At 07:53 AM 11/9/00 -0800, you wrote: >You think that Nader's 3% showing is impressive? Maybe it was impressive once you think of the fact that Nader voters were showered by a sh*t-storm of abuse and fear-mongering. The more that Nader seemed to be getting, the more the fear level was ratcheted upward. The closeness of the election -- and the domination of the winner-take-all system -- also encouraged fear-mongering. If it had been an LBJ vs. Goldwater type election, 3% would have definitely been unimpressive (since the former had such a big margin). But it wasn't. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
- Re: Re: Stop the name calling Michael Perelman
- Re: Stop the name calling Justin Schwartz
- Re: Re: Stop the name calling Michael Perelman
- Re: Stop the name calling Lisa & Ian Murray
- Re: Re: Stop the name calling Brad DeLong
- RE: Re: Re: Stop the name calling Lisa & Ian Murray
- Re: RE: Re: Re: Stop the name calling Michael Perelman
- RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Stop the name c... Lisa & Ian Murray
- Re: RE: Re: Re: Stop the name calling Brad DeLong
- RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Stop the name c... Lisa & Ian Murray
- Re: Re: Stop the name calling Jim Devine
- Re: Re: Stop the name calling Justin Schwartz
- Re: Re: Re: Stop the name calling Max Sawicky
- Stop the name calling phillp2
- Re: Stop the name calling Doug Henwood
- Re: Re: Stop the name calling phillp2
- Canadian Elections Sam Pawlett
- Re: Re: Re: Stop the name call... Ken Hanly
- Re: Stop the name calling Michael Hoover
- Re: Re: Stop the name calling Jim Devine
- Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop the name calling Brad DeLong