It is very grounding to be realistic. Having our head in the clouds only works its magic when our feet are on the ground. Let me propose this concept for the purpose of illustration: Can you think of a more effective political investment for a supporter of GeorgeW than a contribution to Nader's campaign, hopefully siphoning off potential Democratic votes to a neutralizing effect?
Don't be a lemming, following the mindless right off the cliff, misled by seeming idealists with cynical purpose... Your vote can make a difference, if you think about where it really counts. A huge regret voiced by many 60s progressives, including Sen. Tom Hayden, was not supporting Hubert Humphrey in the 1968 elections because V.P. Humphrey was not critical enough of President Johnson's Vietnam policies, thereby allowing Nixon to win the presidency by a tiny margin. The Nixon nightmare followed: he continued the war for 7 more years.
In the big picture, Gore is far from being a bad guy. He's more progressive on the environment than any candidate ever with a realistic chance of the presidency. And a Gore/Lieberman victory would shatter an important barrier: Every president and vice president so far has been male, and white, and Christian. When that perfect record is finally broken, no matter in which aspect, it will be a victory for all people who are not all-of-the-above themselves.
Unless you're willing to enter politics yourself, don't let your anger at the imperfections of those who are willing to spend their lives in that realm blind you into wasting your vote. You count.
A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush.
Back to Essential Truths Homepage