Votin' Green follow-up

• I registered as Green (rather than Peace & Freedom or independent) because the party is an international one with success in other countries, and I figured it therefore had the best chance of survival. I voted Nader in 1996 and 2000, but not 2004 (I considered voting for Leonard Peltier, who was the Peace & Freedom candidate in '04, but ultimately decided I was OK with Kerry). I did believe Nader when he said that no matter the result in 2000, he was looking to build a new progressive movement. I see no evidence that he delivered on that. Ironically, Gore has done more than him on that front (since 2000). I don't know that Nader would get more attention than McKinney...but I do suspect he's slightly more sane. I respect the hell out of his achievements, but also feel like he's in it mostly for himself. As for casting protest votes...if you're already in the Green Party, you have to be pretty used to that, right? If we want Democrats to consider voting for Kucinich, we can't be afraid to do the equivalent. If the party does like it did in '04, they'll choose independently of the votes anyway.

• i guess it depends on what your reasons are for voting green. it seems to me that, if your reason is to promote the general agenda of the green party, then one ought to vote for nader simply because he's got the best chance of getting national attention (much of it bad). if you still believe that a protest vote is meaningful in any way then sure, go for one of the others. if, like me, you registered green when you thought there was some chance of a genuine movement starting behind the nader candidacy and have never bothered to re-register as independent then... who knows? i'm giving serious consideration to skipping the whole affair.

TotalComments: 2