.
This is partially in response to bickering in the Wilder household, and partially in response to us getting slammed by fellow, progressive bloggers at Third Estate Sunday Review. Please vote (unless you are like our friend Roger, and you know not to get in the middle of a couple arguing…)
In case it has to be said again, Ian HATES the fact that we ever had Obama coverage. Kimberly thought that we should somehow acknowledge that America voted for a black President. Even though, he is a warmonger who supports nuclear energy (and some people say is homophobic.)
[polldaddy poll=1091380]
Filed under: 3rd party, Anti-War, Barack Obama, election, Election 2008, elections, green, Green Party Websites, local, Long Island Politics, personal, Political Websites, president, presidential race, progressive politics, third party, US Politics Tagged: | Barack Obama, ian wilder, kimberly wilder, Poll
Well I’ve been known to enjoy (and even try to encourage) public fighting by the Wilders (see past video’s of the Babylon Green gatherings), so I’m glad to see that my vote is with the (clearly well-informed) majority who similarly enjoys the drama. I’m popping some corn in case the battle heats up and goes into production as a sit-com.
In all seriousness, I think one of the things that this election shows is the importance for Greens (and all other alternative-cum-imperative parties) to study how winning is done strategically (and not just monetarily) so that we can apply some of these strategies for REAL change. I do think, however, that gushing about the “historicity” of Obama’s win neither really accomplishes this, nor is HE as a person an appropriate target for this kind of “study” (but it does create a convenient opportunity to talk about what would be). Better people for Greens to continue to study are people like Frank Luntz and George Lakoff (to give “bipartisan” examples). The “framers,” the people who are at the core of translating political agendae into “everyday speak” in a way that can make clear our values. This is our real strength as a party (vs. the corporate parties)–they have to focus on how to CONCEAL their values (i.e. more $ for the rich as ‘economic stimulus’, warmongering as ‘defense’ or ‘security’, perpetuating the prison-industrial complex as ‘tough on crime’, etc.) whilst we ned to focus on ways to state our agenda that HIGHLIGHT our values in ways that don’t seem too fringe (because they’re not–see the research that has repeatedly shown a majority of americans in favor of universal, single-payer healthcare as an example), or threatening or (our biggest problem I think) unworkable.
If you have made one small step toward sustaining this discussion for Greens, then Bravo Kimberly!