Re: Nader/U.S. Election

["Alan Bradley" <alanb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: "mike pearn"
> But unlike Alan I do not reject the need to offer a United Front to those
> still in the Labour Party, that I repeat still commnads the loyalty of
> most politically concious Trades Unionists, who are willing to fight.

and from another of Mike's posts:

> Turning our backs on Labour in voting terms is small potatoes but does
> indicate how a political tendency views the supporters of that party when
> they are in struggle and runs the risk of rejecting the united front
> tactic towards reformist workers whom you must view as being no diferent
> from workers who support the Liberals or Tories.

Well, this would be true if we were damn silly sectarians.  It's not much
of a problem for people who mostly live in the real world.

> Alan replied that;
> > good on them - and a certain proportion no doubt are supporting Clinton
>
> Now Alan perhaps you are confused but Clinton is not a candidate. Just so
> you know its his VP who is running Gore. Perhaps this is the person you
> mean.

Yes, of course I mean Gore.  My attention lapsed.  But then again, you can
see why
people might confuse them - Gore, Bush, Clinton and so on are pretty much
clones.

Alan Bradley
alanb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx