A friend has sent this message, so I could share with all. I think the link for the Galbraith interview is very informative, although I do not necessarily agree with his decision. Reason: A vote is not a policy statement but a decision on who will be the choice for the political office. There are other avenues for such policy statements. And in any case, I have found Nader to be a nutcase who single-handedly screwed the future of the world by standing in the 2000 elections, and taking the votes away from Al Gore. The views:
A different viewpoint from what you see everywhere about the US election candidates:
and the US/Intl financial crisis:
Disclosure: I support and will vote Ralph_Nader/ Matt_Gonzalez (for Prez) and non-Republican/ non-Libertarian candidates for local offices. A vote for Obama in Texas will not change the outcome and though there is no chance of Nader to win, this helps the cause of future 3rd party candidates to cross debate and media-interest thresholds (for future elections).
Get Drishtikone Updates
in your inbox
Subscribe to Drishtikone updates and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.
Thank you for subscribing.
Something went wrong.