Democrats Didn't Help Themselves In Election

[Larkspur]

LTTE in The Day, Eastern CT newspaper
http://www.theday.com/eng/web/news/re.aspx?re=16B95333-0B05-4A12-AEB1-706ABCC2A80C

The problem is that there is no “Democratic” party. By running a candidate who was so far to the center, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has given up the right to be called anything but Republican wannabes. The story of the election was that the misguided people who were for President George W. Bush actually liked the guy; the rest of us who were left with no choice but to vote for the insipid Sen. John Kerry never liked him. He exhibited the charisma of a shoebox.

If the DNC had run Howard Dean, we could have gone down fighting and presented the country a clear choice. After spending an unprecedented amount of money — which could have been put to better use helping the less fortunate who have fallen through the Bush-ravaged social-safety net — all the DNC managed to do with it was give the Bush regime a faux-legitimacy more undeserved than that which Mr. Bush proclaimed in 2000.

Say hello to Patriot Act II, with deeper invasions of personal liberties; constitutional amendments banning gay marriage and abortion in any circumstances; a new, more fascist Supreme Court; a Congress that rubber stamps anything Vice President Dick Cheney can think up; more wars; more American men and women dead on battlefields; and more terror and hatred against the United States.

Say goodbye to Roe v Wade, meaningful political dissent, personal privacy and representative democracy. If Sen. Bill Frist and his cronies have their way, they'll get around to reversing Brown v Board of Education. Whoever said America gets the government it deserves was dead on.

To VFW and American Legion stalwarts who supported Rep. Rob Simmons while he supported the Bush administration's evisceration of veterans' programs and military pay, and the creation of a “back-door” draft with no-time-limit deployments, enjoy your retirements and families, while you still have them.

I think Dean would have won, but even if he didn't, I agree with the LTTE writer that Dean would have offered a clearer choice than "Shoebox" Kerry.

[emulatorloo]

1. wait - I thought Dean was a Centrist and Kerry was a Ted Kennedy Liberal

EOM

[Larkspur]

19. Dean is a moderate and for the DLC clowns to call him a "McGovernite"

shows us their stupidity. McGovern endorsed Wes Clark, not Howard Dean.

If the DLC clowns say that Dean is too far to the Left, then they are pulling to the right of Fascism.

[emulatorloo]

21. Of course, the labels are dumb. . .OTOH there was a damn clear choice

between Kerry and Bush, despite what the LTTE argues. Jobs, Tax Cuts, Education, Opportunity, on down the line.

But Bush won on Fear and Terror . . . .

http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=18049

[Maat]

2. I was a Deaniac, but I refuse to engage in this second-guessing

and criticism. Kerry had so much more to offer us than George Bush. I will not engage in this chest-beating. I recognize that my inclusive views (and those of DUers) are in the minority. We lost the election because the bulk of Americans are so ill-informed that....

[NYCGirl]

3. And those same Americans will most likely continue to be ill-informed,

so what's the solution?

[emulatorloo]

8. Don't know, but look at this Survey on Bush Voters knowledge/beliefs

Well worth following the link and reading the article.

http://www.alternet.org/election04/20263/

<SNIP>


The World According to a Bush Voter


By Jim Lobe, AlterNet. Posted October 21, 2004.

A new survey reveals that Bush supporters choose to keep faith in their leader than face reality.

Do the supporters of President Bush really know their man or the policies of his administration?

Three out of 4 self-described supporters of President George W. Bush still believe that pre-war Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMD) or active programs to produce them. According to a new survey published Thursday, the same number also believes that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein provided "substantial support" to al Qaeda.

But here is the truly astonishing part: as many or more Bush supporters hold those beliefs today than they did several months ago. In other words, more people believe the claims today –- after the publication of a series of well-publicized official government reports that debunked both notions.

<SNIP>

[library_max]

15. They have become insular, and believe only those

who flatter them and tell them how smart they are, i.e. Fox News. The war against liberalism has turned into an all-out war against the facts. Whenever a Republican uses the word "facts" nowadays, he is either about to relay an opinion or an outright lie that he heard on Fox News or some other "safe" propaganda outlet.

[emulatorloo]

Well, they want to believe the President. . .why would he lie?

And Rove and Bush and Cheney exploit that relentlessly.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

4. Yeah that's why Kerry got 55 million votes and Dean won one state

in the primaries in spite of spending 45 million dollars. Hey Larkspur...name a single RED STATE Dean would have won...name a single REDSTATE he won in the primaries....you can't.

[Demobrat]

9. If it wasn't for the ABB vote

Kerry would have been buried in a landslide of epic proportions. Get a clue. Nobody voted FOR KERRY. They voted AGAINST BUSH. Just like they were told to.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

10. In the real world lots of people voted FOR Kerry including people here

I like Howard Dean a lot more than I like some of his petulant whining followers.

The ads only ran in Iowa and NH I believe..please explain how he lost every other primary state...oh yeah..he mismanaged his campaign and blew all that money....if the race was ran by Dean and Trippi we would have been broke in August.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Larkspur]

18. If it wasn't for Dean opting out of FEC matching funds in Nov 2003..

Kerry would never have done the same thing and he would have been hamstrung with FEC regulations. Kerry is a political coward and needed Dean in the forefront leading the way. Kerry should have asked to be Dean's VP because Kerry is an inept, cowardly, and unimaginative leader.

[sangh0]

24. "please explain how he lost every other primary state???"

Answer the question, if you dare

[sangh0]

26. You're making a prediction? Some people never learn

Here's a link to Larkspur agreeing with a poster who claimed that Dean would win the nomination

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=802700#802770

[Demobrat]

28. Speaking of never learning

I bet you're all for running the Repuke-Lite loser again next time, aren't you?

[sangh0]

30. Still won't answer the question, huh?

All you've got is the personal attack

[leftynyc]

42. If you couldn't see the clear differences

between the chimp and Kerry, you're beyond hope.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

34. Yes Kerry is a coward and you're real brave hiding behind your screen

[Larkspur]

131. I'm not the one running for Prez

and I do face Repukes at work on a daily basis and fight them.

[JI7]

11. i voted FOR Kerry

i supported him in the primary and was an early supporter. i know many others who did so also.

[Larkspur]

17. And I know many who held were ABB, not Kerry voters

Kerry would have lost in a landslide if it wasn't for ABB. ABB won't be there next time.

[ohioan]

29. Maybe nobody in YOUR circle voted FOR Kerry, but plenty of people

did.

Including me, even though I supported another candidate in the primaries.

[leftynyc]

38. Speak for yourself

I voted FOR KERRY with pride.

[Larkspur]

16. Dean would not have written off the South, like Kerry did

Unlike Kerry, who had a penchent for taking vacations when he should have been campaigning, Dean would have worked hard to win over Southerners. He may not have carried a single Southern state, but we know for a fact Kerry could not and will never be able to carry a southern state. Kerry is an elitest and reeked of arrogance towards the common person. Instead of windsurfing off Nantucket over Labor Day weekend, Kerry should have been with Jimmy Carter building a home with Habitat for Humainty. Kerry's vacation spots only reenforced his elitism and aloofness form the problems and concerns of ordinary Americans.

Dean could relate to ordinary people better than Kerry. It is Kerry, not Dean, who lives in 5 mansions. Dean lives in a modest Middle Class American home and uses language that ordinary Americans can understand and appreciate. Dean did not talk down to people, but Kerry and the DLC/DNC goons do.

[JI7]

20. Kerry won many Southern states in the Primary

[sangh0]

25. "please explain how he lost every other primary state"???

Please answer the question, Larkspur. Until then, your claims about how well Dean would do in the South is just blowing smoke out of your butt.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

50. Did Dean win any southern states in the primaries?

[sangh0]

53. Let's count them

[CTLawGuy]

62. its called momentum...

and because the DLC used fear of losing to cajole the Dem voters into picking the safe "electable" candidate.

Dean was the guy they agreed with on the issues, but they were convinced that Kerry was "electable" because he served in Vietnam. Brings back memories of 1996 and Bob Dole.

[sangh0]

65. So Dean needed "momentum" to win in the South?

Then why do his supporters keep arguing he would have won in the South but never mention his need for "momentum"?

[CTLawGuy]

87. because there is no "momentum" in a GE

the primaries are state by state over time, while a GE is all at once. If someone does well in an earlier state, they garner more support in the later states because they look like a winner.

[sangh0]

94. We're talking about the primaries

Deanies are saying that Dean would have won the nom because he would do better than Clark and the other Dems in the south. Read the posts in this thread, but only if you don't have problems handling what is actually happening in reality.

Dean couldn't even win when the voters were almost all Democrats.

[CTLawGuy]

104. you're right

voters liked dean for what he stood for, but thought he wasn't "safe" or "electable" enough. Repubs made the same mistake in 1996. We're hoping that voters won't be so misguided in 2008. The repubs learned from 1996 in 2000, when they ran someone who appealed to the conservative base and supposedly held strong priniciples..

[sangh0]

109. Dean supporters went for "electability"?

If Dean can't even convince his own supporters that he was electable, why would anyone vote for him?

[CTLawGuy]

113. because

maybe Iowa voters learned from 2004. Maybe they are the only ones who learned that maybe we should vote for those whose ideas we agree with and not for who other people might vote for. Certainly the DLC and Senate Dems didnt learn that.

[sangh0]

118. No, not "Iowa voters".....DEAN VOTERS!!!

Why didn't the DEAN SUPPORTERS in Iowa actually VOTE FOR DEAN?

Don't they know that a candidate that can't get his own supporters to vote for him can't possibly win in the South?

[CTLawGuy]

123. dean has a hard core of supporters

and then there is the core of voters who are flaky. They were orginially for dean when they wre thinking about ideas. When it came to electability, then they bailed. Dean's core of support never abandonded him. i believe they were 18%.

[sangh0]

So Dean would win the South with flaky voters?

Obviously, his "hard core" were insufficient to win an election.

[CTLawGuy]

129. no one's hard core

is enough to win an election. ABB wasnt enough for Kerry.

Dean made a mistake by not countering the perception that he was unelectable. I think he has potential to fix that in 2008. the fear of losing was enough to sway people who otherwise liked Dean, from voting for him.

[leftynyc]

44. Congratulations on wolfing down the moronic spin the MSM

fed during the campaign.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[library_max]

5. This is complete and utter bull.

First, the differences between Kerry and Bush were profound and clearly drawn by both candidates. Anyone who thinks that Kerry was Bush lite is going to have trouble with democracy generally speaking. In a nation of 200 million, some of us are looking for a candidate who perfectly articulates our personal beliefs. Naive isn't nearly a strong enough word for that.

Second, the Bush vote was much more "anti" than the Kerry vote. Look at the Bush campaign. Not a word about voting for Bush, all of it was aimed at voting against Kerry. Millions of people with serious trepidations about the way Bush is handling the war, foreign policy, the economy, etc. voted for him to vent their hatreds against "the liberals." Listen to Republicans and you will hear this.

Third, isn't it obvious by now that the Republicans stole the election? In 2000, they kind of stumbled into stealing it - nobody had a plan except Jeb Bush, by far the smartest of the Bush boys. This time they had nationwide plans - BBV, voter purges, voter intimidation and endless lines in minority and other Democratic-leaning districts, absentee and provisional ballots that nobody ever intended to count, etc. etc.

We took our very best shot with Kerry, and got it stolen from us. Was he the perfect candidate? Did he run a perfect campaign? No, but Jesus Christ is not going to come down to run on the Democratic ticket in 2008. Perfection eludes us in this world. Kerry was the best shot we had. If he couldn't win, especially after four years of Bush mendacity and bungling following eight years of Clinton peace and prosperity, then it's clear that Democrats are no longer allowed to win, period.

[Warpy]

6. Oh, crap

I was originally for Dean because I felt he presented the best chance to get away from the DLC campaigns that had turned good men into "shoeboxes" and lost elections for us.

However, there was nothing wrong with Kerry. He was Gored by the media and restrained by the DLC, but it appears only massive fraud by the Repuglican Party at the polls managed to defeat him.

[Demobrat]

7. How dare you insinuate that Kerry wasn't the best we could do?

He knows something about aircraft carriers for real, remember?

[Rowdyboy]

12. Dean MIGHT have carried DC and Massachusetts....maybe

YEARRRGGGHHHHHH!!! OHIO!!! WISCONSIN!!! CALIFORNIA!!!

It would have rivaled McGovern as the largest electoral massacre in American history.

[Larkspur]

14. Like this LTTE writer, I didn't vote for Kerry, I voted against Bush

But I will not vote for a DLC approved Prez candidate again. The next Dem Prez candidate will have to earn my respect. Kerry had and still does earn my scorn.

There were no major differences between Kerry and Bush, especially in foreign policy. Kerry supported Bush's immoral war against Iraq and his support of Ariel Sharon's apartheid policies against the Palestinians. Kerry was Bush-lite. To see my more detail assessment of Kerry's 2004 campaign, see my personal blog at http://tinyrippleofhope.blogspot.com/

[willysnout]

22. Dean Would Have Gone Down in Flames

I make the following comments as someone who never really warmed to Kerry either, especially after he so thoroughly fucked up in August. I was beside myself with frustration while Kerry sat there and allowed those attacks on his honor to go unchallenged. He also did a piss-poor job with the $87 billion "flip-flop" issue.

Look, I respect Dean. He didn't apologize for being a Democrat, and I hugely appreciated it. If we're going to lose, we shouldn't lose as whipped dogs crawling into a corner somewhere. If nothing else, at least Dean killed the possibility of a Lieberman candidacy and for that I am eternally grateful.

That said, I think Kerry ran a very respectable campaign. He spoke out loud about the things I care about. There were even moments of brilliance and poetry, although not enough of them. Could he have done better? Yeah, of course he could have. But let's not tear each other to bits here.

Howard Dean was never going to be elected president. The Republicans would have had his head on a platter. He'd have been protrayed as the skateboard generation's candidate, McGovern Redux. You think Kerry got it bad? You have no idea how bad it would have been if Dean were the candidate. We'd have gotten 38% of the vote, not 48%.

I'm as disappointed as anyone here. I'm crushed, really. But the only thing to do is pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and get back in the game. We are 48% of the country, and let's not forget that.

[CTLawGuy]

63. everyone who thinks dean would have gone down

thought Kerry would easily beat bush :eyes:

[willysnout]

95. I Never Thought That

I always thought it would be a close election, and when Kerry failed to respond effectively to the "flip-flop" thing and especially to the Swiftliars, I was quite worried.

[Larkspur]

135. Agree. They were the ones who drank the kool-aid that said that

Kerry's military service would be the talisman that would break Bush's spell upon the nation. They forgot that Kerry is an elitiest who can't empathize with ordinary Americans.

[willysnout]

142. You're Wrong

... and either a Republican or someone who's been watching way too much Faux News.

[paulk]

23. this thread is a good example of why we lose elections

with people like you, Larkspur, "on our side", who needs Republicans?

I guess now that the elections over, the Deaniacs can come crawling out of the woodwork.

Thanks for this thread, BTW. It reminds me of why I put you on ignore the first time.

[Demobrat]

27. We lose elections because

we run cowards who afraid to stand up for Democratic values. Kerry, for example. Why vote Repuke Lite when you can have the real thing?

[sangh0]

31. So why didn't Nader win?

Is he a coward too?

[Demobrat]

40. Nader didn't have the Democratic machinery behind him.

Kerry did. And he lost to the worst president in history anyway. Interesting that you point to Nader as the embodiment of Democratic Values.

[sangh0]

54. So Nader would have won if he had the DNC behind him?

Do you suppose there might be a reason why the DNC did NOT get behind him? Would you mind sharing it, because it sounds like you're saying that the only way to win is to have the DNC do something it's never going to do - support someone else.

[Demobrat]

64. Considering the DNC got behind the weakest candidate

running, and according to you will always be Bush Lite, we'll never know, will we? Just like we'll never know what would have happened if we'd run somebody with the balls to stand up to the war mongering.

[sangh0]

67. You missed the point

If "somebody with the balls to stand up to the war mongering" is what you're talking about, then why would the DNC run such a candidate if they are bush*-lite?

The "bush*-lite" crowd is NOT known for being pacifists. Why would the bush*-lites who control the DNC run an anti-war candidate?

Isn't this like waiting for the RNC to run an anti-war candidate?

[Demobrat]

78. The DNC did not run an anti-war candidate.

They ran Bush Lite. The DNC will never run an anti-war candidate. Therefore, they are and always will be Bush Lite. And they will always lose.

[sangh0]

84. And why do you think that is?

Because they're bush*-lite?

If so, then why would they EVER run an anti-war candidate? If so, then waiting for the DNC to run an anti-candidate is like waiting for the RNC to run a pro-choice candidate.

BTW, if being against the war is supposed to be so important to voters, where are all the protests against the war?

Therefore, they are and always will be Bush Lite. And they will always lose.

Then why demand that they run an anti-war candidate? Even YOU realize it's a futile effort.

[Demobrat]

86. Yup. It's futile.

The Dems will always be Bush-Lite and they will always lose. Which is why I left the Dem party this year and re-registered as an Independent. I'd rather go down fighting than sucking Bush's dick.

[sangh0]

91. SO are you big on futile actions?

or is it just the best you can do?

Nevermind, I have your answer already. I noticed you said you're going third party.

[Demobrat]

97. I'M big on futile actions

says the guy who supports doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

[sangh0]

106. try reading

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1368983

SInce I first came here three years ago, I've been calling for something similar to what Lakoff is calling for.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

36. Bill CLinton didn't stand up for Democratic values and he won twice

you were saying....

[Demobrat]

107. So in other words....

Democrats should NOT stand up for Democratic values, in order to win. Thanks for clearing that up.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

120. No I didn't say that. I simply said it doesn't necessarily equate with

winning..and Clinton proved it.

I would also dispute that Dean stood for Democratic values any more than Kerry did.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. Could You Define Democratic Values...

I am a Democrat because America needs a party that looks out for the little guy and respects everybody's civil rights...

[Demobrat]

43. Including the little guy's right

not to be sent to fight and die for a lie? Kerry voted for the war to protect his ass politically. Do you consider that looking out for the little guy?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

47. It Was A Bad Vote... A Totally Political Vote...

If he really supported the IWR like Joe Lieberman I could deal with that...


But then I look at a vote like his DOMA vote and I see a man who took a principled stand that was not helpful to his political career...


This whole debate makes me think which is worse...

Dems who voted for DOMA or Dems who voted for the IWR...

[wantkerryin]

105. Republican "Morality"?????

John Kerry talked about the issues that affected me-jobs, healthcare, fighting a smarter war in trying to bring peace,preserving pro-choice issues etc.This is why i am a Democrat! Bush talked about ...Morality!Morality from a guy who sends poeple overseas to a war to get killed! he could have tried having Summit talks and attempted peaceful negotiations before war as a last recourse-but he didn't.Take away womens' right to choose safe abortions will mean we will go back to the dark ages of illegal ,dangerous abortions. He gives the wealthiest people a tax break while those in poverty need jobs and healthcare----and tries to put a halt to overtime pay for employees!!! Is it MORAL to favor corporations over the individual americans just trying to keep a roof over their families----do these families have to move to india to get the outsourced jobs there??? I am outraged by the lack of separation of church and state? Is anyone else with me on this?????????????

[ohioan]

32. Ain't it amazing - because Dean was not in the line of fire

and, thus, comes out of the election in one piece, his acolytes see that as concrete proof that he is the Chosen One.

Here's a clue - the Republicans didn't lay a glove on Dean because he was completely irrelevant to them for the last nine months. If HE were the nominee, they would have gone after him as hard - or harder - than they did Kerry and he WOULD not have weathered the storm as well as Kerry did.

[quaker bill]

46. Sorry, you are wrong

Republicans were running ads against Dean in Iowa. As it happened 3 or 4 of our candidates joined in. Why spend money attacking Dean this early, if he was not a threat?

Apparently they went after Kerry just as hard as they had to. Remember August and September? Kerry did not weather it all that well as I recall. He needed to win all three debates just to draw back to about 3 percent behind. The swifties were all of the october surprise they needed and they did it in August.

Kerry simply was not as "electable" as people thought. The results are in and the facts are not deniable. If your thoughts were that Kerry was the "electable" one, then you were wrong. Your judgement in regard to how other candidates would have done is more than suspect.

[ohioan]

140. Republicans also ran ads against Edwards throughout the primary

Do you think that means they were terrified of him, too?

But let's assume you're correct, that the Republicans ran ads against Dean because they feared him and that those ads were so effective, they helped do him in.

Sounds like it didn't take much for them to knock him out of contention by gettint Democrats to vote against him. Imagine how easy it would have been to destroy him in a general election where the pool of voters were not exclusively Democrats?

Moreover, you may find my reasoning suspect. But there is nothing suspect about figuring that if Candidate A narrowly defeats Candidate B who wiped the floor with Candidate C, that Candidate A is likely a stronger contender than Candidate C.

Unless, of course, Candidate C is the infallible Howard Dean, who, despite his inability to convince a majority (or even a respectable plurality) of Democrats to vote for him, at least has convinced his band of supporters that he could have swayed a majority of American voters, Democratic and Republican, into jumping onto his bandwagon.

[quaker bill]

33. I worked, I donated,and I voted for Kerry

I agree with the Larkspur and I am not the reason Kerry lost. I am part of the reason he did as well as he did.

Kerry lost because he did not make Bush run on his record. Kerry tried to woo "swing voters" by not being too aggressive. This was often referred to by its better known handle; maintaining "Electability".

This approach and the stupid Vietnam BS allowed Bush to escape a serious focus on and discussion of his record. Bush ran away from his record and to a poorly defined warm and fuzzy vision of the future. We let him do it. We lost.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

35. Thankyou...we really need mutiny on our own side

Imagine if a freeper posted most of these posts..would they even be here?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

61. Is Larkspur on our side? I hadn't noticed. Larkspur is on Larkspur's side

[DoveTurnedHawk]

72. I Can't Believe This Person Is STILL Around, Yet Dookus Is Gone

:crazy:

DTH

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

75. This is why we lose elections...we pretend MUTINY is big tent

Karl Rove could write half of Larkspur's posts

[JI7]

79. Dookus is gone ?

why ?

[Larkspur]

134. Your wrong, with Dems like Lieberman, who needs Rpukes

Just for your information, I'm on my town's Dem Town Committee and I sacrificed a vacation day to help with the election in my town.

I never liked Kerry and Kerry never gave me a reason to like him. I voted for him because Bush is the worse Prez ever, but I will never voted for a DLC clown again. The next Dem Prez candidate will have to earn my respect. Kerry only earned my scorn.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

39. Yet Another Counter-Productive and Meaningless Thread

People like you denigrate the good name and reputation of Dean supporters, the vast majority of whom have been awesome.

DTH

[NewYorkerfromMass]

41. Hey Larkspur

whatever.

[quaker bill]

48. Hey NYFM

"Electability"?

Apparently not.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

55. are vote counts final?

hold the fire please.

[emulatorloo]

57. If Ohio had gone for Kerry, Kerry would be President.

And quite frankly, I am not prepared to say that Ohio and Florida ****did not**** go to Kerry.

So yes, apparently Kerry was electable. . .

[NewYorkerfromMass]

58. Thanks. Everyone should read this

http://www.thehill.com/mellman/110204.aspx

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

45. This simply sums up your pomposity in the matter...you would have rather

lost be a FUCKING LANDSLIDE than a few million votes and a dozen electoral votes because being RIGHTEOUS is more important to you than actually getting elected.

For all your fucking tripe about how wonderful Dean is (and in many ways he is because he's not a whole hell of a lot like you) Dean made comtadictory statements SUPPORTIVE of the war until it was politically capitalistic to come out against it..Dean SUPPORTED the Patriot act IN FUCKING PRINT prior to coming out against it.

Please....I know that people believe and may NOT be incorrect about the part that Dean was taken down in an orchestrated manner by his fellow Dems...but FUCKING RIDDLE ME THIS BATMAN...given how he folded after a dumbass scream...please tell me if he could have withstood an OUNCE of the body blows Kerry took in the election to come within a razor of grabbing it. The SCREAM attack was NOTHING compared to the SwiftBoat attack and Kerry STILL stood after those.


Now fucking stuff your Kerry hatred up your pompus mutinous ass.

[leftynyc]

51. Well said and amen (eom)

[DoveTurnedHawk]

73. AMEN! (eom)

DTH

[Larkspur]

139. Dean didn't fold after his scream

He was making gains in NH and if he had had another week, he would have beaten Kerry. He came in 2nd in NH.

The Media played his "scream" over 690 times and they intentionally misrepresented it. Kerry had some of the Media barons on his contributors list, so they had interest in bringing down Dean.

[w4rma]

52. Give me a break. This is BS. (nt)

[sampsonblk]

56. It ain't about Kerry vs Dean, its about standing for something...

and John Kerry just plain DIDN'T. That's the main reason we got trounced. Hopefully next time we will run a guy we believe in, instead of a guy we think can win.

[emulatorloo]

59. Only if you live on the moon or if you are a MSM pundit

can you imagine that John Kerry "didn't stand for anything."

Nor did we get trounced. . .if Ohio or FLorida had gone for KErry he would be President. And I am not prepared to say that Ohio and Florida did not go to Kerry.

[CTLawGuy]

70. tell me

is kerry FOR the Iraq War , or AGAINST it?

He voted for it, and then said he hoped Bush didnt do what kerry jsut gave him the power to do, then he said Saddam Hussein was a threat, then said we should have gone after bin Laden instead, then he said that America is safer with Saddam gone, then said we should have worked with allies.

is kerry FOR the tax cuts, or AGAISNT them?

he voted against them, then he wants to keep them for some people, and cancel them for other people, opening him up to charges of both flip flopping (by voting against them and then wanting to keep them)and being a tax raiser (by wanting to roll back tax cuts for those over 200K)

is Kerry FOR or AGAINST the Patriot Act?
he voted for it, and now says it needs to be changed. Way to not realize that it needs to be changed before voting for it.

[emulatorloo]

81. Maybe its me, but it sounds like you've internalized Rove's talking points

OK I'll lay it out for you

For holding Saddam accountable, but war as a last resort.
For tax cuts for the middle class, for repealing Bush's cuts for the upper 2%
For interagency information sharing, and cutting off funds to terrorists per Patriot Act, against sneak and peak searches etc per Patriot Act.

[CTLawGuy]

83. ok

the resolution allowed Bush to go to war NOT AS A LAST RESORT and Kerry was ok with that.

Kerry voted against the Tax cuts for the middle class, which I admit was the right thing to do.

He should have known what was wrong with the patriot act and voted against it.

[emulatorloo]

101. Ok - then

Kerry was ok with the assurances they got from Colin Powell that everything would be done that they could to avoid war. . .but as we know Colin Powell was out of the loop.

Patriot Act - full of loopholes that Ashcroft exploited.

We will continue to disagree, I will never ever bash Howard Dean. But you are way too harsh on Kerry, and way too willling to ignore the great things he has done in his life.

[CTLawGuy]

103. I am glad that Kerry served in vietnam

and spoke out against that war. But I can't abide by his irresponsiblity. if he and others in the Democratic Senate Caucus (which was the majority at the time) had been more responsible 1200 soldiers would be alive today.

1200 sons and daughters, sisters and brothers, fathers and mothers.

the Honorable John kerry of 1971, who would NEVER have voted for IWR, was not the John Kerry who ran in 2004.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

144. Yeah except one fatal flaw with your logic. That Bush would NOT have

gone to war anyway.

[sampsonblk]

126. What was his campaign about?

John Kerry stood for whatever was convenient during the election cycle. What was his campaign about? What is the main thing he was going to be about if he had won? What are the issues where he will refuse to compromise? Why did John Kerry spend months talking about jobs and health care While our guys were getting killed in Iraq! Only in the last month did he mention the word "incompetence," and then it was only after Republicans had mentioned it first.

Its not about Rove, its about looking at things as they are, and not as you'd wish them to be. Do you think John Kerry really believes we need a tax cut for the "middle class" while we are running huge deficits?

[willysnout]

60. You Weren't Listening, Then

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

66. And if we laid out all of Dean's conflicting statements side to side

one could have come to the same conclusion...he was for the war then against it...he was for the Patriot act..then against it...he was for civil unions but against gay marriage....

Only difference between Dean and Kerry was Kerry had to vote..Dean didn't.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

68. There were a lot more differences between Dean and Kerry than that

and thankfully Iowans saw them.

[sampsonblk]

132. My issue is not Dean

My issue is John Kerry. I can be wrong from time to time. But my impression of his primary campaign was "I can beat Bush." I didn't see any groundswell in this party for Kerry's positions on the issues - before, during or after the primaries. Kerry is a war hero, and he was kinder and gentler in tone. He was moderate, and a lot of people thought that might play well with swing voters.

So what I saw was the ABB crowd willing to pick any horse that looked like it could cross the finish line first. And Kerry looked like the horse last winter. At least that's what I get from the exit polls.

I hope we don't make this mistake again.

*I wasn't a Dean supporter, FYI, although I agreed with his positions. My fam is 100% for Wes Clark.

[Larkspur]

138. And Kerry missed lots of votes in 2003

because he was busy campaigning for Prez nomination.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

143. your point is? I swear, every last one of them is like a Rove manifesto

Please tell me...what distinguishes your undermining of us versus Rove's undermining of us? Am I supposed to fucking thank you because I am to presume you are on our side when even during the general election you were posting this shit?

[sangh0]

69. Dean STOOD for all sorts of things

like support for storing nuclear waste in Nevada AND opposing the storing of nuclear waste in Nevada

He supported a Balanced Budget Amendment, then he opposed a Balanced Amendment.

Dean STOOD for amny things. Dean had a stand for every occassion

[CTLawGuy]

71. wow nuclear waste and BBA

that sure compares to such insignificant issues as Tax policy and the war in Iraq. :eyes:

[sangh0]

76. Yes, BBA has nothing to do with taxes, and nukes have nothing to with

our invasion of Iraq

:crazy:

And of course, Dean also supported tax cuts AND opposed tax cuts, while starting out agreeing with bush*'s claim that we needed regime change AND then disagreeing with the need for regime change.

[CTLawGuy]

80. you need to read more

I dont know when he supported the tax cuts. :shrug: He opposed them because they were fiscally irresponsible.

its not mutually exclusive to want regime change but oppose a particular way of doing it. Dean knew that the case for unilateral war was bullshit.

What kerry did was vote to allow bush to go to war and then get all upset when bush uses that power. If you dont want him to go to war, DON'T HELP HIM TO DO IT!

[sangh0]

88. I guess you should have paid attention to Dean campaign

when he spoke about how he cut taxes as Gov of VT.

its not mutually exclusive to want regime change but oppose a particular way of doing it.

True, but that's not what Dean said. First he said he FOR regime change, and then he said he was AGAINST regime change. Dean never criticized bush* for the WAY he did it (ie invasion). He criticized the idea that we invaded at all.

What kerry did was vote to allow bush to go to war and then get all upset when bush uses that power.

Ah, so with Dean it was that he opposed the way it was done, even though Dean never said that. But Kerry, who actually and explicitely said his criticism was based on HOW bush* used the power, did not care HOW bush* used the power.

:crazy:

[CTLawGuy]

92. wow, you are good at stretching logic

he criticized us for invading at all, becuase invasion is only ONE WAY to accomplish regime change. We could also arm the opposition, or use economic sanctions.

If kerry was upset that Bush used the power how he did, kerry shouldnt have voted for a resolution that allowed Bush to do that.

[sangh0]

96. Dean campaigned on "arming the opposition"???

In which dimension?

or use economic sanctions

Umm, did you notice we already HAD sanctions?

[CTLawGuy]

100. he didnt campaign on them per se

he campaigned against what Kerry enabled Bush to do, invade a country, in violation of international law, without proof that it threatened us.

[sangh0]

111. No, he just plain ole didn't campaign on them AT ALL

Your inability to state the obvious truth is revealing.

[CTLawGuy]

114. ok fine, he didnt campaign on them at all

but he campaigned against going to war in Iraq.

[sangh0]

121. Dean was FOR regime change, and then he was AGAINST regime change

He was FOR Yucca Mountain, then AGAINST Yucca Mountain

He was FOR a BBA, then AGAINST a BBA

Dean had a stand for every occassion

[CTLawGuy]

130. Yucca Mtn. and the BBA

did not violate the central core of International Law or result in the expenditure of 100 of billions of dollars and the loss of 1200 soldiers. Kerry's flip flop was that deadly.

[MuseRider]

77. THAT is the very thing

that took me off the Dean bandwagon. I kept talking him up to friends then they would come back and tell me I was incorrect. I thought I was losing my mind until I discovered for myself that whatever was politically expedient at the time was where he was going to be. Now, that being said, I think that is typical of many politicians and is the game that most of them play. For me it simply put him on the playing field as nothing more than a politician. That is where my intense dislike of the St. Howard stuff begins. He is nothing more than a politician who pretended to be a lefty when he saw it was a popular thing to do.

[sampsonblk]

136. That was my impression of Dean also

That's the main reason why I never jumped on the bandwagon. But didn't it make you feel good when he came out fighting back against the Repubs? He wasn't afraid of taking them on. And that counts for something, whether ya like the guy or not. I am for Clark. But if Dean had won the nomination, I would have cast a proud vote for him, and then prayed for the best.

[MuseRider]

141. Well of course

but his style was a little disturbing to me. I was for Dennis Kucinich so I have taken a few lumps around here as well. To me DK has more backbone than all of them put together. We all have our preferences. Voting for Dean would have been very hard for me because I did not trust him to keep to his word after that experience. I never really thought any of them had a probelm taking on Bush** though, I loved the primaries and the debates.

[DrWeird]

74. Why order the meat loaf when you can have the steak dinner?

Bush supported the war. Kerry supported the war.

Bush was against gay marriage. Kerry was against gay marriage.

What else was there?

[sangh0]

82. Dean supported regime change, then opposed regime change

Kerry consistently criticized how bush* handled Tora Bora, while Dean COMPLIMENTED BUSH* on his good leadership

Dean was also against gay marriage.

[CTLawGuy]

85. dean did not oppose

Regime change, he opposed going to war unliaterally on a flimsy case. Yes, Dean thought bush was right to go to afghanistan. and Dean is personally against gay marriage, but unlike kerry, who said he would consider a state ban on gay marriage, Dean put his neck on the line to get civil unions which were VERY controversial in 2000.

[sangh0]

90. Dean didn't oppose regime change? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

.

[CTLawGuy]

93. regime change != unilateral invasion of a nation

there are other ways to effect regime change. Dean was not pro-saddam.

[sangh0]

98. Dean opposed regime change

but only after he supported it.

[CTLawGuy]

102. link?

to supposed statement of Dean's where he "opposes regime change" of saddam in general.

[sangh0]

112. I'll provide links when you do

.

[CTLawGuy]

116. you're the one who claims dean opposed regime change

you provide the link

[sangh0]

119. You claimed Dean campaigned against regime change

.

[CTLawGuy]

125. no i didnt

he campaigned against the war, but he's always thought saddam is not a good leader and shouldnt be in power.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

89. I Though Bush Supported An Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment

and John Kerry opposed it...

In fact John Kerry was only one of twelve senators with the stones to vote against DOMA.. Even heroes of this board like Bobby Byrd and Paul Wellstone voted for DOMA...

Dr. Dean opposes gay marriage too and I wish some enterprising DUer would find the Meet The Press interview where Dean almost "apologizes" for Vermont's civil union laws arguing that the inspiration for the law was found in the legislature and he merely signed it....


As a point of privilege I define marriage is a union of two people who love each other but I don't have the burden of running for office...

As far as the IWR, Dr. Dean was on record as supporting Biden-Lugar which was really a watered down version of the Iraq War Resolution... All it required was for Bush to "ask" twice for permission instead of once....

[CTLawGuy]

99. B-L

was MUCH better than IWR. B-L only authorized force to get rid of WMD. It doesnt allow bush to change the reason for war in the middle of the war. It also doesnt allow Bush to go to war unless there is actually WMD there. Bush was against B-L because it "tied my hands".

If there were WMD in Iraq that threatened us, Dean was for unilaterial action to destroy them if that was necessary. Dean was NOT for unilateral action to overthrow the governement that did not threaten us and without any hard evidence of WMD.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

110. Right...

But it's time to pick up the ball where we find it...


The election is over...


Kerry ran a decent race... It's not like he embarrassed himself or us...

He got 48% of the vote and got 254 or so EC votes...


He used AWOL as a punching bag in the debates and made him fear for his job...


I wasn't a big Kerry or Dean fan in the primaries... The fact that a northeasterner hasn't won an absolute majority of the pop vote since 1944 weighed on my decision...

[sangh0]

115. Did ya notice how darboy completely ignored the gay marriage point?

You nailed him by pointing out a glaring error in fact, and darboy ignores it and continues to pretend s/he hasn't made any mistakes.

darboy claimed to me that Dean campaigned against regime change. When I called darboy on it, s/he ignored it.

[CTLawGuy]

122. im a he

hence darBOY

dean is against gay marriage personally, I admit. but he never said he would support a state or federal ban on gay marriage. He also put his neck on the line in an election year, to give civil unions to gays in 2000.


Dean thinks saddam is a bad guy and shouldnt be in power, he just didnt like the fact that we went to war against him with no allies and no evidence. Kerry also said those things, but he voted to allow Bush to do it anyway. hence, Kerry lost all credibility on the war issue.

[sangh0]

124. Untrue (again)

but he never said he would support a state or federal ban on gay marriage

Dean said it was a matter of states rights, which means he would support the right of a state to ban gay marriage

Dean thinks saddam is a bad guy and shouldnt be in power

Dean was FOR regime change, and then he was AGAINST regime change. Rewording it to talk about some straw man (like whether or not Saddam a "bad guy") doesn't change the fact that Dean was FOR regime change, and then he was AGAINST regime change.

[CTLawGuy]

128. sigh

Dean said it was a matter of states rights, which means he would support the right of a state to ban gay marriage

He personally wouldnt support a ban on gay marriage,(he also wouldnt push to allow gay marriage either) but he would let the states do what they wanted. Kerry said he might have supported a MA ban on gay marriage "depending on the language." Dean's position doesnt constrain a person's civil rights, even if it does not do much to advance them beyond civil unions.

Dean was FOR regime change, and then he was AGAINST regime change. Rewording it to talk about some straw man (like whether or not Saddam a "bad guy") doesn't change the fact that Dean was FOR regime change, and then he was AGAINST regime change.

In order for your statement to be correct, you'd have to prove that unilateral war was the ONLY way to effect regime change. If you can't do that, then Dean would logically be allowed to support regime change but be against the war.

Dean is AGAINST saddam being in power, (hence FOR regime change) but also AGAINST going to war against him without evidence of an imminent threat.

[Reality Not Tin Foil]

108. Dean would have been slaughtered!

Ala Mondale and Dukakus.

Dean is a man of vision and passion, but a horrible presidential candidate.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

117. The Duke Got 46% Of The Vote And Won Ten States...

Not as bad as Mondale's 41% and one state...


I think Dean does better than the Duke but worse than Kerry...


It would take a god awful Dem to lose NY, CA, OR, and WA....

[Reality Not Tin Foil]

127. Good points.

And GREAT nickname!! Took me a minute. LOL! "The Duke"!!

[zulchzulu]

133. Here we go again with the childish Temper Tantrums

Dean couldn't get the nomination in the primaries.

HE LOST.

HE DROPPED OUT.

GET IT?

Even though he was trounced handily, should we have given him the nomination? What the f%&* would that say to people who didn't vote for him in massive numbers? Should the DLC have said that all those that voted for Kerry should just get the hell out of the way? What does that say about respecting the vote?

Kerry won in the primaries and got the nomination. He is a very good man and put up a good fight. We didn't get enough votes to win. Period.

Yes, there was fraud. Yes, we need to count all the votes. Yes, we will never know about the votes that were cast with no paper trail.

Perhaps this person who wrote this pitiful article didn't vote...

[MuseRider]

137. This sounds.....so... familiar

"Even though he was trounced handily, should we have given him the nomination? What the f%&* would that say to people who didn't vote for him in massive numbers? Should the DLC have said that all those that voted for Kerry should just get the hell out of the way? What does that say about respecting the vote?"

We were robbed but not in Iowa.

[Moderator]

145. Locking

for flamewar....