[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [CUGreens] My letter to the editor
- Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 16:37:26 -0600
- From: "Becci" <gindin@mail.colorado.edu>
- Subject: Re: [CUGreens] My letter to the editor
Hey, I think it's great! In fact, I'm going to print out a copy for my
friends.
Becci
----- Original Message -----
From: "TREXLER ANDREW STEVEN" <Andrew.Trexler@colorado.edu>
To: <cugreens@flwyd.dhs.org>
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 4:22 PM
Subject: [CUGreens] My letter to the editor
> I sent this to the CODaily today. I think we should send more like this
> that add strength to the argument, as well as getting some "Forthofer vote
> is a vote for change" letters out
>
> Any thoughts
>
> Andrew
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 16:19:17 -0600 (MDT)
> From: TREXLER ANDREW STEVEN <trexler@ucsu.colorado.edu>
> To: editor@codaily.com
> Subject: Letter to the editor
>
> Dear Editor:
>
> several month ago, I decided to start campaigning for Green Party
> Presidential candidate Ralph Nader, not because I believe he will win, but
> because I support the revolutionary political reforms that he is calling
> for. These include, among other things, universal healthcare, withdrawl
> from the WTO (until it changes the current rules of global trade), public
> funding of public elections, an end to the War on Drugs and the
> legalization of marijuana, and several other radical changes. As well, he
> is the ONLY major presidential candidate that I respect- Bush and Gore
> have sold their souls to big business; oftentimes to the exact same
> companies.
> Since deciding to campign for Nader, I've gotten a lot of flack
> from friends. "A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush", "Don't waste your
> vote!", "You're going to help overturn Roe v. Wade" etc, etc. For such
> folks as these, I've compiled a little "Myth/Fact" sheet about this
> election:
>
> Myth: A vote for Ralph Nader is a wasted vote
> Fact: If Nader gets 5% of the national vote (nearly the same as his
> current poll numbers), the Green Party gets nearly $15 million in public
> funds to run a strong campaign for the Presidency in 2004. In other words,
> five million Nader votes changes the American political landscape for
> decades to come.
>
> Myth: A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush
> Fact: Each candidate has to earn every vote, and millions of Nader
> supporters are one-time non-voters. I, for one, would be sitting out this
> election if Nader weren't running. Even if Nader does attract would-be
> Gore voters, Colorado polls show Bush with a strong lead over Gore:
> the race here is over already.
>
> Myth: If Bush wins, Roe v. Wade will be overturned
> Fact: All of Bush's Texas Supreme Court appointees have supported a
> woman's right to choose, A Nixon appointee wrote the Majority opinion in
> Roe v. Wade, and Ford, Reagan, and Bush Sr. appointees have all supported
> it since. This is nothing more than a scare tactic.
>
> Myth: Gore is a stonger environmentalist than Nader
> Fact: Gore let a shopping Mall be built over fragile wetlands in exchange
> for $31,000 in campaign contributions, owns $500,000 in stock in the
> infamous Oxy Oil Co., and supports the WTO, the biggest
> threat to the environment that the world has ever seen. Nader was
> instrumental in creating the Environmental Protection Agency, protested
> against the WTO in Seattle, and has been endorsed by David Brower,
> Founder of League of Conservation Voters, Friends of the Earth, and the
> Sierra Club
>
> Myth: Nader has no popular support, and he won't get 5%, so you might as
> well vote for Gore
> Fact: Nader drew 10,500 people who paid to hear him speak in Portland, and
> plans to do the same in Boston, Seattle, Minnesota, and maybe even Denver.
> Thousands have volunteered time to his campaign in every state, and he's
> at right around 5% in the polls.
>
> Myth: Most Gore voters are really excited about his campaign, because he's
> going to be a progressive, populist president. Didn't you hear his
> acceptance speech?
> Fact: When I was in LA, even delegates used the "lesser of two evils"
> argument to get me to vote for Gore, and I've seen one Gore-
> Lieberman Bumpersticker in the last month, as compared to about 50 Nader
> stickers and signs all over town.
>
> Myth: You should vote for Gore, because he's the lesser of two evils
> Fact: If we continue to buy this argument, politics will only get more
> odious and someday, there will be even less difference between the "bad
> guy" and the "good guy"
>
> In this election, vote your hopes, not your fears!
>
> Sincerely
>
> Andrew Trexler
> Boulder
> 303-440-7754
>
>
Contact the webmaster for comments and questions.
Denver Green Party|Colorado Nader 2000