[Marxism-Thaxis] Using the Tea Party to Split the Right
Using the Tea Party to Split the Right Mark Engler - August 6, 2010 http://dissentmagazine.org/atw.php?id=228 Are you a Democratic congressional candidate in a tight electoral contest? Here's an idea: Help to recruit a Tea Party candidate to enter the general election and siphon off voters from your Republican opponent. Sure, you might be forced to debate a reactionary nut job. But this only makes you look more reasonable. More importantly, the new entrant splits the right-wing vote. You waltz to victory. At least one Democratic candidate-Bryan Lentz, who is running for Congress in Pennsylvania's hotly contested Seventh District-is pursuing this strategy for the fall elections. The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that Tea- Party-identifying candidate Jim Schneller, a new addition to the race, owes almost half the petition signatures he submitted to get onto the ballot to a drive by Democrats: "Democratic volunteers, including campaign workers for the Democratic candidate, Bryan Lentz, collected 3,800 signatures for Schneller. The campaign made no attempts to hide its involvement "The move is not illegal, although some in political circles view it as hardball (or low-rent) politics "While the practice is relatively common at the state level, it is not typically seen in congressional races, said G. Terry Madonna, a political analyst and professor at Franklin and Marshall College. And it's even more rare to clearly see a candidate's fingerprints on the effort, he said. "'This is one of the top 10 congressional races in the country,' Madonna said. 'It just shows you how rough and tumble this race already is.'" There's some polling data to support the strategy-and to suggest that the Tea Party is doing the Republicans more harm than good. Back in March, CBS news commented on a Quinnipiac University poll indicating that the Tea Party could foil the Republican Party's hopes of taking Congress: "Given a choice between a generic Democratic or Republican candidate in November's mid-term elections, voters preferred Republicans by a margin of 44-39 percent. The presence of a Tea Party candidate on the ballot, however, dramatically upsets that balance. "In a potential race between three candidates, 15 percent of respondents would vote for a Tea Party candidate. Thirty-six percent would vote for a Democrat, while only 25 percent would opt for a Republican, the poll finds. "An example of that dynamic played out in New York's 23rd district special election last fall. Pressured by conservatives and Tea Partiers, moderate Republican nominee Dede Scozzafava elected to drop out of the race to clear the way for Conservative Doug Hoffman. The result: Democrat Bill Owens won a seat that had been strongly Republican for decades." Is there a down side to this type of thinking? Only the possibility that Tea Party candidates could actually win, in which case we'd be governed by the far Right. I've worried about this with regard to Sarah Palin. Some progressives have hoped that, amid a weak field of Republicans, Palin will emerge as the Republican nominee for president in 2012. They have faith that she would be a weak and polarizing candidate in the general election, leading to an easy Democratic win. I'm inclined to think that this strategy is playing with fire. Sure, Palin makes egregious gaffes on a regular basis. Similarly, John Heilemann and Mark Halperin's Game Change reports in detail how McCain campaign staffers found her to be a liability in the fall of 2008 and often regretted putting her on the ticket. Still, as a friend recently remarked to me, plenty of people thought George W. Bush was a bumbling, unelectable dimwit-and look where that notion got us. Electoral strategies that must rely on too-clever maneuvering can only conceal a party's more fundamental weakness for so long. At the local level, you can make a case for trying to split the right-wing vote. But, at the risk of being trite, I think there's a better case for progressives learning to defeat conservative ideas on their merits. -- Mark Engler is a senior analyst with Foreign Policy In Focus and author of How to Rule the World: The Coming Battle Over the Global Economy (Nation Books, 2008). He can be reached via the Web site http://www.DemocracyUprising.com. ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] 34 billionaires pledge half of their fortunes
On 8/6/10, CeJ wrote: > >>Hope , faith and charity. The greatest of these is charity.<< > > More like PR, tax shelters and untaxed investment/finance capitalism, > and the greatest of all these Bill and Melinda know more about than > 100 Michael Hudsons. > > CJ ^^ Bill and Melinda prove what they know by their practice. > --- > ELT in Japan > http://www.eltinjapan.com/ > > Japan Higher Education Outlook > http://japanheo.blogspot.com/ > > We are Feral Cats > http://wearechikineko.blogspot.com/ > > ___ > Marxism-Thaxis mailing list > Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis > ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
[Marxism-Thaxis] A Workers Inquiry
Hi Sinn Fein rejected the Workers' Party stagist theory involving the call for a six county democratised state. Its view appeared to be that the six county sectarian state was a form of institutionalised sectarianism that is irreformable. Consequently this state had to be smashed as had the state south of the border. These states were to be replaced by a 32 county democratic socialist republic. Given Sinn Fein's acceptance of the Good Friday Agreement it is clear that the party has abandoned this position falling back on the position of the Workers Party --the stagist democratised sectarian free six county state. The abandonment of this position was made in the absence of any real discussion and debate. Instead the retreat was made by the backdoor --by sleight of hand. Rejecting the Eire Nua Programme as drafted by the O Bradaigh/O Connell leadeership formed a part of this process. If, as the present Sinn Fein leadership now assume, the six county state is reformable then the basis for an all-island Irish democratic socialist republic dissolves. This means that the Long War, involving death, injury and destruction was an aberration --the politics of illusion. So too was the conflict between the Provo IRA and the Officials. The working class, north and south of the border, should call for and execute an inquiry into the real nature of this war as led by the Sinn Fein/IRA. This people's inquiry must cover the dirty aspect of the war which was formed a decisive part of it. Paddy Hackett http://paddy-hackett.blogspot.com/ ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] US to Attend Hiroshima Memorial for First Time
Also, I should have said: it has been the official policy of the US government and military neither to confirm nor deny the presence of nukes (tactital nukes usually) on US ships or planes or overseas bases. When New Zealand tried to get them to stop taking nukes into NZ ports, the US actually set up sanctions that damaged the NZ economy. However, I was thinking that during the height of the Cold War, with Japan leaning towards the socialists and communists, they would have thought of something different. Besides, in the 1940s and 50s, I don't think it was so commonplace to take tactical nukes everywhere. I think this came about mostly during the Vietnam War and then intensified after, during the Reagan years. I could be wrong about that. Perhaps the US army stockpiled nuclear artillery (nuke rounds, nuke-tipped little john missiles, etc) for possible use in Korea. I have to research this more. If the people in Japan and S. Korea had known so many nukes were coming and going with the US military, they might have thought differently of the alliances set up by the US. To hear some Japan officials talk about all this after the Cold War, some claim they were assured the US had no nukes in Japan. Others say they knew the US had nukes and it was acknowledged. Perhaps it's a mix of both. I remember Time magazine reporting (int'l edition) in the late 80s and 90s how the Japanese were sensitive about US carriers putting into Yokohama because the ships are nuclear powered, but that never made sense at all because Japan has nuclear power plants all over the place--like dozens up and down the Japan Sea cost between here (Fukui) and southern Honshu. CJ ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
