The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
There is a difference, and it means something--for one thing, that the U.S. will move towards rejoining the international community, because the neocon spell has been broken. Issues like the climate crisis and alternative energy will be debated on far different terms than before.
I fully expect to be upset by some of what Congress does and doesn't do. But if the past six years haven't convinced everyone that there is a crucial difference between Bush Republicans and Democrats, I don't know what it would take. I don't expect perfection--or, more to the point, perfect adherence to what I favor--but I believe what I outlined is going to happen. "The end of all intelligent analysis is to clear the way for synthesis." H.G. Wells "It's not dark yet, but it's getting there." Bob Dylan
No, a bland campaign, triangulation, a failure to take on Republican election tricks, and not inspiring 50% of eligible voters to even go to vote is what got G.W. Bush in the first place. Just remember who was Al Gore's vice. Al Gore should have won by a landslide, and had Nader not ran, most Nader voters would have joined that 50% sitting at home anyway.
But if the past six years haven't convinced everyone that there is a crucial difference between Bush Republicans and Democrats, I don't know what it would take.
While many who reject both major parties have claimed lack of difference, what matters is another thing: has the Dems' difference the potential to bring about significant positive change? If Dems in power mean only intermittent delays in the Republoscum push to the right (as in the Clinton era), iut's not worth much, if it means ineptness allowing the Repubs to regroup and prepare for a real landslide next time (as would have happened if Kerry wins and 'owns' Iraq), it may be even worse.
However, a lot of the Dems elected yesterday are a new generation. Although idiots like Rahm are there to meddle, and many are too centrist to support significant reforms, I'd hope that thery would be willing to do things differently. One prerequisite is for the base to push them on. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
Be nice if we could send him to Europe as a roving ambassador.
You folks would get your fill of that one quick enough.
Hopefully someone would take him to St. Petersburg, for Rasputin's Christmas party. "When the abyss stares at me, it wets its pants." Brian Hopkins
Just as a side note - I haven't heard nearly the same vehemence for the Libertarians who finally deserted Bush, but could not stand to actually vote for his defeat by supporting the Democrats.
http://www.lp.org/media/article_438.shtml
aspiring to genteel poverty
Then in 2004 the Democrats spent more effort trying to keep Nader off the ballot than debating the Republicans on policy.
Any country where ballot access and voter registration are issues is not a functioning democracy. Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
Al Gore lost the 2000 election all by himself. He should have won it with half his brain tied to his back and ran poorly, and debated even worse.
The Al Gore we see now didn't even materialise until after 2002, possibly until 2004, and had today's Gore run in 2000 he would have definitely put on a spirited show, but he would have been tagged as radical and unelectable even by his own party. Much more centrist Democrats were called unelectable in 2004, after all. Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
Hillary's failure to set forward a health care plan that could pass Congress was, of course, part of what set it off.
The "departure" for the World of radical right fantasy began, after all, in 1994, not in 2000. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by Frank Schnittger - Oct 2 7 comments
by gmoke - Sep 27
by Oui - Oct 15
by Oui - Oct 14
by Oui - Oct 133 comments
by Oui - Oct 131 comment
by Oui - Oct 1210 comments
by Oui - Oct 121 comment
by Oui - Oct 118 comments
by Oui - Oct 11
by Oui - Oct 105 comments
by Oui - Oct 101 comment
by Oui - Oct 9
by Oui - Oct 91 comment
by Oui - Oct 81 comment
by Oui - Oct 8
by Oui - Oct 74 comments
by Oui - Oct 67 comments
by Oui - Oct 56 comments
by Oui - Oct 4
by Oui - Oct 42 comments