U.S. Election 2000
Hartford Web Publishing is not the author of the
documents in World History Archives and
does not presume to validate their accuracy or authenticity nor to
release their copyright.
U.S. electoral politics in general
Documents for the political significance of Joseph
- Loyal Opposition: The GOP's Lie-apalooza
- By David Corn, AlterNet, 7 August 2000. Team Bush and the
Republican Party demonstrated how well duplicity can be done
during their warm-and-fuzzy, have-a-nice-election convention
in Philadelphia. The GOP platform.
- Bush Campaign To Return Blacks For Refund
- From 2000 AbsoluteIdeas, 12 August 2000. A biting satire on
the GOP's parading Blacks to buy legitimacy during the
- Post-convention analysis
- From the Institute for Public Accuracy, 18 August 2000.
Most of the words that floated from the podiums of the Democratic
and Republican conventions amounted to little more than insipid
drivel. Continuing the Clinton-Gore economic policies will
do nothing to build a different, fairer economy. Etc.
- Off Camera, Celebrating So It Counts
- By Ruth Marcus, Washington Post, 21 August 2000.
The television audience for the two party conventions may have
been the smallest in decades, but the party-hopping audience
was bigger, and the parties even more lavish than the excesses
of four years ago. The nonstop festivities had a certain end
of the Roman Empire feel.
- Gen. Powell Invites You To Join The Grand Ole
- By Elombe Brath, August 2000. Before Black people get swept
up in the dust storm left by Ret. Gen. Colin Powell's speech
to the Republican Convention which glorified most of the most
reactionary leadership of the Grand Ole Party (GOP), we need
to understand the man who spoke and who and what he was speaking
for - and against.
- The Post-Liberal Apocalypse. For four days in
August, it was end-times in L.A.
- By Barbara Ehrenreich, in The Progressive, 5 October
2000. Inside the Staples Center, delegates celebrated the most
conservative Democratic ticket in at least fifty years. Outside,
the uninvited shouted their conviction that the centers of power,
Democratic Party included, have grown so hopelessly cruel and
corrupt that they no longer deserve to hold.
The popular protest
- Los Angeles: Quiet before the storm
- By Jim Smith, L.A. Labor News, 13 August 2000.
Anti-globalization, pro-democracy workers, students, socialists,
anarchists and veterans of battles in Seattle, D.C., and Philadelphia
are poised to confront those torchbearers of civilization and empire,
the leaders of the Democratic Party.
- Shadow Convention Speech (Los Angeles)(extract)
- By Cornel West, Sunday 13 August 2000. I reached a point where
working people and poor people are so disregarded and disrespected
by a corporate-dominated Democratic party, that you have to begin
a new cycle.
- Qualifying the Police State
- By Jamie Doucette, 17 Aug 2000. Concerning the way the media
has not examined the policing of the protests, as well as
other criticisms of power by many of the anarchists and
youth involved in them. The coordination between police and
the agenda of the state are still there; only the categories
- Only 50% of Americans vote for the president and the
protests outside the Democratic convention explain why
- By Duncan Campbell, in Guardian, (London) 19 August 2000.
The images symbolise both what is missing from conventional American
politics, what divides the haves and have-nots of the world's richest
country and what is fuelling the still unspecific but growing
international movement that started in Seattle last year. The old order is
no longer trusted by the very people - the young, the poor, the
Latinos, the blacks - the candidates claim they want to help.
- Convention Protests Bring Mixed Reactions
- The Daily News, 21 August 2000. Protests outside the
recent Republican and Democratic national conventions drew mixed
reactions from the public, a recent nationwide poll shows. 32.9%
said they were proud of the protesters, while another 31.2% said
they were wary. Another 13.2% were sympathetic and 15.7% irritated
while 6.9% said they were not sure.
- 15 October 2000. Every fourth year or so, most people are fooled
again, and the people at the top of the pyramid, are laughing their
masks off. All janitors we put in charge are just caretakers of a
completely whacked system, a system inherently wrong. To discuss who
this person should be, whether it is bush, gore or nader is really
beside the point. In my opinion the system can't be reformed, it
can't be changed, and it can't be overturned from within. Don't vote.
If you do, you'll lose all chance of influencing what direction
humanity should take.
- The debates: Truth is stranger than science
- By Norman Solomon, Creators Syndicate, 20 October 2000.
A satire on the debates.
- Why Voters Will Lose Out In Tuesday's Debate
- Four years ago, President Clinton was returned to office by only
slightly less than 25 percent of the electorate. Democracy is
in a serious crisis when more than 94 million voters stay at
home and turn their backs on the precious right to select the
people who will lead the nation. Commanding the money, the media,
and the access to both the ballots and debates, the Republican
and Democratic parties have designed and enforced a closed
system that largely shuts out new parties and new ways to
strengthen our democracy.
- The 2000 Presidential Election: History, Ideology
- By Manning Marable, July 2000. Months ago, the white conservative
establishment decided that it would
back George W. Bush for the presidency, because he was safe, stupid,
and willing to serve as a frontman for its reactionary agenda. But
sometimes the lesser evil is just plain evil. The African-American
community should critically examine the whole rotten two-party
system and whether it makes sense to continue voting for a politics
that we don't want, just to defeat a politics that is worse. Perhaps
the time has come to make a break with the failed politics of the
past, and to chart a new course despite the tremendous odds against
- It's Time For Electoral Reform
- By Dave Steele, Ithaca Today Editorial, 7 August
2000. The current electoral system is undemocratic and
corrupt. The two parties differ only slightly in the policies
they advocate. It is money that powers the system.
- AU's Lynn Urges Candidates To Reaffirm
- Americans United statement on the role of religion and politics
in the presidential campaign, 9 August 2000.
- Election campaign or religious revival?
- AANews, 12 August 2000. The ethos of the election 2000 campaign,
where parties and candidates stumble over each other in a frenetic
effort to showcase their commitment to "moral values" and
religion-friendly social schemes ranging from vouchers to public
support of faith-based programs.
- The Next President. The Unspoken Issue: The
Impact of Globalization
- Weekly Global Intelligence Update, 14 August 2000.
The most potentially divisive - and unspoken - issue of all:
globalization. As the Democratic Party meets in Los Angeles,
this issue is at the root of the next president's choices
on foreign policy. And this is the one thing neither major
candidate will dare discuss.
- Presidential Debates Should Serve -- Not Subvert
- By Jeff Milchen, JINN Magazine, 14 August 2000.
The televised presidential debates are the single most
influential forum for most Americans who are trying to decide
whether they should vote and who to vote for. these debates
are now controlled by a private corporation that is purely
a tool of the Democratic and Republican parties and operates
without any public oversight.
- US Presidential Election: What's in It for
- By John Stremlau, Mail and Guardian (Johannesburg) 18
August 2000. Will any conceivable outcome of the U.S. election
alter current US foreign policy in ways that will affect
Africa? Al Gore is more expert on world affairs, but Joseph
Lieberman's selection suggests foreign policy is irrelevant
to today's politics. Both presidential candidates say almost
nothing about Africa. US's current Africa policy will likely
continue whoever is elected.
- Religion, politics becoming uneasy mix, some say;
Policy issues taking a back seat to piety
- By Miles Benson, The New Orleans Times-Picayune, 20 August
2000. Thomas Jefferson, the Democratic Party's founder, warned
Americans about political leaders who preach about religion. Holy
scripture instead of the Constitution is the basis for making laws,
and that is a very dangerous idea. This is still a democracy, not
- Voting and African Americans
- Letter to the editor of the New York Times, by Dave Silver,
21 August 2000. Will voting for the Democrats or Republicans make
a significant difference in the lives of most African-Americans?
Martin Luther King Jr. advocated a rejection of those Parties
and candidates that were not in the best interests of his people.
Lieberman's support of the death penalty.
- Election 2000 - A religious "Cold War"
- AANews, 22 August 2000. The religious tone of the
White House race is pervasive and unabated, as candidates from
both parties continue to drape themselves in the rhetorical
mantle of "values," morality and religion.
- Why George W. Bush's policies and Al Gore's
policies are basically the same
- By Jerry Gordon, 23 August 2000. While there are differences
between Bush and Gore on certain domestic questions, their
basic agreement on fundamental issues, regarding jobs, health
care, labor's rights, the environment, justice and peace are so
harmful to working families and the great majority, that a vote
for either Bush or Gore only promotes the interests of Corporate
- The United States has become insufferable as it has
- By Polly Toynbee, The Guardian, Wednesday 23 August 2000.
The rest of the globe watches U.S. elections as powerless spectators
and demi-subjects. The two conventions displayed all that is most
repugnant and alien in a political system corrupted beyond recognition
in the democratic world.
- Lieberman blames national woes on "freedom
- AANews, 28 August 2000. Lieberman has provided Democrats
with a new political weapon in their effort to "take back
god" and seize the rhetorical high ground from Republican.
Lieberman continues to push the envelope in
a political campaign awash in religious themes and rhetorical
devices. Candidates in both parties scramble to establish their
religious faith as a credential for public office, and both
platforms call for a greater role of religion in the public
square, as well as involvement by faith-based groups in the
operation of social services.
- The Nader factor
- By Brad Knickerbocker, Christian Science Monitor, 29
August 2000. Nader's message of environmental protection, social
justice, and grass-roots democracy resonates with many in the
Northwest - particularly those who see little difference between
"compassionate conservative" Republicans, buffing a more
centrist image, and the predominant New Democrats, who have
shifted their party rightward.
- The beat goes on: Lieberman again cites religion;
ADL calls for restraint, American Atheists speak out
- AANews, 29 August 2000. Candidates on both sides of the
political divide continued their effort to appeal to faith-based
groups and cite the virtues of religious belief, despite calls
for a "cease fire" in what has become a rhetorical war
- Nader: Empower People vs. Elites
- The Associated Press, 31 August 2000. Nader's goal is to halt
the concentration of that power "more and more in the
hands of the few controlling our government." On the
issues that matter there is little difference between Democrat
Al Gore and Republican George W. Bush. "They are different
in a few areas but the rhetoric is more different than the
- Crisscrossing Manhattan, Nader Criticizes
- By Jayson Blair, The New York Times, 1 September 2000.
Ralph Nader, running for president as the Green Party
nominee, railed against big business, crisscrossing Manhattan
to condemn environmental pollution, the exploitation of workers
and the abuse of taxpayer dollars through "corporate welfare."
He also dismissed his opponents as candidates whose similarities
(favoring businesses over workers and taking millions from
corporate donors) outweighed their differences.
- Populism & and corporate welfare
- By Tom Barry, The Progressive Response, 8 September
2000. It's time Gore spoke out about corporate greed and corporate
control over the political process. It's time that the U.S.
government's practice of corporate welfare become an issue
for U.S. fair trade, labor, and consumer groups--and for
"populist" Al Gore.
- Bush underscores need for faith; Gore again hits
Hollywood, supports Lieberman on religion-in-politics
- AANews, 17 September 2000. Just when you thought the
candidates of the two major political parties could not add
to the volume of religious rhetoric in the election campaign,
both Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Democrat Presidential
hopeful Al Gore continued talking about the importance of faith,
and a role for sectarian groups in the public square.
- Ralph Nader Responds to ColorLines
- By Ralph Nader, 5 October 2000. Nader says that after reading
the ColorLines article accusing him of downplaying
issues of race and racism in his campaign, Nader responds by
describing his record on advocating for the rights of people
of color: Issues concerning racism have been central to the
work I have done in the past, and continue to the present
- Nader = Clinton on foreign policy
- From the Marxist Workers' Group, 5 October 2000. Nader
refuses to take any position on critical issues of
foreign policy because he is indistinguishable from
Buchanan, Bush, Gore or Clinton. The Greens aren't
big on pushing themselves as an alternative to Clinton's
foreign policy because there is no difference. The Greens
in the US use the first Green Party in Germany as its
model, and the German Green Party runs the imperialist
war machine there.
- A Green Perspective on Ralph Nader And
Independent Political Action
- By Howie Hawkins, 8 October 2000. Nader no stranger to the labor
movement, and buiding a labor-environment coalition is a constant
theme in his campaign. While Nader's campaign develops independent
progressive politics, many still adhere to the lesser evil position.
It is hard to find any redeeming liberal or progressive legacy in
the Clinton/Gore record. The Gore candidacy might put to question
the traditional popular constituency of the Democratic Party.
- A campaign without class
- By Howard Zinn, 8 October 2000. This country is divided among the
rich, the poor, and the nervous in between. Whether Gore or Bush
wins, the same class that has always dominated our political and
economic systems will be in power. How to bring together the
class of have-nots -- a great majority of the country -- into the
kind of social movement that in the past has made the people in
charge tremble at the prospect of "class warfare" and has
gained some measure of justice.
- In dispute over RU-486, Bush working to woo Catholic vote.
Republicans mobilizing special Catholic task force
- In AANews, 9 October 2000. In the year 2000 election campaign,
major party hopefuls quote scripture and verse from holy books. Bush
adopts Catholic anti-abortion slogan, "culture of life." The
Catholic vote and the Democratic Party.
- I'm Angry at Ralph Nader's Whimpy Statement
- By Stan Heller, 10 October 2000. I'm angry that Buchanan's statement
on the Middle East was much better than Nader's! The "peace
process" is a fraud to solidify an apartheid system, with
Palestinians kept down. Nader is foolishly throwing away a huge
- Politics & People; The Biggest Whopper: The
Bush Tax Cut
- By Albert R. Hunt, Dow Jones, 12 October 2000. The GOP
nominee claims his tax measure principally will help the working
poor and middle-class Americans. The rich, he says, will get a smaller
percentage than they currently do, and the tax plan comfortably fits
with projected budget surpluses and his Social Security plans. None
of that is true.
- Is there any difference between Gore and Bush
on the conflict in Palestine?
- Interview with the candidates, 13 October 2000, on Middle
East policy. Gore: I haven't heard a big difference in
[our] last view exchanges; I was one of the few members of
my political party to support former President Bush in the
Persian Gulf War resolution. Bush: I want [the genocidal
Iraqi sanctions] to be tougher.
- Reasons not to vote for Bush (Need Help)
- 15 October 2000. The stand of Gore and Bush on Privatizing
Government Services, Minimum Wage, Discrimination, Protecting
a woman's right to choose, Protecting Our Environment, Right
to organize, Paycheck Deception, Social Security and
Pensions, Education, Equal Pay, Health Care, Taxes, Working
for our children, Head Start.
- Candidates Ignore Poverty in 2000 Elections
- By Mark Weisbrot, 15 October 2000. The absolute poverty of American
presidential politics is perhaps nowhere more evident than in the
politics of poverty. It is not only the poor who have been left
behind in the Age of Greed: according to the latest data, from
1986 to 1997 the real income of 90 percent of American families
barely grew at all. Gore wants to maintain the illusion that the
rising tide of economic expansion has lifted everyone's boat, and
Bush -- well, for him the rich still have too little.
- Ralph's People Problem
- By Laura Flanders, In These Times, 16 October 2000.
Nader says he's running for president on the Green Party ticket to
reinvigorate U.S. politics. It's about building a people's movement,
he says. The only snag: When it comes to people of color, queers,
feminists and a whole hunk of today's already pretty invigorated
youth movement, Nader and the people find it hard to get along.
- Vote Strategically: For Nader
- By Manning Marable, Along The Color Line, October 2000.
Bush completely ignores the African-American electorate because
he knows he'll receive few black votes, probably under 10 percent.
Gore can also safely ignore us, because he knows we have nowhere
else to go. All too many black elected politicians and Democratic
Party officials have become silent partners in the suppression of
black electoral political power.
- Nader's Curious Lack Of Black Support
- By Salim Muwakkil, in the Chicago Tribune, 16 October
2000. The striking lack of racial diversity among
Nader supporters despite his progressive positions on economic
democracy and social justice. Black leadership is in the pocket
of Al Gore because he is part of the Clinton administration
that is beloved by many blacks primarily because of his
attention to symbolic issues, and most blacks have a vested
interest in the fate of the Democratic party.
- The Real Choice in 2000
- By Dave Steele, in Ithaca Today, 17 October 2000.
Everyone in the world deserves the right to vote in our
Presidental elections, not just Americans. The President
wields unparalleled power over the entire planet and most
of the world has no voice in his decisions. Al Gore and
George W. Bush agree on an awful lot on policies which, to
put it mildly, are not at all good for the world.
- Quick on the Trigger. On Foreign Policy, It's No
Easy Matter To Make A "Lesser Of Two Evils" Argument For
the Gore-Lieberman Ticket
- By William D. Hartung, in The Progressive, November
2000 issue (17 October 2000). In the of U.S. foreign and
military policy, it's no easy matter to make a "lesser
of two evils" argument for the Gore-Lieberman ticket.
On many of the issues that progressives care about most,
the differences between the two major parties range from
subtle to nonexistent.
- October Surprise? U.S. Special Forces Hunting Bin-Ladin
- In Mid-East Realities, 19 October 2000. The attack on Afghanistan
could be designed to further Gore's campaign and win Clinton a positive
image in history.
- Quick on the Trigger On Foreign Policy, It's No Easy
Matter To Make A "Lesser Of Two Evils" Argument For The
- By William D. Hartung, in The Progressive, 21 October
2000. Liberal columnists attempt to show that there are
significant differences between the two major parties. They
then argue that Nader should put aside his quixotic quest.
On many of the issues that progressives care about most, the
differences between the standard-bearers range from subtle
to nonexistent. Look for a Gore and Lieberman Administration
to launch air strikes on Washington's designated enemies of
the moment in the tradition of Reagan and Clinton.
- Voters Are Tuning In, Turning Sour. People express
disappointment with Bush, Gore; 'Like a fraternity election'
- By Jonathan Weisman, in the Baltimore Sun, 22 October 2000.
Many of the nation's voters appear to be eyeing Election Day with
disappointment, dissatisfaction and even disgust for two presidential
candidates who still have not won their confidence. Votes will
be cast without enthusiasm for the man viewed as the less
objectionable candidate. "I haven't seen anything addressed
that I felt was important; it's more politics as usual."
- Cut Out of Prosperity, Cutting Out at the Polls
- By Dale Russakoff, The Washington Post, 24 October 2000.
Low-income, working-age Americans, the least likely voters in a
country with the lowest voter turnout of all western democracies,
appear doubly alienated this election year. Not only have they
watched the nation's longest economic boom lift seemingly every
boat but theirs, but now come the major presidential nominees
talking conspicuously past them about tax relief for the middle
class and prescription drugs for the elderly.
- Forgotten Issues
- By Hanna Rosin, in The Washington Post, 26 October
2000. The one fact about America that will define "the
shape of the future," is that during the past decade,
more immigrants came to the US than at any time. Yet, when
the two main candidates talk about the future, the impact of
this demographic upheaval rarely comes up.
- Contradictions of the Nader Program
- By Fred Goldstein, in Workers World, 26 October
2000. Nader's rallies calling for democratic rights inspired
great enthusiasm among white youths just coming into the political
movement. It will take a great deal of education and wider and
deeper political experience for the new generation of activists
to grasp the enormous contradictions (over issues) in the Nader
- Clinton, Gore church appearances spark IRS complaint
from church-state watchdog group
- Americans United for Separation of Church and State press release,
27 October 2000. AU ask the IRS to investigate two churches for
possible violations of the federal tax law's ban on church
- Sierra Club Scolds Nader: Calls Ralph's
- Sierra Club release, 27 October 2000. Response to a letter
from Ralph Nader that attacked a number of environmental
leaders for their support of Gore. Nader's letter contained
a number of inaccurate and unfair attacks on Gore's
- Top ten reasons why I'm not voting for Nader
- By Gloria Steinem, 28 October 2000. Perhaps there's a reason why
Nader's rallies seem so white, middle class, and disproportionately
male. Be ethical as if everything we do matters: if we want Gore
and not Bush in the White House, we have to vote for Gore and not
Bush. Think about the impact of our vote on the weakest among us.
Also here a rebuttal to this blast at Nader by Gloria Steinem,
by Green Party Lisa Thurman.
- Gore = ANTI-CHOICE (tell your pro-Gore friends)
- From votenader.com, 29 October 2000. A major reason cited for "why
we've got to vote for Gore instead of Nader, to make sure we keep out
Bush" is to protect Roe V. Wade. This is an incorrect assessment.
- A Missing Campaign Issue: Economic
- Institute for Public Accuracy, 30 October 2000. The absence
of much discussion of the gap between the presumption of
universal prosperity and voters' own experience of their
lives is a big reason why neither of the major presidential
candidates has been able to develop a strong bond with the
electorate or retain a lead in the polls.
- Bush and Gore on Sovereign Right
- A dialog from the Taino-L list, 30 October 2000. Statement
by Bush on Native American sovereignty. Criticism that
they will continue with the "trust relationship"
that means more of the same old colonial paternalistic
behavior. Nothing about getting rid of the BIA altogether,
and going government to government. It all looks like
business as usual.
- The Interest Groups
- By Matthew Vita and Susan Schmidt, in The Washington
Post, 2 November 2000. This year Christian conservative
groups have decided to stay out of the limelight, even as
they try to step up their grass-roots efforts to increase
voter turnout among supporters. They have come to realize
that most of the people they are trying to mobilize are
pretty squarely in the Republican camp and that the thing
that works best are quiet efforts to get these folks out to
- African American Leader Wilson Riles, Jr. on
- By Wilson Riles Jr. 1 November 2000. A respected African
American leader addresses an open letter
to the Jewish community concerning Gloria Steinem's plea that
they vote for Gore rather than nature. I have found that the
weakest among us are more willing to struggle than the less
weak. Lets work for the profound change that is going to mean
something to the weakest among us. Let's not just work to keep
them in a weak position.
- Gore = Anti-Choice
- From Gore's Broken Promises Archive, 2 November 2000. Gore's
real stance on "pro-choice" broken promises for gay rights;
broken promise that "health care should be a right, not a
privildege"; scores of deaths due to lax FDA enforcement
under Clinton/Gore watch.
- As Turnout Falls, Apathy Emerges As Driving Force
- By Richard Morin and Claudia Deane, Washington Post, 4 November
2000. The single biggest reason why half of all Americans will not
cast ballots on Tuesday is because they are bored by politics and
indifferent to the political process, according to new surveys of
nonvoters. One in four doesn't participate out of anger with politics
and politicians. Today, women may outnumber men within the ranks of
the alienated. Article seems to blame the victim.
Labor and progressives and the election of 2000
- Labor caves in to Democrats on
- By James Drew, in Blade, 30 July 2000. The outcome
of the platform meeting was another sign of how "New
Democrats," who helped move the party to the center
after Bill Clinton's victory in 1992, retain tight control
over the party's agenda. Free trade has been a fundamental
element of our economic success, but the platform's stance
on trade won't broaden the party's appeal and could cause
apathy among traditional Democrats. If you keep moving the
center to the right, you're missing out on representing a
lot of people.
- Labour Disputes - Los Angeles
- 12 August 2000. Disputes between labor and big money, and accusations
of police paranoia, are combining with the threat posed by thousands
of protesters to set the scene for strife and dissension.
- Revived Unions Flex Their Muscles in L.A.
- The Philadelphia Inquirer, 16 August 2000. The power that
labor unions exert in the 2000 campaign season, and the deference
being paid here to union members - who make up roughly 30 percent
of the elected delegates - and to union money, which accounts for
some of the largest contributions to the Democrats' coffers.
- Labor's Love for Gore May Be Lost
- By David Moberg, Newsday, 17 August 2000. Democratic victory
depends on union support, but most moderate-income workers gained
relatively little from the Clinton boom, and the gap between the
corporate elite and everyone else widened. Even if labor support
brings Gore a victory, growing corporate influence in the Democratic Party
makes it unlikely he would reward labor with the sound policies that
labor wants, are politically popular and that would strengthen the
- "The Democrats Have Lost Me"
- By Bruce Mirken, San Francisco Examiner, 24 August
2000. America's survival depends on one major political party
standing up for ordinary working people, the poor and those who
face discrimination. Democratic Party hacks are near panic over
the possibility that many progressive voters, including gays and
lesbians, will support Green Party presidential candidate Ralph
- Nader visit aims to get labor vote
- By David Postman, Seattle Times, 25 August 2000.
"How many years of dissembling and lies and betrayals do the Democrats
have to deliver to organized labor before labor says `enough is enough?"
Nader asked. Democrats call Nader a spoiler. Most major labor organizations
have endorsed Gore, nationally and locally. He may get some labor support
on an individual basis.
- AFL-CIO leader pledges support for Gore
- By Ann McFeatters, The Blade, 30 August 30 2000. John
Sweeney estimates his organization will spend between $40 million
and $45 million this election to try to get Al Gore elected, win
back the House for Democrats, and influence legislation.
- The Real Strength of the Economy; A labor agenda
- By Ralph Nader, San Francisco Bay Guardian, 1 September
2000. There is a critical need for the labor movement and
progressives to once again pick up the battle against the
restrictive anti-labor provisions of Taft Hartley. There is a
need to adopt labor laws which end the tilt toward employers
and provide a fair opportunity for workers to organize without
- 'Working-Class' Majority Needs a Hero
- By Michael Zweig, Newsday, 1 September 2000. There is
class warfare in this country. The problem is, only one class
seems to know it - the class that has been winning for the last
three decades. The working class takes it in the neck while the
capitalist class goes to the bank. If we understand class as a
question of power rather than income or lifestyle, we see that
America is not a "middle-class society."
- US labor movement will support Gore
- Agence France Presse, 3 September 2000. US labor unions, want
to use their still decisive influence to help Democratic
presidential nominee Al Gore win the White House. Closing
his eyes on the free-trade ideology of Gore and his running mate
Joseph Lieberman, AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said he was
"very enthusiastic about the whole ticket."
- Labor holds key to future for Gore, his
party in Nov.
- By David Goldstein, The Enquirer, 4 September
2000. Like clockwork, labor leaders tell their rank and file
every two years that the campaign before them represents "the
most important election in their lifetime." Organized labor
has been a cornerstone of the Democratic base since the New Deal
days of the 1930s. And these days, when union members vote,
- Nader's Politics Of the Disconnect
- By Dana Milbank, Washington Post, 5 September 2000.
Nader's issues reflect "white, middle-class interests,"
not gay, nonwhite or youth concerns. He speaks to the white
middle class. Nader is failing to rally the far left for the
same reason Gore failed. "The left has become heavily
concentrated on identity politics--gender, race and homophobia,"
Nader says. "It's devolved itself into grievances. Slights
are magnified, and they tend to implode on themselves."
- Union Families And the Upcoming Election
- Reuters/Zogby, 6 September 2000. In a recent national Zogby
poll of 1,004 likely voters, 183 said they, themselves or
someone in their family is a union member. Among these likely
voting union families, Gore is the choice of 55.3%. One in four
union families choose George W. Bush, while 9.2% favor Green
Party candidate Ralph Nader.
- The Greening of America
- By John Neumaier, in the Daily Freeman (Kingston, N.Y.),
1 October 2000. The presidential candidate who poses the
strongest challenge to the two-party system is Ralph Nader
of the Green Party. Left-leaning voters in the main are divided
between Gore and Nader, and the latter is better on the issues.
Though few expect Nader to win, what motivates many Nader
supporters is their determination to challenge the stultifying
monopoly of the two-party system.
- Unions push turnout in key states for Gore
- In USA Today 30 October 2000. Business interests outspent
the AFL-CIO 11-to-1 in 1998, yet labor made a difference in races
all over the country. This year an even greater effort.
"He who has the gold, rules"
- US Elections: Corporations Buy Access
- By Douglas Turner, in Buffalo News, 17 July 2000.
In all, corporate America is ginning up nearly $42 million
to help the two political parties pay for their conventions
and purchase influence, no matter who wins. The last GOP
convention where there was any real indecision about the
nominee was in 1952. The last Democratic convention of the
type was in 1960.
- Media coverage overshadows demonstrators'
- By Michael Kozart, Daily Bruin, (Los Angeles) 21 August
2000. The protesters raised issues all but banished from the
platforms of the two-party system, but when it came to the media,
these issues were nowhere to be found. The Los Angeles demonstration
was reduced by the media to a mindless confrontation of people
versus police.There is a corporate machine behind the news, and
behind the convention itself. It is all about the money, and money
is made from action films.
- The money, media, and liberal-left role in
- By Edward S. Herman, 13 September 2000. As part of the
normalization process the media argue that the two candidates on
the take offer adequate options, have sufficient and important
differences, so that nobody else even needs to be heard by the
public. I feel that we will lose if Gore-Lieberman OR Bush-Cheney
win. And if Gore-Lieberman do win, and Al From and the
more-pro-business-than-thou crowd of the DNC consolidate their
position in the Democratic Party, where is political change supposed
to come from in the future?
- Political Groups Change Status to Avoid
- By Susan Schmidt, Washington Post, 15 September 2000.
Political groups that want to keep their finances secret are
changing their tax status in order to avoid having to reveal
their donors and spending, making an end-run around a new law
intended to crack down on anonymous political activity. GOP
election lawyer says his firm's 527 clients are converting
to nonprofit status in droves to avoid the new disclosure
- Withering Democracy
- By Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman, in "Focus on the
Corporation,", 27 September 2000. For all but the ideologically
committed or deluded few who believe corporations and their
executives make contributions out of a sense of civic obligation,
there can be little doubt that the U.S. campaign finance system
is fundamentally corrupt, and corrupting.
- Reject fear and loathing on Gore's campaign
- By John Stauber, 26 October 2000. A well-organized campaign of
fear and loathing is attempting to frighten people from voting
their own consciences. Democratic big business lobbyist Toby
Moffett is one of the so-called progressives coordinating the
effort to attack Nader and his supporters.
- 'Stealth PACs' Report Campaign Financing
- By John Mintz and Susan Schmidt, The Washington Post,
1 November 2000. A few of the nuggets buried in the first
detailed filings under a new law aimed at forcing previously
secret organizations to disclose their donors and spending.
Nobody thought this law would be the final solution to the
problems of unreported political spending, but the 527s
were so abusive that just disrupting those arrangements had
- Taking A Long Hard Look At Ralph Nader
- By Cedric Muhammad, BlacklElectorate, 17 July 2000.
Instead of looking at American politics in terms of a
narrow-minded Democrat-Republican dichotomy, Blacks
should look at politics in terms of their own best
interests. Such a strategy will find plenty in the
Democratic Party worthy of support but it also will
reveal plenty to be disgusted about.
- Quote of the Day: Katha Pollitt
- If working on Nader's campaign is the best way progressives
can spend the next eight months, it's time to hire a
hearse and lie down in it.
- George W. Bush: The Illusion of Inclusion
- By Manning Marable, July 2000. The theatrical production called
the Republican National Convention resonated with Bush's message
of racial inclusion. For four days, the Republicans paraded before
the television camera a near-endless series of black and brown
performers. It was truly a breathtaking exercise in hypocrisy.
The basic Republican strategy has been to fragment the hold the
Democratic Party has on the African-American electorate.
- Dick Cheney is relying on our cultural amnesia to
wipe away his record on South Africa
- By Joe Conason, in Salon, 1 August 2000. "Whitewashing"
is the only word to describe the weak explanations offered by Dick
Cheney about his votes on South Africa during the apartheid era.
He is relying on our customary national amnesia to wave away the
questions raised by his vice presidential nomination.
- Cheney's Multi-Million Dollar Revolving Door
- By Robert Bryce, in Mother Jones 2 August 2000.
As Bush Sr.'s secretary of defense, Dick Cheney steered millions
of dollars in government business to a private military contractor --
whose parent company just happened to give him a high-paying job
after he left the government.
- GW Bush, Jesus and the Manhattan Institute
- By Robert Lederman, 8 August 2000. George Bush credits the Manhattan
Institute with inventing his entire "compassionate
conservative" platform and persona. The link between
having faith-based organizations assume public responsibilities
and Nazi objectives, and the association of the Manhattan
Institute with Nazi immigrants.
- Buchanan Accepts a Disputed Reform
- By Thomas B. Edsall, The Washington Post, 13
August 2000. He promises to lead a "party that will defend
America's history, heritage and heroes against the Visigoths and
Vandals of multiculturalism."
- Gore gives America a stark choice
- By Ed Vulliamy, in the Observer (London), 20 August 2000.
Gore's acceptance speech was a high-risk strategy, which enlivens
the struggle against Bush. This now becomes - issue for issue,
brick by brick - the most politically polarised election since
Ronald Reagan's. Gore was forced into his position by a miasma
of personal and political relationships. Gore and Clinton
- Why I'm Voting for Ralph
- By Robert W. McChesney, In these Times, 21 August 2000. Over
the past few months, no one has aroused progressive political
interest more than Ralph Nader, who suddenly has invigorated
the most tedious and numbing presidential race imaginable.
- Why Nader, why now?
- By Chuck Idelson, 26 August 2000. Whether to once again line up
behind the Democratic Party's Presidential candidate us usually
an academic exercise, but this year is clearly different. Nader's
campaign is the most serious, broad-based, third party challenge
from the left in a Presidential race in over half a century.
- Nader's Veep: Running To Help Poor
- By Patrick Howe, Associated Press, 29 August 2000. Ralph Nader's
vice presidential running mate, Winona LaDuke, is an Ojibwe
author, activist and farmer from Minnesota.
- Nader calls for single-payer health care
- Nader 2000 General Committee press release, 29 August 2000.
Ralph Nader calls for a universal health care system - with
public funding, private delivery, and controls against waste,
profiteering and malpractice, which would be similar to the
single-payer system in Canada.
- Lingering Question: Is Dick Cheney Guilty Of War
Crimes Against Iraqis?
- By Robert Jensen, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 5 September
2000. Much criticism of Dick Cheney's business record -- the
propriety of his stock options, his role in getting government
contracts, and whether or not he earned the millions he was paid.
We also heard much about some of Cheney's less compassionate
conservative votes in Congress against gun control, Head Start
and Nelson Mandela.
- The Nader-bashing begins, but he deserves to
- The Blade (Toledo, Ohio), 12 September 2000.
The guardians of reality at the New York Times Corp. and other
media conglomerates are sharpening their knives to cut Ralph
Nader and the Green Party down to size. Somewhere along the
way, Nader, the practical radical disappeared and his theme seems
to be not consumer protection but general hostility toward
corporations, warns Paul Krugman of the New York Times.
- Ralph Nader is so fed up with corrupt beltway
politics that he is willing to sacrifice Al Gore
- By Charles M. Young, Rolling Stone Magazine, 14 September
2000. An interview with Nader by Rolling Stone Magazine.
- Interview With Winona LaDuke
- In These Times, 2 October 2000. In these Times
interviews the vice-presidential candidate.
- Cheney, Lieberman Play Games With Numbers
- By Glenn Kessler, The Washington Post 6 October 2000.
Both Joe Lieberman and Richard Cheney tend to distort the
facts. [Interesting, in a year when the few who plan to vote
will mostly based their vote on the good character of the
- Buchanan pans Columbus Day parade protesters
- By Michael P, October 9, 2000. Buchanan's off-the-wall hostility to
- Trust or hustle: Wall St Journal on Bush
- By David E. Scheim, 16 October 2000. The Bush family financial record.
The record called a "never-ending hustle".
- Protecting Bush-Cheney
- By Sam Parry, in ConsortiumNews.com, 16 October 2000. The national
news media have altered the course of Campaign 2000 by applying two
different standards for judging how George W. Bush and Dick Cheney
handle the truth versus how Vice President Al Gore does.
- Socialist Party Candidate on the Mid-East Crisis
- 22 October 2000. Presidential candidate for Socialist Party discusses
the Middle East situation, in which the two sides are morally equated:
"Both sides have behaved as if in a tribal battle."
- Weakening the wall: Al Gore grovels for votes with
Promise Keeper T.D. Jakes
- In AANews, 23 October 2000. Al Gore panders after what many
consider to be a cult leader. It was typical of the saturation of
religious rhetoric, themes and voter-block appeals which have
characterized the year 2000 election contest.
- Will the 'Slow' Candidate Win the Big Race?
- By Howard Kurtz, Washington Post, October 26, 2000. Some
left-leaning journalists are flat-out calling George W. Bush dumb and
blaming the press for not persuading the country of his utter
unsuitability. Even commentators who also criticize Vice President
Gore have focused on Bush's candlepower, or lack thereof.
- A little background on that hate crimes bill
- From John - THE LIST, in Star Telegram, 30 October 2000.
Bush's killing of the Texas hate crimes bill. Bush's political
problem was that he was about to run for the nomination of a party
in which Christian-right voters make up one-third of the Republican
primary vote. He could not afford to be associated with a bill that
could be interpreted as giving special rights to gays.
- A closer look at GW Bush
- By Mark Graffis, 1 November 2000. If you look at George W. Bush's and
Al Gore's resumes as one would when considering someone for a very
high level office, you will find that Al Gore is 100 times more
qualified. George W. Bush has no more than 12 months experience in
a gubernatorial office that is very constitutionally weak.
- Dead Serious: Ads and Calls Go for Jugular
- By Howard Kurtz, The Washington Post, 2 November 2000.
The low tactics of the parties as we get down to the wire. Attempting
to tie a candidate to a horrendous crime is a high-stakes gamble,
often done through low-profile phone banks, that invariably produces
charges of desperation. The exploitation of tragedy has been an
advertising staple since Bush's father turned Willie Horton into a
household name in 1988.
- Questions which Mr Bush left unanswered
- By Paul Wolvekamp, 2 November 2000. Former President George Bush's
interest in the gold concession in the north-east of the Democratic
Republic of Congo. Question whether presidential candidate George
W. Bush has personally gained from it and whether the income from
it has helped to fund his run for presidency and other electoral
- Nader's Record
- 2 November 2000. Ralph Nader is by all accounts a very smart
man, his humorless, hair-shirt personality aside. But he's only
interested in one issue: the growth of corporate power and its
corrupting influence on democracy. He has little interest in, or
commitment to, social issues. Ralph Nader may look like a democrat,
smell like a populist, and sound like a socialist--but deep down
he's a frightened, petit bourgeois moralizer without a political
compass, more concerned with his image than the movement he claims
to lead: in short, an opportunist, a liberal hack. Before this
campaign, he was hostile to labor and to the Greens.
- Poll: Voters Satisfied With Presidential Choices
- By Claudia Deane and Richard Morin, The Washington Post,
3 November 2000. Despite a steady drumbeat of complaints about
candidates being dumb, dull or both, the majority of those who
intend to vote say either Bush or Gore would make a good president.
Two in three of those who actually vote say it is "strength
of the candidate's personal character" that is key to their
vote. This article does not examine whether personal character is
likely to be only an image created by the media or whether such a
criterion subverts the principle of democracy.
- Malaysians on Gore: Can't forget, can't forgive
- By Brendan Pereira, Malaysia Correspondent, The Straits
Times, 3 November 2000. Malaysians cannot forget what US
Vice-President Al Gore did the last time he was in Kuala Lumpur,
nor can they forgive. Many politicians, newspaper executives and
prominent Malaysians are rooting for Republican nominee George
W. Bush and hope that his foreign policy will be less intrusive
if he is elected in next Tuesday's polls.
- Nader Vote May Cast His Name in History
- By Scott Martelle, in Los Angeles Times, 3 November 2000.
Third-party presidential candidates historically attract little
attention and even less voter support. But sometimes, the right
candidate riding the right issue can vault a third party to the
front of the national political stage. The election is so tight,
particularly in states where Nader's support is relatively high,
that Nader could turn the electoral table.
Which candidate is the lesser evil?
- Lesser Evil?
- By Michael Albert, ZNet Commentary, 21 August 2000.
The most frequent reply to the lesser evil argument either
(1) disputes that Bush is that much worse than Gore, or (2)
urges that voting for Nader sends a message to the Democrats
that they are missing the boat and need to move left to win
wider support. Problems with the pro-Nader and the anti-Nader
- Lesser Evil?
- By Michael Albert, ZMag, 23 August 2000. The main problem
with the anti-Nader argument is that it assumes that what matters
most about an election or an administration is the positions the
candidates and their parties want to pursue, rather than what they
can get away with.
- A voice crying in the wilderness
- By Edward Said, in Al-Ahram Weekly, (Egypt) 24-30
August 2000. The choice between Gore and Bush exists but
is a relatively trivial and uninteresting one: both are
comfortable with the current system. The poor, the disadvantaged,
the minorities will have less support from the state thanks to
Clinton's neo-liberalism. In Ralph Nader, the Green Party candidate,
there is an individual who is much better suited to be president
than either of the two main ones who are where they are by
inheritance and a huge amount of money rather than real merit.
- A Vote for Gore is a Vote for Bush
- By Paul Glover, Ithaca Today 27 August 2000. Clinton's
presidency should have taught progressive voters that a cute
smile can mask bitterly conservative willingness, after elections,
to sell out environmentalists, labor, middle-class taxpayers,
small businesses, African-Americans, and women. Had progressives
begun twenty years ago voting our own platforms rather than
fearing greater evils (which we got anyway), then today we'd
have a strong electoral challenge.
- Reed on Nader
- Adolph Reed, 2 September 2000. It's the quadrennial presidential
charade. Progressives debate about which of the two major evils
is really lesser, and it comes down to whether to support the
inadequate Democratic nominee or some more or less quixotic third
party initiative. This has characterized every presidential
election season since 1980, when John Anderson ran as a mass
media-generated hologram spouting empty slogans and projecting
gravitas without specific content. We have internalized our
defeat and accommodated perversely to our marginalization in
- Maximizing Ralph: The Free Nader Vote
- By Don Hazen, AlterNet, 10 October 2000. No issue has dominated
liberal and progressive political debate more this election
cycle than the Gore/Nader dilemma. Must we choose between
idealism and pragmatism? Given the nature of our winner-take-all,
corporate-money-drenched democracy, many believe that voting
isn't the best way to create social progress, but is only tactical.
- Protecting Bush-Cheney
- By Sam Parry, www.consortiumnews.com, 16 October 2000. The national
news media have altered the course of Campaign 2000 by applying two
different standards for judging how Bush and Cheney handle the
truth versus how Gore does.
- Don't Vote Lesser Evil Politics!
- By Rabbi Michael Lerner, Tikkun Magazine, September/October
2000 (18 October 2000). With the New York Times' liberal establishment
bashing any liberals who are choosing to give Nader's candidacy
serious consideration, Tikkun Magazine thought it might be worthwhile
to consider the logic of might be described as "lesser evillism"
- "You Always Hurt The Ones You Love" The
Real Threat is Al Gore, Not Ralph Nader
- By Jeffrey St. Clair, in CounterPunch, 19 October 2000.
The neo-liberals' warning to progressives and Leftists that a vote
for Ralph Nader is the surest way to elect George W. Bush? It's
a cynical ploy; yet, millions have fallen for it, trembling out
of fear. But there's so much more to fear from Gore than Bush.
- Halliburton Corporation's Brown and Root is one of the
major components of the Bush-Cheney drug empire
- By Michael C. Ruppert, the Wilderness Publications, 24 October 2000.
The success of Richard Cheney at leading Halliburton, Inc. to a
"pig-out" on federal contracts and taxpayer-insured loans.
Report suggests drug money played a role in the successes achieved
by Halliburton under Cheney's tenure.
- Why I Won't Change My Vote: a Native American
- By Noquisi (Day Starr), 24 October 2000. In Native Ameican tradition,
we elect those who will represent us, and neither Bush nor Gore
have the good of the people in their heart, just the good of the
corporations. What kind of future are we creating for the future
generation if we continue to vote the lesser of two evils?
- The Lesser of Two Evils or The Greatest Common Good
- By Jonah Nadir Omowale, 27 October 2000. Now, because it looks
like Gore's blunders during those debates and throughout this campaign
are catching up to him, he and the media that backs him are attacking
Ralph Nader. But they aren't addressing the issues that inspired Nader
to run in the first place.
- Some Black Voters View Gore as the Lesser of Two
- By Terry M. Neal, the Washington Post, October 29, 2000. Neither
candidate has spent much time addressing issues of particular concern to
African Americans. The message they get from Democratic leaders was not
so much that Gore was great on the issues but that Bush was horrible and
that a vote for Nadar was tantamount to a vote for Bush.
- Nader Painted as Spoiler by Mainstream Green
- By Brian Hansen, ENS, 30 October 2000. The Sierra Club
lashes back at Ralph Nader, who last week attacked mainstream
environmental groups for what he called their "servile
mentality" in supporting the "lesser of two evils"
in this year's presidential race.
- An Open Letter to Gore From Moore
- By Mike Moore, 31 October 2000. When it begins to look as though
Gore's victory not sure, those who support the status quo accuse
Nader's people of being traitors. It's the fault of Gore and Democrats
that there is a possibility of Bush winning, not of Nader's supporters.
You missed an opportunity to do the right thing and now you ask us to
pull you out of your mistake and prevent the reign of terror a Bush
presidency will bring us.
- Labor and the Lesser of Two Evils
- By Haines Brown, 1 November 2000. The difference between the working
class vote for Lesser Evil and for a Friend of Labor. How should the
working class approach this election?
- Labor and the Lesser of Two Evils
- 1 November 2000. A comment in response to the previous essay of the same
name. For the first time in years, there is a viable alternative, a
chance for blacks and labour to take a stand and act independently.
- German Green Objects to Nader
- 1 November 2000. A founder of the Green Party in southern
Germany is warning Americans about the danger of applying
the Green political experience in Germany to the United
States. America's winner-take-all system has made Ralph
Nader's potential contribution to the election of Bush an
"alarming" threat to the principles of Greens in
Europe and the United States,
- The Nader Dilemma
- By D. A. Clarke, written for Feminists for Nader, 2 November
2000. Ralph Nader and the lesser evil argument from a feminist
perspective. Many progressives face a crisis of conscience over
their vote this November.
- Nader Urged To Yield Field to Gore
- By Eun-Kyung Kim, Associated Press, 2 November 2000. Attacks
against the Green Party presidential candidate are mounting
from those once closely aligned with his progressive views
but now angered by his refusal to step aside in closely
contested states where a vote for Nader could mean a victory
for Republican George W. Bush.
- Ain't Fallin' For That One Again
- By Michael Moore, 2 November 2000. The pundits and the Democrats
tell us that a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush because all Ralph
will end up doing is siphoning off votes that would have gone to
Gore. Well, I've fallen for this before and I ain't fallin' for it
again. In fact, Based on the record of abortion rights, George W. Bush,
if elected, will never to anything to make abortion illegal, but
under the Clinton/Gore watch, there was a "right" to an
abortion, but you couldn't actually get one.
- For what social forces does Ralph Nader speak?
- 5 November 2000. A citation of a good workers' analysis of Nader's
true place in the scheme of things, and a quote from Karl Marx on
working-class independent politics.