IMHo we did NOT lose because of god. We lost on security.

[montana500]

That's why we lost. Fear. The National Security thing won. Kerry was not leading any national polls after the RNC. But it starts before that.

Alot of pundits think the DNC didn't help Kerry. I say bullshit. It helped him incredibly. His national numbers after the DNC were excellent. He led the country in every poll. People felt safe under Kerry and could see him protecting them.

Then the SBV came and took that away from Kerry, at least temporarily. Then the RCN came and heaped on the SBV garbage, which hurt Kerry even more.

We lost because people were AFRAID.Thats why 9% of dems voted for Bush.We were ahead or leading on every issue except the war on terror.

Kerry ran a great campaign, but he did not offer a specific plan to comfort moms of the nation. Had he offered a school protection plan, things might have been different.

[Kahuna]

1. It's not either/or. It's both. And a few other things besides.

We need to get out of this either/or mindset.

[Polly Glot]

2. I find it confusing, to say the least, that

BEFORE the election, everyone who was voting for * was doing so because they were skeered of terraists.

Now, however, AFTER the election, everyone who voted for * did so because of moral values.

WHICH THE HELL IS IT?!?

[Blasphemer]

3. Fear

For the Fundies it comes down to "values". For those who shifted their votes from Gore to Bush it was "terra". Both of these boils down to one thing - Fear. Fear rules this country. Forget International terrorism, the domestic terrorism of bigotry and hate is even more dangerous. Ignorance about homosexuality and gay marriage is nothing more than fear, fear of that which is different. The G.O.P. feeds on the lowest, most base, most irrational and most hateful human instincts. I don't know how you fight something that negative when millions of people WILLINGLY live in darkness.

[Polly Glot]

4. I agree with you...

The G.O.P. feeds on the lowest, most base, most irrational and most hateful human instincts. Amen.

Do you think this is a relatively recent phenomenon borne of the neo-cons or fundie takeover of the party or both?

I ask because my late grandfather was a GOP bigwig in his state of residence back in the 50's and 60's. We had some fun conversations towards the end - he died in 1996 - ("You're a Democrat? You're out of the will!") but he NEVER EVER brought up any kind of moral code superiority of any kind. I think he was a true "paleo-" conservative in that he was big into fiscal conservatism and smaller government. Period. He was a kind, gentle, loving person. I honestly don't think he hated anybody.


In any case, I really hope that more moderate or "paleo" conservatives will get enlightened and join the fight to crush the neo's. If we can make it happen somehow, maybe a Bush impeachment won't seem like such an improbability after all.

-Polly

[JI7]

5. yes, that was mostly in places like new jersey

where it was fear, and also the sense that if there was a terrorist attack if kerry got into office, they would be to blame if they voted for him. this is the type of shit right wingers were spreading. and for weak minded swing voter types, it works. but new jersey is such a democratic state as are some others where bush gained some that it still went to kerry.

i do agree with you that the domestic terrorism of bigotry and hate is more dangerous probably.