The following is an e-mail exchange between Mattro and Paul, Raptorial's co-founders.

Paul is a law student, politically aligned with Nader but also an election pragmatist (supporting Gore because Bush would be worse). Mattro is a "social philosopher" (so-to-speak) and an unapologetic Nader supporter.

The two recently engaged in an e-mail exchange re: the results of Election 2000. The Exchange is posted here in its unabridged form...

 

Nader Campaign: Bad Strategy or Social Necessity? (Pt. 1)

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Mattro,

You seem to be pretty involved in politics these days....that is good. Bush is going to be our next President. Watch out Abortion rights, prayer in school, oil drilling, contraception, evolution taught in school, private school vouchers, the list goes on. You know, all that bullcrap about Gore and Bush being the same....c'mon. There are HUGE differences regarding specific policies. I found Nader's arguments so simplistic. It was rather shocking. I still like the guy, and would vote for him if there wasn't a Presidency in the balance.

...but I am still pissed that he did the EXACT thing he criticizes the Repubs and Demos for....he over generalized. To say that Bush and Gore are virtually the same simply shows either (a) lack of intelligence, (b) lack of awareness of the issues, (c) lack of knowledge of prior legislative history, (d) an intent to simply confuse the public....or perhaps (e) an easy, general criticism that will win him votes. I think it was E. If he was REALLY wanting the left to be empowered, than he would have said something like: "You know, of course I think that Bush would be a much worse alternative in regards to (insert just about any social issue), but I still think that they are both sell-outs in their own regard." That would have been a true statement.

However he did what any politician will do, overgeneralize the issues in order to get attention of the voter. I really thought Nader was above that. Oh well, what do you expect in America.

It should be noted that NARAL was very pissed at him as well. They were pissed because in his constant attacks on both parties (which is warranted) he did not point out that one candidate had one view and the other had the absolute opposite. Ironcially, on abortion, Nader didn't say much, but of course it is to be assumed that he would have a policy very much like Gore's. I guess that makes him like Gore? Ha - more generalizing.

I am waiting for a candidate that will be able to get the attention of the voters with TRUTH and ACCURACY and will address the issues head on. Despite all his positives, my image of Nader fell off drastically. It is one thing to say that every vote is to be cast for the candidate who deserves it. I agree totally. It is another to say things that are misleading in order to put your party on the map. That is what the two-party system has been doing for ages. It could be argued that the only way to fight fire is with fire. But has also been said that peaceful resistance will always undermine violence. Meaning that if you fall to the level of your opponent, then what is the difference between you and he?

...these are just some thoughts that are passing through my mind as I contemplate a complete and utter moron in the White House.....Fuck, I though we had moved passed that.....and you know, if he becomes popular either by luck or by circumstance.....and planning, we could be more fucked that anyone realizes.

....I may be in the minority here, but electing an evil (or perhaps dangerously ignorant) President is not the path to a higher stage of policital evolution. It sets us back something like 12 years in my mind. It endorses the idea to all those little fuckheads, and there are thousands upon thousands of them, that Bush is the kind of man we need.....

My only hope is that the lack of legitimacy will put him under the spotlight, and he'll fuck up, misspeak, and be basically a bumbling idiot....and then we'll look back on it and say, shit - Gore would have been a better alternative.

Interesting, the several times this has happened before, the guy who lost the close election actually was remembered better in history, and each time, ran again and won the next time...and was much more popular and famous than the previous winner (but this doesn't say anything about him being EFFECTIVE)...anyway, we'll just have to see.

....ok - gotta go Matt...had to vent a bit. I begin to throw up into my mouth everytime I think of Bush being President.

Later.

Paul

--> THIS DISCUSSION CONTINUES -->

<-- RAPTORIAL MAIN PAGE