.  What's so
> >worse about Bush than Gore?  I want people to get
> past the partisan
> >nonsense.  A vote for Bush or Gore is a vote for
> the status quo, with
> >minor tweaks either way. A vote for Nader is a real
> vote for change.
> >A vote for Nader is a vote for the future.  Four
> years of Bush (or
> >four more years of Gore, for that matter) can only
> leave so much
> >damage.  But we need someone to think of the
> future.  "How dare Nader
> >run during such a close election!"  When won't it
> be close?  When will
> >people give third parties the chance that they
> deserve?  When else
> >will the seeds for deep democracy be sown?  When
> will the cycle be
> >broken?  "There's always next time" some Cubs fans
> might say.  But
> >there's no better time than now.  In fact, it is
> the best time because
> >there's so little to lose.  Gore and Bush are so
> similar, it really
> >doesn't matter how Nader's campaign affects the
> election.  The choice
> >between Gore and Nader is not as fuzzy as the
> choice between Gore and
> >Bush.  And a vote for Nader now buys us all four
> years closer to
> >progress.
> >
> >A vote for Nader brings us closer to the badly
> needed 5% to make the
> >Green Party a second party.  A vote for Bush or
> Gore changes so
> >little.  What happens if Gore loses by a margin
> less than Nader's
> >votes?  Perhaps the Democratic Party then realizes
> to adjust their
> >platform, and it's a win for us.  Activism becomes
> stronger and more
> >critical of Congress and the White House.  What if
> Gore wins but Nader
> >does not get 5% of the popular vote?  We still end
> up with a
> >conservative in the White House, some progressive
> organizations will
> >become lax in their efforts, and the Green Party
> (or some other third
> >party) will have to fight just as hard during the
> next four years.
> >
> >I'm glad that Nader & LaDuke are running for
> president.  If not for
> >them (and perhaps another third party), I would not
> be voting for any
> >presidential candidate this year, and I'd have so
> little positive
> >passion towards the race at all.  Candidates need
> to earn their votes,
> >and Gore sure doesn't deserve my vote.
> >
> >In solidarity,
> >Arun
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Nader-uiuc mailing list
> >Nader-uiuc at lists.groogroo.com
>
>http://lists.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/nader-uiuc
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Prairiegreens mailing list
> Prairiegreens at lists.groogroo.com
>
http://lists.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/prairiegreens
> http://www.prairienet.org/greens/


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf!  It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/