Reply #19: OK. I think the national ones are not so much "rigged" as "controlled"....

[freddie mertz]

That is to say, the establishment in all of its forms (political parties, media, corporate donors, etc) firmly controls what sorts of candidates and ideas will be treated as "serious" in nation-wide elections.

As the establishment consensus moves ever farther to the right, and the corporations take control of almost everything, they work to marginalize and if necessary, to suppress any possibility of fundamental change, especially where our economic system is concerned. Thus we get "safe" (for the establishment) choices like Obama vs. McCain.

This helps to explain why the "serious" candidates never really push for real economic change once they get in office.

How else to explain the DEMOCRATS' decision to bar even the DISCUSSION of single-payer in the early months of the HCR process?

Obviously it is quite a bit easier to get progressives elected to congressional seats and even senate seats. Also to local offices.

That said, it is true that I still hold out a slim hope that even at the national level, the situation may never be totally "hopeless."

YES, it is true that I have become convinced that the present administration is a virtual lost cause. They may throw us a few bones on social issues but the big economic issues like finance reform and HCR, and labor laws, that is where the true test takes place.

But even if we are forced to give up on present "leadership" (as I have essentially been forced to do), I think it is still important to point out, in venues like this one for example, what the issues are, and to try to find potential solutions to the challenges we all still face.

So you see, for me, it is dialogues like the one we are having right now are the real and perhaps only source of hope (not "hope," the campaign slogan, but actual hope for actual people).