Progressives must identify and support real progressive candidates for the Congress wherever they can be found, regardless of their party affiliation. Targeting Bush-Democrats like Pelosi is perhaps more important than targeting Republicans. We may be able to expect the electorate to punish the Republicans to some extent for their obvious and miserable failure to govern, but if the replacements are led by the likes of Pelosi and Reid then the nation has gained nothing.

There are a number of organizations out there attempting to identify and support insurgent progressives for Congress (usually on the Democratic line), but their criteria and methods vary considerably. In most states, there will be at least one progressive running for Congress either in the Democratic primary or as a third-party candidate in November – they deserve our support. Nationally, nothing could send a stronger message to the establishment than the defeat of Speaker Pelosi. Go Cindy!

Eugene Debs

First, I don’t think I made sufficiently clear in the piece that I don’t support Huckabee and regard him with a mixture of suspicion and contempt. Rather, what I’m opening up for consideration is a strategic vote for him in the Republican primary-or, putting it differently, engaging in a legal form of sabotage. If successful the result of this strategy will be that 1) the most unelectable Republican gets nominated 2) the schism between the theocratic and the corporate wings will result in a full fracturing of the party and 3) that if nominated Huckabee’s economic populism will force the Dem nominee to address issues of corporate accountability and bread and butter economics which they would feel no pressure to do with McCain as opponent.

Given that there is no vote in the Democratic primary which will have any positive political impact, why not consider this? An out-of-the-box idea, I admit, but aren’t radicals supposed to be capable of considering radical ideas? Incidentally, you can be sure that the right engages in all sorts of sabotage of the left, though maybe not of this particular sort.

As for supporting an independent and/or Green campaigns, yes, by all means. I am very impressed with McKinney’s generally and her appearance at the recent San Francisco debate in particular where she made the following remarks:

“The Green Party needs to stop being divided. We need to unite the party. We must face the machine of corporate politics and we can’t do it divided. I’ve have never seen something like this like I see now in the Green Party. So please let’s come together.”

The attitudes McKinney is referring to are luridly displayed on on this list including by some of those who claim to support her. Let’s hope they will begin to recognize their own role in what McKinney recognizes as the descent of the party in to almost total insignificance in recent years.

While I’m impressed with McKinney, I agree with Ross Mirikami that there is no evidence that what happens at the national level helps the party do what it needs to do which is to build an electoral foundation at the local and then state levels . Again, I’ve tried to make the argument repeatedly that this is what the party needs to do-and I’ve walked the walk in addition to talking the talk. It would be nice if those above who seem so enthusiastic on lecturing to me on this point would get their thumbs out of their asses and turn their attention to what is necessary to get this ball rolling. I have seen no indication that any of them have done so. Note that this requires actual practical political work-talking with neighbors, coworkers, compiling databases, raising money, filing ballot access petitions, familiarize one’s self with election law-there is no glamour in it, and it does not provide the opportunity to hobnob with various left celebrities, a primary concern of the starfucking, elitist left wannabes-not an insignificant constituency, alas.

Of course, this discussion is of no interest to what appears to be the majority of leftists who have no interest in “building” the Green Party-or any political institution, for that matter, as the piece notes. As we have seen on DV, they are always the first to chime in with denunciations of this or that deviation from ideological purity or failures to maintain strict adherence to an idealized hyper-democratic “process”.

It is unfortunate that they seem, at the moment, to have a lock on most of the higher profile left blogs.

That said, I’m grateful that DV is at least open to running perspectives which challenge the dominant views on these questions.

John Halle’s is joking. He has done it in the past. It is called speculative fiction. Who wants to vote for Huchabee? Unless you are a naïve person. The “president” of the United States more correctly, the manager, is more likely to be changed by the corporations and forces protecting the interest of corporations than to “change” the established economic system which benefits the rich and not those who have been neglected.
Huchabee’s foreign policy is copied from the Zionist notebook and that is to arm the Kurds up to their teeth to extend the Zionist state to bring more war and destruction through which to rub the regions’ resources through rules of the game “divide and rule” manipulation

Mike McNiven is also correct about Chomsky and the Zionist “left” who abandoned the anti-war movement for the pro-war Democrats/ABB/Safe-State strategy in 2004.

Why can’t it ever be “who should the PEOPLE support”?

Stop allowing corporate media to pit yourselves against one another. Look at your passports – they all say American.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/sep2004/prog-s20.shtml

and 2006

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/sep2006/prog-s28.shtml

then it will be worth casting a vote. Apart from something of this type with a clearly formulated socialist program, it’s a waste of time and a bad diversion for people to focus on the elections.

20 years ago your description of Chomsky would have been accurate. But if you’ve been awake then you should know that Chomsky has slid down the hill in his late years and actually endorsed Kerry in 2004. That can be taken as a lesson in the failures of anarchism. But it’s not a reason to start voting for Democrats. If a vote is to be cast it should be for a party like the SEP which offers a real alternative.

whenever asked, “What should we do?”, Chomsky always has a single word answer – ‘organize’.

http://www.chomskyviewer.org/web/The%20Chomsky%20Viewer_files/slide0308.htm