Reply #49: I think you're correct!

[LeahMira]

Again he has an essential message with many voters that will lose the election for Kerry if he doesn't step up to the plate.

I liked President Clinton overall and certainly enjoyed many of the benefits of his administration, but there were definite problems as well. He promised a health care plan and we didn't get one. We did get NAFTA though. He promised gays in the military and while they were always there, far as I know the military code hasn't changed. We did get a "reform of welfare as we know it" though. So, although President Clinton was so much better than the thing that's in office now, I think people have to admit that a lot of his progressive ideals got sidetracked and compromised.

We are seeing Kerry apparently making some compromises and softening his positions now in order to appeal to a broader base of voters. Already, it starts!

Now, the issue is whether or not the majority of American voters are ready to approve the message that Nader hopes will gain their support. If Nader is right, his input and influence can only help Kerry get those "independent" votes. If the country is not quite ready to clip the corporate wings, though, Nader's message could lose Kerry the election. Maybe there really are a lot of folks who really wanted Kucinich but (foolishly, IMO) believed he wasn't electable.

Currently, the Democrats have a slight lead in numbers of voters, but that "independent" block of voters is huge... easily a third of the electorate. Does anyone know which way they go?