Why is Kerry pandering the Lieberman crowd more than Dean's antiwar crowd?

[Classical_Liberal]

Lieberman did worse than Dean in the caucus. Clark another antiwar candidate even won a state or two. Where is Kerry's foreign policy? How is he going to get us out of Iraq?

[Andy_Stephenson]

1. He won't get us out of Iraq

hadn't you heard?

[Atman]

2. Easy...

Dean voters are most likely already pre-disposed to vote for Kerry/Dem. Lieberman is only slightly to the left of Bush, so probably boasts many fence-sitters among his abandoned supporters. Kerry needs these Lieberman republicans.

[Classical_Liberal]

4. I think Lieberman is a mole rather than a dem

No one can win saying Bush is right about the war. That is just like having a Bush/Cheney sign in your backyard. Every Lieberman supporter I knew ultimately planned to vote Bushco. The idea that there are any fence sitters in the neocon camp this time around is delusional. Buchannanite anti-interventionists paleocons are more of a sure bet.

[Markus182]

5. I disagree

This strategy doesn't work, and Gore proved it in 2000 (ok, we all know he won, but let's stick to the topic at hand). It doesn't work because by disenfranchising the base, the people who are going to vote for you anyway, you're losing your army of people who are out there, excited to spread the word about you. They're just sitting there frustrated, and not particularily motivated to engage others in debate about the merits of their candidate. Sure, they'll still loyally fill out their ballots in November, but they won't be bringing anyone with them. It's NOT the right way to win fence-sitter votes.

[Classical_Liberal]

6. Dead on! You should also note Kerry's failure to reach fundraising goals

It is a sure sign he hasn't attracted the Deaniacs and Clarkies.

[sir_captain]

81. I dunno...

He's raised about a million a day over the internet since he became the presumptive nominee. That's really not that bad. And it looks like he'll probably get his $10 million in 10 days thing.

[Classical_Liberal]

91. Last I heard he was falling short

.

[sir_captain]

101. According to his website

he's at 8.5 million as of right now, halfway through day 9. So he's right on target.

[RapidCreek]

82. Right on Markus

I'm one of the few Democrats/Left leaning Independants in Western South Dakota. Further, I am one of about 20 who campaigns for Democratic candidates. I generally engage those voters whom I visit with a pump for the candidate much more signifigant that "so and so is working hard to/for, bla, bla, bla. I speak directly to the isseus the candidate feels are important and address exactly why he or she feels they are important, how exactly they intend to approach those isseus and how and why these isseus have a direct impact on respective voter. I attempt to inform and educate.. If Kerry starts pimping Liebermans postions he can bet his sweet ass I wont do any campaigning for him as Liebermans positions are detrimental to the constituany in my community. I cannot with any integrity promote a politician who seeks to appeal to less than Democratic ideology simply to gain votes...it's disengenous and I refuse to be party to such shit.

Suffice it to say that Tim Johnson won his South Dakota senate seat by less than 500 votes. I had 25 voters tell me that my communications with them convinced them to vote for Mr. Johnson and as opposed to his Republican challenger...that's 1/20 of the votes by which he won. If Mr. Kerry isn't interested in my support...so be it.

RC

[Classical_Liberal]

94. and what demographic is he trying the attract

the Hillary is Stalinist crowd. This is just dumb politics all the way around.

[Markus182]

3. Frustrated...

Who knows! I haven't been at all happy with Kerry these last couple weeks. I was actually starting to get excited for awhile there when he was going after Bush, but now he's just turned into another Gore, "make everyone happy".

When will the Democrats finally realize that this strategy DOESN'T WORK? Dean had it figured out. If you go after the moderates by looking as much like a Republican as possible, they are going to vote Republican! The way to win is to excite the BASE, and the moderates will be drawn to the side that is excited and motivated!

This election truly is Bush's to lose. No one is going to win it for us.

[moondust]

7. If it makes you feel any better...

Kerry is campaigning with Howard Dean on Wednesday I believe.

[buycitgo]

8. you hit it exactly with this:

If you go after the moderates by looking as much like a Republican as possible, they are going to vote Republican!

of COURSE!

if he keeps this up, I don't know what I'll do, besides move to Auckland.

he'll lose HUGE if he keeps this MOR crap up

disgusting

[Michael Harrington]

19. I hate to quote him...

...because the more I've learned about him over the years, the less respect I have for him, but Harry Truman said it best: "If people have a chocie between a real Republican and a fake one, they're going to vote for the real one."

[Alenne]

11. The base are the people who vote in the primaries

Most people don't vote and if they do vote they vote in the general election. Dean didn't win the base.

[Classical_Liberal]

18. Dean did better with independents than Lieberman

So did Clark. Independents were more antiwar, than the general population.

[Markus182]

21. He was the safe choice

Right up until the moment that Kerry won his first primary, his campaign team was demotivated, frustrated, and low on cash. But people were so petrified of Dean thanks to the media's thorough and complete assassination of him that they felt that Kerry was the responsible choice. The perception that he would be able to beat Bush was the #1 reason for voting for him.

Dean (and Clark and Kucinich, and possibly others) had the people who really CARED. These are the people with the fire in their bellies, who really believe in changing the country for the better. These are the people who can set campaign fundraising records. These are the people who can drag out others to vote in November. These are the people who Kerry needs to be talking to. Instead, he's taking them for granted, and it's going to bite him in the ass if he doesn't wise up.

[Alenne]

32. All the candidates had die hard supporters.

Kerry also had the people who thought he would be the best choice. I haven't seen Kerry do any real campaigning so I don't know how he is taking them for granted. I've seen a lot of other candidate's supporters jump on every little thing that Kerry does without giving him a chance to start campaigning seriously.

Maybe Dean did have the people who cared but he didn't have enough to get him the nomination.

[Classical_Liberal]

35. Kerry's supporters don't raise money like Deaniacs and Clarkies

Kerry needs those people.

[Alenne]

44. If those people don't want to raise money for Kerry

there is nothing he can do. I have seen clarkies and deaniacs on DU sending money to Kerry.

[Classical_Liberal]

47. Evidently there aren't enough of them sending money to Kerry

or he wouldn't be behind on his fundraising like he is. If there is nothing he can do, why the hell did anyone think him "more electable" Clark and Dean raised money quite simply because they gave Bush the finger early and often. Ah well your loss!

[Alenne]

52. We will all lose if Bush is re-elected.

[Classical_Liberal]

54. and if Kerry doesn't make that clear by muddling his opposition

to Bush's policies he will have no one to blame but himself for this.

[Alenne]

56. I will wait until he starts campaigning.

[JVS]

67. There are many important states that have no say before primaries are...

locked up.

[Alenne]

69. They can still vote for the candidate they want.

[JVS]

85. It is not as though it counts

[Alenne]

86. After awhile the winner is already known but

you can still vote for the candidate you want.

[eileen from OH]

9. What's he done that pandered?

I thought he was on vacation?

I don't know Kerry's plan to get us out of Iraq outside of the get-other-nations-involved (which, admittedly was also Dean's). I should, but I don't - and I'm sure longtime Kerry supporters will fill you in.

As to why doesn't he go after Dean/Clark supporters as opposed to Lieberman's it may be because they won states in the PRIMARIES and he's looking to the GENERAL. Biiiiig difference and you can bet that if Clark or Dean had gotten the nom, they'd be looking a lot more moderate as well.

Bush and Kerry both have their bases - it's the swing voters that count. And one of the smartest things I've heard said recently (dont' remember who, sorry) is that swing voters aren't the voters who sometimes vote Dem and sometimes vote Repub. Swing voters are the ones who SOMETIMES VOTE, period. Getting those sometimes-voters to the polls is the key. Anyone who liked Clark and/or Dean is you betcha gonna vote. It's motivating the new and sometimes-voters to get their asses to the polls that's the key.

eileen from OH

[kysrsoze]

12. I think this is a bad time for the vacation. He could have just taken

a couple of days. Maybe a long weekend, starting Friday? He should be shouting about this shit right now.

[Old and In the Way]

34. Why, what could he possibly do that would change the impact of

the hearings? Let him rest...it's going to be a long GE and he's going to need get his batteries deeply charged for this race. The media is focused on what Bush didn't do on 9/11. We don't need Kerry piling on now. Let the story reach the electorate directly....he'll be reminding them through the course of the campaign.

Let him conserve cash and plan strategy.....campaigning now just takes the focus off 9/11 bad news that is getting the media attention.

[Classical_Liberal]

13. Clark and Dean did better among independents than

Lieberman. Independents are more likely to be against the war than republicans or democrats. Lieberman's voters sure as heck aren't swing voters in this one. They are sure thing Bush voters. Dean talked about the UN's involvement. I haven't even heard Kerry talk of getting us out period.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

10. Kerry could grow 2 heads, (one purple, one green) and

the people who don't like Bush will still vote for Kerry.
The world is dying to get some competence back in the WH. If the new president isn't 100% liberal no one will care.

[Classical_Liberal]

14. Then they won't care if he is a liberal either

It is about right an wrong. Furthermore you neglect that people view Bush as incompetant because of the war and his foriegn policy, so why blur the distinction to nothingness.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

23. Yes. It is about right and wrong

Kerry is right and Bush is wrong.

[Classical_Liberal]

25. What in the hell is he going to do about Iraq though?

?

[jeanmarc]

15. Kerry is not Leiberman

You are panicking.

[Classical_Liberal]

16. I am panicking over weeks of

pandering to neocons, and smug statements toward foriegn liberals who support him. Let's not forget Dean wouldn't have been a problem had it not been for IWR vote.

[jeanmarc]

17. Quite frankly

Those foreign liberals will have things patched up after the votes are counted. They have a tough skin, and they'll understand why he said that.

Those foreign liberals cannot win a single vote in America.

[Classical_Liberal]

20. He should have said nothing than

His statements will lose more than they win, I assure you.

I hope he doesn't keep this up.

It is silly.

You can't beat Bush by being Bush ever. people who like those statements are definately solid Bush voters.

[jeanmarc]

22. I doubt that. I highly doubt that.

Like I said, to vote for Nader thanks to this is not something I would want on my tombstone.

[Classical_Liberal]

24. Independents will simply not vote

if they are antiwar. I thought we cared about them. Not all antiwar peopel are liberal. Alot of them are liberatarian leaning.

[jeanmarc]

28. Independents will not vote?

"if they are antiwar. I thought we cared about them. Not all antiwar peopel are liberal. Alot of them are liberatarian leaning."

And if they are libertarian leaning, how would distancing themselves away from Chavez and Zapatero translate to votes?

I really don't see this as an issue.

[Classical_Liberal]

31. The IWR and the pandering to neocons will turn off those people

Zapatero and Chavez are obviously punching your kid sister. Besides Libertarians are anti-interventionists. Whatever turns you on. Don't wonder to long about why Kerry isn't doing well in fundraising when he does stuff like this.

[jeanmarc]

36. You think fundraising comes from support for Chavez and Zapatero?

This thread is weak. Give us some real charges to talk about.

[Classical_Liberal]

39. It comes from appealing to the base

and zapatero and Chavez are just apart of an entire neocon pandering trend I have noticed. The IWR. The recent statements of support for the Sharon's wall. Lack of a plan for getting out of Iraq. It isn't helping.

[Old and In the Way]

40. Independents who will only vote a single issue aren't worth

worrying about.

This is Bush's war. AFAIK, Kerry did not introduce a resolution to invade Iraq. For whatever reason, many here want to make Iraq Kerry's war. My guess is that they are going to vote for Nader and need some excuse to support him. This is their excuse.

[Classical_Liberal]

41. Why are sure thing Bush voters worth our time?

War supporters are definately for Shrub. People who want Chavez ousted are the type of people who call Hillary a Stalinist. These statements aren't attracting anyone, and are accumulating defections we don't need.

[Markus182]

26. It's not one thing in particular

It's the entire right-wing appeasement philosophy that Kerry seems to have adopted (or maybe always had). His comments on foreign liberals is just one example of the things that is taking the wind out of the sails of people who want him to be the leader they're looking for so badly.

Think of it this way. At the height of Dean's campaign, this message board was absolutely buzzing with people excited about DEAN. They were excited about what a great president he was going to be; Bush no longer even _mattered_. They weren't saying, "At least he'll be better than Bush". But that's about the best praise I've heard for Kerry lately. If this message board is any indication of the mood of Democrats at large, it's not happy.

We have returned to wanting Bush to lose, rather than wanting our candidate to win. And that is a huge difference, and it WILL make a huge difference in voter showing, and could very well cost this election.

[Cat Atomic]

29. You nailed it.

Very well said.

[jeanmarc]

30. Dean did not survive

This is the nomination process. The strongest out of the bunch survives. I think we had a damn good bunch this year and I think any of the top 4 could beat Bush right now.

I see this as a lack of understanding of how politics are. You energize the support, and then you move to the center to attract the undecideds. Leiberman is Leiberman and Kerry is Kerry. To link the two is silly. I have absolute disgust for Leiberman. Kerry has done nothing to garner that sort of disgust from me.

[Classical_Liberal]

33. How is he energizing support by slapping liberals and our friends?

He hasn't consolidated the Deaniacs and the Clarkies and his lack luster fundraising campaign proves it.

[jeanmarc]

37. Not all liberals see a distancing from foreign support

in an AMERICAN election as a slap in the face.

[Classical_Liberal]

38. He wasn't just distancing himself from foriegn support

He was supporting Bush's foriegn policy, particularly in Venezuela, which is all about Bush's oil buddies. We want Chavez to succeed and the opposition(Bushco) to lose that one.

[Old and In the Way]

42. Oil is strategically important to the US, regardless of the

administration. Sad, but true.

I have seen nothing from Kerry encouraging an overthrow of Chavez. He has said that he expects Chavez to abide by the referendum, but he also made it clear that he won't support a US action that encourages an overthrow or meddling in Venezuala's election. If the people re-elect Chavez freely, I have no doubt that Kerry will be happy with the results. I'm sure he, unlike Bush, has no particular desire to see a RW puppet of the oil companies installed. If I understand the popular sentiment, Chavez ought to win easily.

[Classical_Liberal]

43. Yes, but whether Chavez or Bush's oil buddies control it

makes no difference to us. Chavez needs the money more than Shrub.

[jeanmarc]

45. hmmmm...

"(Chavez) must be pressured to comply with the agreements he made with the OAS and the Carter Center to allow the referendum to proceed, respect the exercise of free expression, and release political prisoners."

I have no problem with telling a left wing or right wing Latin American politician that, although it's easier if I'm living in an America without Boosh.

Bush has nothing to run on right now, so they will run on smear. The foreign leaders crap became an issue, albeit a small one, but Kerry should repuke a public statement by Chavez in this climate. I can't imagine having to explain to America on a podium in front of the newswhores why it is good to support Chavez. The big thing is to get a Democratic administration in there to curb the flow of money to the right wingers there.

This election is not about Venezuela. Spain made the right choice with a government that deceived them. They were on their way to making that choice anyway. This election is about getting a buffer of reality in there against a Republican Congress and Supreme Court retirements. No, this is not a referendum on Venezuela, no sir/madam.

[Classical_Liberal]

49. He wouldn't have to explain anything if he had simply kept his mouth

shut on both issues.

[jeanmarc]

51. Well, since he didn't on one issue

he had to speak on the other, especially given the extremely public endorsement of Kerry as like the slain JFK.

This is punch and counterpunch, and I find it difficult to believe that this will lose him votes or financial support.

Now I know how people get to 1000 or more posts. Normally, I don't get this involved, but this exchange is very fast. ;)

[Classical_Liberal]

55. He is losing support over a lot of these muddled pro-Bush looking

positions. I don't doubt that. I think that is why he can't raise money. Why don't you get that he has to actually say Bush is wrong to win?

[Alenne]

59. Do you actually believe that Dean, Clark or any other candidate

would have put out a statement supportive of Chavez.

[Aquarian_Conspirator]

60. They haven't put out statements attacking Chavez, either.

And whatever Dean's position is on Chavez, I'm sure it doesn't involve the recycling of Otto Reich's right-wing propaganda lies. That poop is on Kerry's hands now.

[Alenne]

61. You don't know because they have not put out a statement.

I guarantee you it would sound close to Kerry's statement.

[Aquarian_Conspirator]

64. Unlikely

Clark, maybe, but Dean has stood firmly against the neo-con agenda in Iraq, and I doubt he'd suddenly be spouting off those very same neo-con's fabrications the way Kerry has. Anyway, we'll never really know what they would have said, but we do know that they have chosen not to speak on the issue while Kerry has charged ahead at Chavez, armed with neo-con lies, such as the bad fiction that Chavez is harboring narco-terrorists and communist guerrillas.

[Alenne]

70. Dean would say whatever he thought would get him elected.

[Classical_Liberal]

72. Dean obviously has superior thinking skills because he

never said what Kerry said. I never got pissed off at him.

[Alenne]

74. Just because you never got pissed off at him

doesn't mean he didn't piss people off. I remember his campaign he said some unnecessary things. They all do.

[Classical_Liberal]

77. He pissed off neocon repukes and pack journalists

. That is fine with me. They aren't potential voters or donors.

[Alenne]

79. He obviously pissed off some other people

He was the front runner but he didn't win.

[Classical_Liberal]

90. They were scared off by the neocon pundits sadly

Kerry had a crappier organization for the things that he has to do in the general election, like fundraising. He still does. We are more necessary to him than neocon republicans who will like his slap at Chavez but still vote for Bush. Depressing us with lessor evilism won't work. He needs to give Bush the finger, or he won't get all their money. He does have to attract his base for the get out the vote drive it is that simple.

[Alenne]

93. Kerry is not campaigning for the neocon vote.

He hasn't really started campaigning at all. Some people are rushing to criticize anything he says or does because they don't really want him to win.

[Classical_Liberal]

97. No we are rushing because we want him to win

and we are giving him every opportunity to appeal to us. If I didn't want him to win, I would be at Repuke or Nader rallies. It is that simple. I wouldn't waste my time here.

[Classical_Liberal]

65. Not putting out a statement at all would have satisfied me completely

.

[Classical_Liberal]

63. I doubt they would have put one out at all, which would be fine

with me.

[Alenne]

71. But if they were asked

do you think they would support Chavez.

[Classical_Liberal]

73. I doubt they would have claimed Chavez was the one undermining

the democratic process, or that he was harboring narcoterrorist, a bush cannard. They probably just would have made a general statement in support of Constitutional government. That wouldn't have offended anyone.

[Alenne]

75. It would have offended someone

There are always people who want to be offended.

[Classical_Liberal]

76. There are truly offensive statements as well

and the lies about Chavez are just that. If Bush overthrows Chavez, Kerry won't be able to criticize Bush about anything because he supported those claims. I don't want my government to undermine the democratic process anywhere in this world.

[Alenne]

78. Yes he will

In his statement he makes it clear that the first coup that the Bush administration supported was wrong and undemocratic.

[Classical_Liberal]

88. Not really

He mentions the coup but then says Chavez is the one threatening democracy and supporting narco terrorist, which is pure Shrubco bullshit.

[Alenne]

92. Not just Bush feels that way

There are Democrats who feel that way also.

[Classical_Liberal]

96. Who Lieberman? his supporters will definately vote for Bush

No doubt about it. They want war. If he hasn't started his campaign why did he put out that press release on his website?

[jfxgillis]

48. Now that is not true.

If you read what Kerry said about it in full, he took a hard shot at Bush for supporting the failed coup in Venezuela and for supporting anti-democratic forces in Haiti.

[Classical_Liberal]

50. He spent 90% of the press release confirming Bush's myth

that Chavez is authoritarian and the one undermining democracy there. Again he could have just not said anything at all.

[jeanmarc]

58. It's an ugly climate in these countries....it's not simple

I think of both sides as evil. There's a set of rules that each side has not formally agreed to, but they are there. Torture, disappearances, political prisoners, goons, etc., it's all there. The right wingers, with US support, have done grave evil to many people in Latin America. There's sometimes less evil on one side than the other.

Imagine again, you are on a podium and now this is an issue, how can you explain my paragraph above? Remember, you are debating George Bush. Your audience is the American voter. I don't think that in a debate, you can adequately explain the issue. The paragraph above is extremely offensive to the ignorant of what happens in Latin America. The best thing you can do is help to make it less of an issue, because Bush and his cabal are going to grind you with torture stories of Chavez. You'll look stupid, no matter what you say.

You do not, and you cannot run on this. The good news is there is relief if Chavez does act to restore freedoms with a Democratic president.

I'm looking forward to a lessening of nationbuilding, bullying of nations, etc. To be pissed off at Kerry right now in this climate is completely irrationale.

[Classical_Liberal]

66. If you think both sides are evil you aren't paying attention

Read the Palast archive.

http://www.gregpalast.com/columns.cfm?subject_id=20&subject_name=Latin%20America

If you assume everything foreign is evil you become shrubco. Kerry shouldn't go their. Cynicism is ugly really!

[jeanmarc]

83. Listen to the 'they might vote for Nader' guy

lecturing me about 'both sides are evil'

Of course they are. One is less evil than the other, and that's the non Nader point. If you were running the Kerry campaign, he'd have the support of a Kucinich, who I do like.

[Classical_Liberal]

87. You learned nothing from Dean

Dean attracted people because they thought he was good, not because he was less evil.

[Groosalugg]

27. I've been wondering that too...

[FDRrocks]

46. He's pandering to the middle, not the lieberman crowd.

The Lieberman crowd has already given up on the Democrats, for this year, I would imagine. He isn't pandering to the anti-war crowd....... get this...... b/c he voted for the war. He was misled, he says. Well, funny, thats what Bush says.

As it is, there is so much disinformation going around, that middle america isn't against the war. And after all, w/i the two party system, it isn't about convictions or ideals, its about getting elected.

[Classical_Liberal]

53. How do the Chavez/Zapatero statement appeal to the mush-heads

who don't know who either of them are? Can't we just admit these are silly moves, and that he shouldn't do them anymore?

[FDRrocks]

57. I'm not so sure.

If you read Latest Breaking he not only rejected the Chavez endorsement but insulted him, apparently. I don't know about that.

I don't think most of America knows who Chavez or Zapatero are, but I think the move was for those who do know. Chavez and Zapatero are painted as far left in the world media, while they aren't really. I've seen material on here to bring Chavez reputation into question, and Zapatero apparently ran on lowering taxes (especially corporate taxes(source=DU)).

I think its all a strategy of keeping to middle, which I do not agree with, generally. In a two party system how can one party be far right and the other moderate (rejecting many liberal values in the process) and then expect the left-of-center to vote for it.

Maybe that doesn't make sense. Alls I know is that I can gaurantee that anyone I talk to on a daily basis would not know the names Zapatero and Chavez.

[Aquarian_Conspirator]

62. He's not attacking Chavez for the "mush heads".

He's saying that to woo the wealthy Latin American aristocrats who reside in the US. It's a fund raising move, just like everything Kerry does. Despite Dean's success, Kerry is showing that he still does not have faith in grassroots fund raising. After years of being a spineless corporate shill, this old dog just can't learn any knew tricks.

[Classical_Liberal]

68. You're probably right

.

It is sad.

I think the other issue is that there are establishment dems that don't want money from the grass roots because than the will owe the grass roots rather than rich people. Some establishment dems don't just act that way because of who they owe. It is actually their philosophy unfortunately.

[sir_captain]

80. If the presidential election involved only democratic voters...

he'd pander to Dean's supporters. But last time I checked, the whole country gets to vote, and as much as I can't understand why, there are a whole lot of people to the right of Kerry. In terms of actually winning the election, Kerry isn't going to do it by veering even more left...

[jeanmarc]

84. Well said! , nt

[Classical_Liberal]

89. Dean attracts more independents then Lieberman

. You all say that as if he has consolidated his base already. He hasn't. He never made peace with the Clarkies and the Deaniacs, and this shit isn't helping.

[shance]

95. Since when has Lieberman been a proponent of Democratic principles?

Lieberman, although a seemingly very kind human being, is pandering to the Republicans, has shown no dedication, NO courage, no sense of integrity or true conviction, or commitment or honest dedication to the Democratic electorate and he has seemingly extremely fundamentalistic tendencies of his own, which seem to filter any objective reasoning he otherwise might have.

GOd help the Democratic Party. We can make it if we remember our initial course and not one that is being shoved down our throats by a homogenized DLC. Weve been taken over by some spinless complicits who have access to "mainstream" media and who seem to have NO ounce of courage. This includes Mr. Joe Biden who might as well change parties.

Why arent individuals like Barbara Boxer invited on to shows more often. Then again, most of us know the answer to that, she speaks the truth. And the truth is just so taboo these days.

[Disturbed]

98. Dems are weak.

"We have returned to wanting Bush to lose, rather than wanting our candidate to win. And that is a huge difference, and it WILL make a huge difference in voter showing, and could very well cost this election."

"Dean (and Clark and Kucinich, and possibly others) had the people who really CARED. These are the people with the fire in their bellies, who really believe in changing the country for the better."

I believe the above statements 100%.

It's the brutal truth. Dems won't win this election but Bushco could lose this election. It seems that the Oligarchy isn't so strong on Bushco. The main reason? The massive defecit. Second: Shrub and Cheney are starting to be major emberasments, expecially abroad where both have real low appoval rates and that's not good for business.

[Indiana Democrat]

99. Lieberman represents Middle America and The Anti-War crowd does not.

Regardless of how Lieberman gets bashed on DU and Dean gets praised.

[MadHound]

100. Easy answer

The Lieberman, Miller, Reagan Dem crowd is seen as a flight risk, and the Dems feel they have to pander to them in order to sew up their votes. That is one reason why the party has been moving severely rightward the past couple of decades.

The leftist/anti-war crowd is seen as sewn up, they are the base("and after all hippie, who else you gonna vote for, Bush? BWAHAHAHAHA) And thus they have been ignored and ridiculed for years now, but are expected to fall in line every two years.

But an interesting development has occured in the past decade, one that apparently the strategy boys in the DNC didn't count on. The lefties have found somewhere else to go, either Nader or Green. So despite neglecting their base, ridiculing it in fact, the Dems see it as the height of betrayal when a long time loyal leftie, feeling neglected and unappreciated, decided to go somewhere else. This is why we see all of the vitriol against DK Dems, Greens and Naderites around here, the centerists, DLC Dems have been called on their bluff and are left sputtering in the wind.

Now if you want those votes back, you've got to realize that you have to apply proper care and feeding to your base. Throw us a bone once in a while, you know, something like universal health care, or a living wage. Hell, the 'Pugs started doing it with their rightist base, especially after the Perot/Buchanan scares. That's how we wound up with Ashcroft and the Defense of Marriage Act.

It is an easy step to take, but one has to put aside one's pride in order to accomplish it. We will see if the Dems can put aside their pride. For their own sake they can, otherwise they will go the way of the Whigs.

[sendero]

102. I've sent $$ to Kerry...

.. though he was my 3rd choice as nominee. He seemed to be doing ok until that "foreign leader" comment, which I believe is absolutely true, but the backlash seems to have affected his stride.

I sure hope he doesn't milktoast out now, the voters he's pandering to are not going to equal the ones he is risking losing, especially with Nadir in the race.

And for goodness sakes - when is he going to pick a VP?