Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (35482)	7/31/2002 1:41:08 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

Gee, have you got a "Weatherman" in the family tree? ";-)" Nope, just folk who are tired of voting defensively. My wife, for instance, keeps threatening to vote against Torecelli, who certainly is not among my senatorial highlights. And who is well known around our parts for less than honorable stuff. My argument has been that a vote against T is a vote for Trent Lott. That's worked in the past but they are all tiring of it. They all voted for Nader in the 2000 election. We all were dismayed by Gore--his long term DNC participation, his electoral tin ear; etc. So we made a family agreement. If Gore's New Jersey lead were threatened, all would vote for Gore; if his lead was not so, we all went our separate ways. I like Nader's politics but have spent a bit of time with him and am not persuaded he is better presidential material than Gore, particularly when he would have had no party support. And, the other argument, building an electoral base for a viable national third party, I agree with that. Just not eager to see Nader as the vehicle for it.