Question For "Non-Transferable" Dean Supporters

[K8-EEE]

If Dean's campaign suffered more losses and Dean himself either dropeed out or endorsed the official nominee, would you still refuse to vote for any of the other Dem candidates?

I for one prefer any of them to GWB, I think enough of Dr. Dean to think he would agree with me if push came to shove.

[Walt Starr]

1. I don't fear Bush an longer

So no.

[cheezus]

2. what does that mean - You don't fear Bush any longer

You don't fear Bush - explain what you mean by that and why that means you wouldn't support Bush's challenger.

/don't understand

[Walt Starr]

3. I do not fear the possibility of Bush getting another four years

That is no longer my overriding factor in this election. ABB is based upon fear and when you fear somebody, you have handed over power to them

I no longer fear Bush. My goal is to change the Democratic PArty from being a corporate entity. Last night was the perfect example of the Democratic Party being a corporate entity.

[HumanPatriot]

5. guess no one is going to scare you...

with demagoguery to make you vote for a cooporate candidate. Congratulations. You see....some people, despite Iowa, are starting to understand.


In the meantime I hope opponents of such ideaology stifle their protest, realizing that we opt to elect a change in America and the Party, rather than simply electing the candidate who appeals most to Bush's America.


Don't characterize Dean by the new supporters he has brought in that feel this way, but praise him for at least sparking their idealistic intrests in a way few others could. without Dean, they wouldn't be voting period, and perhaps, not even paying attention to the corrupt system.

[damnraddem]

9. Fear is a survival trait, an important motivator for human behavior.

Fear of Dubya is an excellent, and quite appropriate, motivator. ABB makes sense, within limits -- e.g., ABBoL (Anybody But Bush or Lieberman).

[Walt Starr]

10. Okay, then I guess I'm ABBo

LKKSCE

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[youngred]

35. hardly

its not a moronic mantra its a last ditch hope to save the country, which in case you hadn't noticed is being run by the closest thing this country has had to fascism.

[returnable]

13. "Last night was the perfect example..."

"...of the Democratic Party being a corporate entity."

Why? Cuz Dean shit the bed?

The Democratic Party is a corporate entity because the much-hyped Dean machine failed to turn out enough voters to support their candidate?

So let me get this straight - if Dean had done better last night, everything would be hunky dory.

But since he failed to deliver the goods, the Democratic Party is a corporate entity.

Gotcha :hi:

[kerry-is-my-prez]

48. Do you realize that Dean is the most "pro-corporate candidate of them all?

http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/001560.php

-snip-

Dean also was on good terms with Vermont's business community — a relationship some considered too cozy. "His top advisors were all money people, brokers and bankers," said Ready, a regular Dean adversary when she served in the Legislature.

While Dean was instrumental in preserving hundreds of thousands of acres of open space, critics say he was too willing to capitulate to developers and allow growth that contributed to sprawl and the pollution of Lake Champlain, Vermont's natural gem.

"If the question was enticing new business in the state, giving them what they wanted or needed in terms of permits, locations, you could pretty much predict Howard would come down on the side of what business wanted, even if meant sprawling development," said Patrick Parenteau, a law professor at Vermont Law School and a former state environmental commissioner.

-snip-

[TLM]

65. LOL! That's pretty desperate...

Dean;s the most pro-corproate because he allowed some new business development in Vermont to save a dying economy.

And Mr. Parenteau is one of the folks who attacked Dean because they wanted ZERO development.


And how does allowing a few companies to build mean Dean is more pro-corproate than guys like Kerry, who is owned by special interests, and Clark who WAS a corproate lobbyist?

[Snivi Yllom]

166. I guess you missed some of Kerry's dealings

....hmmmmm?

[pnziii]

98. Both parties are bad!

The Democratic Party is a corporate entity if Dean won or lost.

What have the Dems done for me? I think they have become Republican light. They do not speak for me. Dean did!

[JohnLocke]

165. Excellent post.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

30. changing the party

"My goal is to change the Democratic Party from being a corporate entity"

So explain your support of Dean?

[Bonobo]

70. Walt, that's exactly what I said before voting for Nader in 2000!

n/t

[trogdor]

72. Bottom line, Bush doesn't deserve a second term. Period.

Whether you're afraid of this possibility or not is besides the point. The point is, he's running the country into the ground (present tense), and most sane people want to stop him from doing more damage.

I'm not afraid of the rabbits in my backyard; after all, the most damage they can do is to eat up all my lettuce. That doesn't mean I ignore the rabbits because I didn't plant the lettuce for them.

So no, ABB is most definitely NOT based on fear. It's based on reality and the here and now.

[Walt Starr]

76. Maybe Bush doesn't deserve a second term

but he'll get one if the Democratic Party njominates an undeserving candidate.

[corporatewhore]

154. Bush dont deserve another term and we dontdeserve another dem that will

be an extension of bushs corporate supporting imperalistic agenda

[Blue-Jay]

81. From Walt's profile:

"I'm proud to be a Democrat!"

Maybe, based on your posts since last night, you might want to reword that bit. I'm serious. You want to change the Democratic party without supporting it? Please tell me how that's going to work.

If (IF!) Dean doesn't win the nod, he's already stated that he'll throw his support to the nominee. The least you could do is honor the wishes of the candidate that you admire so much, dontcha think?

[Walt Starr]

96. No

nt

[Blue-Jay]

105. Walt, I'm just sayin'

Don't you think that you could help to affect (much-needed, I'll agree) change from the inside rather than the outside? I'd prefer an "outsider" candidate myself, but a little bit is better than none. (or something. you get my point) I, for one, believe that ousting the pretender is a greater goal than "getting my way". I still believe that a Democrat in the White House is a vast improvement over our current sad situation. (Except for JL. He's the only one that could possibly make me stay home)

(I think I'll change my DU handle to "parenthetical".)

Listen guy, I wasn't flaming. I just think that your "Dean or Nobody with a chance in Hell" viewpoint is self-serving, short-sighted, and damaging. Sometimes the country has to take baby steps if great leaps aren't feasible.

(I'm a regular metaphor-idiot, eh?)

[Walt Starr]

112. I've tried that route for more than two decades

Things have only gotten worse. It's time to take a different road.

[DoNotRefill]

118. Uh huh....

and by putting the existing insider power-brokers in office, we're signing up for more of the same, over and over and over and over again.

Enough's e-fucking-nuff.

Do we live in a democracy or not? Is what's important the Will of the People, or is it the Will of the Skull and Bones society and the Will of the Corporate Hierarcy and the Will of the Military-Industrial Complex that matters?

I WILL NOT VOTE for more of the same. Being progressive DOES NOT MEAN maintaining the status-quo. And I REFUSE to vote for the status-quo. That means NO to the Military-Industrialist Candidate, NO to the people who voted to let Bush put the blood of the Iraqi people on my hands, NO, NO, NO!!!!!!

If you tell the grassroots to fuck off, don't be surprised when they tell you to fuck off right back.

"Don't piss down my leg and tell me it's raining, Senator..."

[corporatewhore]

156. A-Freaking-Men

[DoNotRefill]

136. Sounds like...

he's part of the "Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party".

I'm sick of people saying "I don't CARE if there's a bastard in office, as long as it's OUR bastard."

If I bought into that, I might end up voting for Zell Miller.

[youngred]

33. it means its Dean or bust

and fuck everyone but himself and Dean

[Egnever]

101. Wrong

I hapen to feel the same way and for me its Dean or any Dem candidate that didnt suport the bullshit war.

Kucinich is looking better every day.

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

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

[OhioStateProgressive]

104. hahahahahahaaaaa

funny shit man

[youngred]

107. Jealousy and sour grapes

sellout?

While Dean supported Biden-Lugar KUCINICH was speaking at Anti-War rallies.

KUCINICH was anti-war before it became popular for Dean

KUCINICH is the real liberal and if you believed what you said you did Walk he'd be your choice.

[Egnever]

109. Jealousy?

thats quite a stretch dont you think?

[polpilot]

111. Kucinich SUPPORTS pro-war candidates. Instructs his supporters to

support pro-war candidates. Not complicated.

Dean '04...NOW the ONLY anti-Iraqi War candidate

[youngred]

117. That's pretty lame

I thought you guys would be better than this.

Dean never was the Anti-War candidate, he played pure politics like he did on the civil unions law. Now that they've payed off he's happy.

Your argument is silly. Dean is a conservative at best on every issue other than Iraq, Edwards is not.

[polpilot]

157. That's untrue. Did Kucinich ask his supporters to support Edwards in

the caucus in certain situations? Do you believe Dean was anti-Iraq War or do you believe Edwards was anti-Iraq War. Not complicated. Not nuanced when you support a pro-Iraqi War candidate like Edwards.

Dean '04...

[youngred]

158. yes he did

but the Iraq war is NOT the only issue. It's one.

[DoNotRefill]

119. Kucinich destroyed his credibility...

by making his deal with the Edwards.

[youngred]

124. Not really, if anything he enhanced it

by not selling out over the one issue Dean has any credibility on (the war, and even that is shaky). Whereas Edwards has some very liberal domestic social policies and Dean generally doesnt.

[DoNotRefill]

128. "slavery is freedom!"

eom

[youngred]

130. quoting the book of Dean again?

like I said sour grapes. If any of you all bothered to look at the facts you'd see that its true...sadly you don't seem to want that

[DoNotRefill]

138. nope, not the Book of Dean....

but rather another book. Maybe you'll get to it later in your curriculum, but maybe not.

[youngred]

139. I know what its from

that was sarcasm because as I say below, your analogy falls short of its intended mark

[Le Taz Hot]

150. I second that

I'm looking at NO viable alternative now. Kucinich has sold his soul -- as he has before. I'm looking at a field of party machinery now and it's making me sick to my stomach.

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

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

[Jackson Smith]

106. Awesome. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[DoNotRefill]

120. the grassroots thank you for your honesty.

If it comes down to that, don't bother leaving the light on, we will not be back.

Better to vote third party than to vote for somebody complicit in the slaughter. At least MY conscience will be clear.

[bitchkitty]

115. I read through this thread -

and the posts of all the people trying to "talk sense" into you. I would suggest that they read through all the threads, the archives too, and ask themselves what could drive someone to take such an (in their view) extreme position.

I'm still ABB - but I feel you, baby.

[HumanPatriot]

4. Nope.

Na...Whats the points? Just politics anyway. Not like we ever make a difference and we always get screwed in the end, no matter whos holding the paddle. I somehow thought we could make a difference and change America, but in such a scenerio, we would only change presidents.

There are (were) about 3-4 people I would support. But my vote isn't a god-given right of the nominee...hasn't been yet, nor will it ever be for someone I do not support.


If you were in a tribe, standing in front of two men running for chief, would you choose the one about to kill 5 babies, choose the one about to kill 2, or tell em to goto hell and leave the tribe?


The lesser of two evils is still evil. A less morally unjust America is still one I do not want to be a part of or participate within. And I thought Id have to register this year, and participate in such a system finally. Maybe not.

[Disandra]

8. Right on!

I must warn you, put on your asbestos suit because you will be flamed, stick to your guns anyway! ;-)

[a_random_joel]

15. You lost me there.

Your argument is invalid.
Change is a slow, methodical process that requires optimism and education to occur. Politics, historically and invariably is about compromise. Cynicism such as that which you display, while understandable and easy to relate to, will not help in this process.

Your tribe analogy is a false analogy. We are not a tribe, nor our are leaders killing babies. Their policies may lead to baby deaths, but they are not the ones killing babies. You oversimplify the argument.

The bottom line here is we know who is absolutely without question evil. And he must be defeated. And that is why you must consider voting ABB. None of our candidates is a "lesser evil". Not a single ONE.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

37. You can't see the world as black vs. white with no gray. Good vs. evil

It's not a very healthy way to view the world.

[kiahzero]

42. Agreed

I hate when Bush casts things as battles between good and evil; not because it's Bush doing it, but because I hate when people do it in general.

[DoNotRefill]

121. Sorry...if given a choice between Hitler and Stalin...

I'll choose neither every time.

I will not enable warmongers any more, regardless of their party affiliation.

[youngred]

125. Hitler and Stalin eh

well at least you didn't exaggerate your beliefs!

[DoNotRefill]

127. Heh...

Given a choice between Hitler and Stalin, would you vote for either of them?

I'm sick of voting for the lesser of two evils.

[youngred]

132. No I would not

however there is no Dem candidate that rises to the level of either of them

Remember if someone doesn't vote for the lesser of two evils one gets the Greater of the two

[DoNotRefill]

134. Not necessarily....

who knows if the lesser or greater of evils will win? My point is that I'll not support the lesser of two evils, because doing so enables them and makes me complicit in their evil, even if it's lesser than the other choice.

If you read my posts carefully, you'll notice that I didn't say that any current candidate was the equivalent of either Hitler or Stalin. It was used to make a point. Obviously, it wasn't enough.

[youngred]

137. exaggeration is not an effective tool in logical debate

because it means you cannot accurately make your point.

you didn't say any candidate was evil, just all the ones but yours. That's, I'm sorry to say, bullshit. It does not make you complicit in evil. Vote FOR someone you want to win, but with the knowledge that when push comes to shove there is something more important at work than your chosen ideological purity.

I have a long record of supporting third parties, and ideological purity here, but I will not stomach people allowing 4 more years of the worst president this nation has ever had and allow us all to slip into fascism because someone doesn't match your litmus test.

FUCK the Nobody But My Candidate Crowd.

I'm sure my grandkids will appreciate living in the wreckage of America

[DoNotRefill]

140. Heh...

"and allow us all to slip into fascism because someone doesn't match your litmus test."

Sorry, but I truly believe that at least one candidate with a (D) after his name (at least recently) is just as much a fascist as Bush, if not moreso. The problem is that he's smart enough to try and mask it.

[youngred]

144. Lieberman?

or perhaps you're referring to the General who is on the cover of The Advocate...which I must say is a fairly strong indication of liberalism

The man from mass? The decorated war veteran who has a long liberal record?

The poor southern boy? He has a liberal voting record that some wish they could have, PATRIOT Act (which really ought to be taken into proper context when discussed here) and IWR to the contrary.

surely you don't mean the "evil elf" as some Dean supporters have called Mr. Kucinich.

So far you're not doing much convincing, just throwing out some anonymous insluts and maitaining an air of detached superiority. See how detached you are with Bush in for the next 4 years

[kiahzero]

17. The one who would kill 2

I at least saved 3 babies. You may have helped kill them.

"As it harms none, do as you will."
- The Wiccan Rede (Abbreviated)

"... But principles are just laws you make up to separate yourself from other people. Principles are selfish when they're more important than those people ..."
- Sal, "It's Walky!"

Your action to "tell em to goto hell and leave the tribe" was a completely selfish action - you did it to make yourself feel better.

[Walt Starr]

22. As a Wiccan, I disagree completely

Choosing to walk away is the correct course.

[kiahzero]

28. Perhaps we should take this to PM

But this is an interesting topic... I follow the Rede, and my interpretation / understanding is that since doing harm is all but unavoidable, one should minimize the harm one does.

How would walking away do no harm? You have to opportunity to save three of those children.

If I may draw another analogy: There's a bus accident, and the bus is over the side of a cliff. If you make any effort to save any of the children, the bus will tip quickly. If anyone moves, it will tip quickly. There are two doors: the emergency exit, and the front door. There are 5 kids by the emergency exit, and 2 by the front foor. What do you do?

A) Save the 5 children, killing the other 2
B) Save the 2 children, killing the other 5
C) Walk away, because you don't want to kill anyone.

Your previous answer would seem to indicate that you would choose C. In that case, all 7 children would die, but you wouldn't have killed anyone.

My humble opinion is that A would be the optimum choice for causing the least harm - you do the best you can to minimize the harm of your actions. It's horrible that 2 children have to die, but at least you saved the other 5.

Similarly, in the original example, it's horrible that 2 children have to die, but at least you saved the other 3.

Life requires getting your hands dirty. As the quote I posted above so eloquently states, it's selfish to refuse to help someone because you may get blood on your hands.

[youngred]

39. Well i hope you enjoy your correct course

when more and more americans come home from Iraq covered in the flag
when ANWR is drilled to the bone
when our last allies abndon us
when the roads become so choked with smog and SUVs that there is no room for anything else
when record numbers of jobless poor go to bed hungry
when inner city schools are drained of funding
when private schools and home schools train the next generation in conservative ideology
when the newly realigned supreme court strikes down Roe v. Wade
when affirmative action is ended
when all businesses take their business elsewhere

Gee I hope you like your absolutism then (and that's just the short list)

[TLM]

47. when more and more americans come home from Iraq covered in the flag

how would voting for someone who supported the war change that?

[kiahzero]

51. A few things

Define "supported the war" - are we talking voted for IWR, or actually wanted to go to war? I believe the only person who would fit in the latter would be Lieberman, and thats a loose fit.

Besides, it is unlikely that any of our candidates would engage in another war, whereas it is almost certain that Bush will.

In addition, I feel comfortable in saying that the Democratic candidates would all handle the occupation and removal of forces better than the Bush administration.

[youngred]

60. well

there is only one man running who actually wants to bring the troops home. Even the vaunted anti-war-rior Dean wants to keep them there. So it really doesn't matter at this point who we elect...but some are more likely to get us out of there sooner rather than later...meaning any Dem over Bush and his oil cronies

[RetroLounge]

94. Careful, you might confuse them with facts

eom

[youngred]

95. I provided facts

more than can be said for some ideology-only posters here

[leftynyc]

59. And don't forget more Scalia's on the court!!!!

n/t

[AntiCoup2K4]

84. And when those things happen, I hope you remember to thank

The DLC and pink tutu wearing ass kissers who made it all possible.

[pnziii]

147. A lot of Dems

Are letting these things happen and that's his point. The Dems are letting Bush do this and in some cases helping him.
Dems helped pass the Medicare package

[youngred]

148. I know what his point is

I'm on the far left of the democratic party. My support in my heart was for Nader in 2000. however I do recognize that it is the only viable alternative, and with Bush and the republicans moving further and further to the right something has to be done. The dems may have rolled over, but really they have not been in any sort of position to do ANYTHING at all for the last 4 years. They very briefly held the Senate, but then only by one vote (and that vote coming from a former republican, while at the same time havings to deal with conservatives like Miller and Lieberman who would sell their souls to sit at Bush's side). They've existed ina country strongly supportive of Bush, particularly on matters of self-defense. They have not had time to be as ideologically pure as the poster would hope.

However, abandoning them all means abandoning ANY hope for the future. I'm not abandoning hope, just like I'm not "living in fear"

[PatGund]

113. And as a Pagan myself.....

There are times that walking away will cause more harm than working to change something.

Basically, it's personal responsibility that the rede teaches. The responsibility to realize what and where your actions may lead - and the responsibility to justify those actions, to the Gods if need be.

To use this election as a case in point, I pretty much loathe Lieberman. I don't think he's qualified, I don't think he's a good leader, I don't think he'll make a good president. But if it came down to it, I'd vote for him.

Why??

Because "to do no harm" means at times weighing harm. Leaving Bush in office would cause greater harm than voting for Lieberman would. Which means that walking away creates worse harm than voting for someone you may dislike.

And you have to answer to that decision eventually, such is the cost of free will. Dan, (or Karma if you will) demands it. Manytimes, simply walking away causes more harm or damage then working with what you have to stop or change it.

[Walt Starr]

170. Hold, back up one

Because "to do no harm" means at times weighing harm. Leaving Bush in office would cause greater harm than voting for Lieberman would.

You don't know that. You don't know that things won't actually be worse under Lieberman. In my judgement, things COULD be worse under an unknown evil than under the known evil. We know what to expect with the known, we do not know what to expect with the unknown. Looking at Lieberman's hawkish stances, he could be responsible for more deaths than Bush very easily over the next four years.

The rede is not applicable to voting or not voting. If it were the case, you'd see a lot more Pagans voting than do.

[HumanPatriot]

24. Not just for myself...

Im also removing myself materially from the institution by expatriation, and hence, not contributing indirect support, via taxes or other means, to the state.

Also, you may very well stand incorrect regarding moral action, when considering the Kantian model. To advocate the indirect or direct harm of the living by controling degrees of damage is still an advocation of some immoral action to some given extent. It may very well be said that it is far more moral, or rather, ammoral and merely permissable, to not participate in such a process whatsoever, and furthermore, remove both your support and participation which may aid future injustice.

[kiahzero]

36. Interesting argument

However, why couldn't you vote for the better of the two options, and then leave?

I would still like to know how you balance the lives of the three children you could have saved with your action? What is worth the lives of those three?

I cannot speak very authoritatively on Kantian morality; I am not familiar enough with his qualifications for moral actions.

[DoNotRefill]

122. By enabling the killer of two babies...

you didn't save three, you killed two.

Sure, it's not YOUR finger on the trigger, but by supporting either of them, you get splattered.

[kiahzero]

163. I'm sure the three that are still alive will be quite happy

that I'm "splattered"

[Cleita]

6. I sent Dean a donation this morning,

so I'm behind him for the long run. However, whoever emerges as the candidate going up against Bush will get my support and I hope he might consider Howard Dean for a position in his administration should he win.

[damnraddem]

7. There is only one Dem candidate I cannot support: Lieberman.

Pesonally, I prefer Kucinich to Dean, but I provide support to Dean because he can win, while Kucinich cannot. Kerry and Edwards have many good positions, but both are tainted by their voting for the Iraqi war resolution, and their timidity in speaking out until after Dean had already cleared the air for doing so. I would not only vote for either of them, I would actively support their campaigns if either was the Dem candidate, canvassing and so on. I don't really trust Clark, but he is much better than Dubya, so I would vote for him, and maybe even work for his election, were he the Dem candidate. Sharpton and Kucinich won't be on the ticket. Thank goodness Gephart is out: I would have supported his campaign; but his acceptance of the federal-financing funding trap would have left him defenseless before Dubya's big campaign warchest.

Lieberman as Dem candidate? In that case, let's all slash our wrists. ;-)

[trogdor]

74. Hate to tell you, but I'd pull the lever for Joe too.

Unlikely as this scenario is, I would rather vote for Joe Lieberman than give George W. Bush a second term. I wouldn't like it one bit, but he would get my vote over Resident Dumbshit.

[Hoosier Democrat]

11. If Dean leaves the race...

If Dean leaves the race, this Dean supporter will transfer allegiance to Wesley Clark or John Edwards (both great guys). I like Dennis Kucinich, but let's be real, he's going nowhere.

I CANNOT bring myself to vote for John Kerry. I have never liked Kerry and I may vote Libertarian this fall if he is the nominee. Now, for those who will scream at this, remember: I Live in INDIANA. Christ himself couldn't carry this state on the Democratic ticket, so my vote has never mattered for president.

[David__77]

14. There are certain things I will not forgive.

Attacks on Dean, insinuating that he is not patriotic: THAT, I will certainly not forgive. I hope the discourse is maintained in a certain range of debate.

[Guaranteed]

16. If Dean leaves early the other candidates are screwed anyway

He's still the leader of the party, the trailblazer, the lightning rod. If he leaves, suddenly all the other candidates are going to have to fend for themselves. They'll have to actually attack Bush, instead of him, and you know how scared they are of attacking Bush. But, hey, that's what the Democratic voters want, anyway. They don't want somebody that's going to fight Bush. They want a nice, peaceful candidate that's going to do an excellent job of going through the motions of a campaign on the way to their political grave. Now that's peace of mind. Thank God that got taken care of.

[beaconess]

18. How is Dean "the leader of the party" if he can't even get a plurality

of the party to vote for him?

[Guaranteed]

19. If Dean is even leading the other candidates,then

he's the leader of the party. And he was leading the other candidates.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

40. lol!

n/t

[TLM]

53. It took the efforts of two candidate double teaming to beat Dean.

Dean vs Kucinich and Edwards
Dean vs Kerry and Gephardt


Yet Dean still held his ground and held his core supporters.


When we see the results in the states where you can't do back room DC insider double team deals, We'll see better results for the grassroots candidate.

As for leading the party... every one of those guys has been giving Dean's speeches and using Dean's issues, then presenting themselves as basicaly a less anrgy version of Dean.

Dean beat the path these guys are now running on... while they attack Dean for being too aggressive in beating the path in the first place.

[Guaranteed]

54. Yup.

Totally right.

[TLM]

68. THink about it... Gephard ended his career monday night...

he gave up everything to throw support to Kerry and Kucinich pretty much ended his campaign as well by showing he's just another politics as usual candidate.

Yet even with these major sacrafices, still they could only push Dean into 3rd with 19%. Clinton had 3% in Iowa.

[Bolo Boffin]

75. The Clinton 3% meme

Nobody competed in Iowa in 1992, because the Iowan Tom Harkin had Iowa sewn up.

There are other, better examples of finishing third in Iowa and winning the nomination, but Clinton 92 isn't one of them.

[The Magistrate]

88. That Is Simply Silly, Gentlemen

Gov. Dean did not even receive a full fifth of the vote. Sen. Kerry out-polled him two to one. Had the contest been head to head between those two, Sen. Kerry would have out-polled Gov. Dean three or four to one.

The rank and file of the Party wants to defeat the criminals of the '00 Coup, and is selecting its candidate for that task in accordance with criteria of electability nationwide. Gov. Dean fails that test.

[The Magistrate]

89. The Machine Hiccoughed

[Rich Hunt]

162. put it on the board

Damn straight, never let 'em forget.

[mitchum]

79. Beat me to it!

Maybe because I was laughing so hard...

[bitchkitty]

116. Wow -

that's what I used to hear all the time about Clinton.

[kiahzero]

21. Many of the candidates were attacking Bush

They just weren't grabbing headlines.

Sorry... Dean is not God, nor is he the leader of the DNC. He is just another candidate.

Revolution this is not.

[Guaranteed]

23. They were attacking Bush because DEAN was attacking Bush

and he was running away with the nomination. He cleared the way for them, even FORCED them to.

[kiahzero]

41. More media-created ideas

How was he "running away with the nomination"? You seem to be using one media-created idea (Dean had the nomination) to support another (only Dean attacks Bush).

If you would like to prove your assertion, rather than just relying on media narratives (since we know that all 'horse-race' media assertions are suspect - just look at their coverage of the 200 debates), how about comparing rhetoric before and after Dean was vaulted to 'front-runner' status?

[Guaranteed]

50. If you correlate the rhetoric with the polls, you'll see I'm right.

That's what happened. And once the other candidates finally started attacking Bush, they started going up in the polls, too.

Don't try to rewrite history. You know exactly what happened. Dean did all the dirty work- and still IS doing it. He even forced the other candidates to dig in a little bit themselves, just so that they wouldn't look like total wimps.

So, who'll do the dirty work if he drops out?

[newsjunkie]

26. hello...thats it

{{{ He's still the leader of the party, the trailblazer, the lightning rod. If he leaves, suddenly all the other candidates are going to have to fend for themselves. They'll have to actually attack Bush, instead of him, and you know how scared they are of attacking Bush. But, hey, that's what the Democratic voters want, anyway. They don't want somebody that's going to fight Bush. They want a nice, peaceful candidate that's going to do an excellent job of going through the motions of a campaign on the way to their political grave. Now that's peace of mind. Thank God that got taken care of.}}


Exactly right ..thanks for putting that in the perfect words.

[ima_sinnic]

20. maybe not

I'd have to think long & hard before voting for Kerry or "Patriot Act" Edwards. Kerry especially is just more of the same old same old--maybe not specifically PNAC but Establishment, government by politicians rather than by The People.

I forgot that the majority of people in this country don't realize just how sinister and nefarious PNAC/BFEE is and still don't see the need for a total overhaul.

By the way, when IS Kerry going to start blasting/exposing BFEE? This IS going to happen, right?? I'm not holding my breath or anything.

[AntiCoup2K4]

91. Kerry will never betray a fellow Bonesman

And the Bush Criminal Empire is comprised mostly of Bonesmen.

[youngred]

97. riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

*coughbullshit*

[underpants]

25. Apparently the Dean people need to get thicker skin

This is something that I read between the lines from the beginning. Either this is their first foray into politics or they are set on changing the Democratic party to only what they want. I'm going to get flamed for this so I will go ahead and say it, a greening of the party. I don't have a problem with that but if that is what you want come out and say it.

Of the 4 candidates who ever had any real chance of getting the nomination Dean was easily to one that W&Co. wanted to run against as he would be the easiest to beat. I think that is a misinterpretation of how the country's mood is but they would run (getting media support) as if it was already decided and that would sink into many people.

If your vote is tranferable (which is mindless) I don't think you are a good American or citizen of the world.

[Guaranteed]

27. I think that's exactly what we've been saying.

We're sick of the centrists rolling over for the damned Republicans. How many times can we say it?

Transferable votes are mindless? Well...I guess you're right in some ways.

[Walt Starr]

29. I think we have very thick skins

This is far from my first election. My stance is the cumulative effect of watching this bullshit for more nearly a quarter century.

This is also the ugliest set of primaries I've seen in my life, and I was paying attention to primaries since '68.

[newsjunkie]

34. No they want the REAL Democrats to stand up

for a change and show some spine and courage...actually make the laws and economy work FOR the people. Thats what Howard and the people behind him wants to do.

[democracyindanger]

44. Yeah and

NONE of the other candidates and NONE of the people behind them want that. The rest of us just aren't as smart and liberal and filled with good intentions like you guys. We don't want what's best for America, because only YOUR candidate is perfect. All the others would be just as bad as * :eyes:

Gimme a freaking break.

[Guaranteed]

52. Even if they want those things

they're just not fighting for them. They're too worried about their images. They got no guts. That's the problem. They're great guys and all, they're just not leaders.

[democracyindanger]

63. If?

IF they want those things?

C'mon, get real. They're all leaders. None of them would be in this race if they weren't.

This 'NBD' thing is a narrow minded, short-sighted way of using one's vote. "I'm taking my ball and going home." Smearing all the other candidates as R-Lite, no better than Bush, etc. is merely rationalization for petulant behavior.

Anyone who thinks they'd be doing the right thing by allowing four more years of * shows an amazing lack of political maturity

NO GOAL IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN KICKING * OUT. Once that's accomplished, then feel free to return to bickering about Democratic purity. Right now, I'm more concerned about SCOTUS, the environment, health care, poverty, et cetera, et cetera.

[Guaranteed]

66. Don't their votes matter?

Isn't that ALL that matters?

And where the hell were Kerry and Edwards a year ago when we were flipping out over being against the war and they were saying things like, "I support the war, but we need a broader coalition."? Do you REMEMBER that?

Where are they NOW?

[Walt Starr]

77. I disagree, reshaping the Democratic Party is FAR more important

Getting rid of Bush is secondary to me.

[democracyindanger]

90. And there it is

I guess you'd rather let the house burn down if people don't want to use your particular firehose. :shrug:

[Walt Starr]

99. Poor analogy

Voting for one corporatist pretending to be a partisan over another corporatist pretending to be a partisan is to engage in their created fantasy.

Fuck 'em. The Democratic Party talks about the "third way", where here is a third REALISTIC way. My vote is not for granted. Earn it or lose it, no more just checking the name with the (D) after it.

[DoNotRefill]

131. It depends...

In this situation, one fire hose carries water, the other carries kerosene.

Given that, I'd use the one that carries water, and refuse to use the one carrying kerosene.

All firehoses are NOT the same.

[youngred]

133. you're all about irrelevant analogies in this thread

eh?

[DoNotRefill]

135. It's not my analogy....

I'm using an analogy made by another poster to make a point.

[KaraokeKarlton]

55. It's not about moving the party left or making it "greener"

It's simply making it grow some balls and stand up for themselves against Republicans instead of running away scared with their tail between their legs.

It's about giving the power and control of the country back to the PEOPLE it belongs to, which is going to mean prying that power out of the hands of special interests, lobbyists and corporations. The Washington Insiders aren't able to do that because they've been playing the same old same old Washington game for so long. Clark can't do it because he is/was one of those very people we need to get the power AWAY from. Dean is the only one who can fix what's wrong with the party. He's the only governor, and governors get elected president, Senators don't. It takes the ability to raise money to defend against Republican attacks, especially this time. Dean is again the one best positioned there. Dean is the only one since Robert Kennedy to pump new life into the Democratic Party. Would Robert Kennedy have won? However you answer that question is the same answer to the question of whether or not Dean would win.

The ONLY think that stands between Dean and the Oval Office is Democratic fear. As a wise man once said...there is nothing to fear but fear itself.

Those who oppose Dean and who have attacked him visciously within his own party have caused a deep and festering wound within the Democratic Party. Every attack on the Dean campaign is an attack on Dean's supporters because WE are Howard Dean, he is our voice, he is us and we are him. This is VERY personal for Dean supporters, and so many fail to recognize that.

Dean would have united the entire party if it weren't for those in his own party who have demonized him and alienated his supporters. Hopefully things will turn around and Dean will end up with the nomination. If that doesn't happen I suspect the Democratic party will lose a large chunk of it's membership to the Greens or Independents/Unaffiliated. I think of it as a self fulfilling prophecy...those who shrieked that Dean would lead the party over a cliff were almost right. However, it's the Democratic Party who are trying to push Dean off that cliff, and if he goes, so goes his supporters (many Democrats) right along with him because we ARE the Dean campaign.

[Guaranteed]

56. "The ONLY think that stands between Dean and the Oval Office is..."

"...Democratic fear. As a wise man once said...there is nothing to fear but fear itself." Yup. It's the fear that's a killer. Pure intimidation. While people will defend their own fear to the death, they won't stand up to what they're afraid of.

[Rich Hunt]

161. my sides hurt

This is something that I read between the lines from the beginning. Either this is their first foray into politics

A-ha ha ha ha ha...Oh my dog. Ow, it hurts.

or they are set on changing the Democratic party to only what they want.

Right. No compromising going on in this camp. We all agree with one another on everything.

[beyurslf]

31. I don't need Howard Dean to drop out or to endorse someone

for my support to change. If he continues to slide and continues to make mistakes in the light of the media, I will change. And no matter what I am behind our nominee.

[newsjunkie]

38. fair weather friend

*sigh*

[LynneSin]

32. I wouldn't loose too much sleep over the "non-transferables"

First: most Dean supporters including myself, believe that Dean is still strong in the race and will win New Hampshire. Clinton never won Iowa in 1992 so I think we did pretty good in Iowa 2004. That being said, I highly doubt any of us are starting to think of who we are going to support now since we all believe that Dean will still win the nomination

Second: I think you'll find that 99.999999999999% of the Dean supporters out there have the best interests at heart when it comes to the general election this November. Although I doubt that Dean won't be the nomination; however, if that is the case I know Dean will be behind whatever Democrat does get the nomination. And that 99.999999999999% of the Dean supporters out there will be following Dean's lead and voting for the candidate that Dean supports

Finally: For those who will vote Dean no matter what, even as a 3rd Party or Write-in - why waste our time? I respect their decision even though I highly doubt it would be what Dean would want us to do. In fact, I think Dean would be very very vocal against any push to have him go 3rd Party/Write-in because it would hurt any future chances he might have for running for President.

Bush may not be a threat for some people, but he is a threat to all of humankind. Dean is first in my heart, but my second choice is Any Democrat But Bush.

Amen!

[youngred]

46. Problem with the Clinton-Dean-Iowa comparison

is that in 92, Clinton started around the same time as Clark, and was polling around the same level as Kucinich is now. He was also running against Harkin, who IS Democratic politics in the state of Iowa.

Dean was the established leader, had the most money, the best platform for Iowa, and the support of Harkin and slipped to half the winner's percentage.

[TLM]

62. Dean did not slip anywhere... his support held...

They were all polling about 20% going into this and Dean held onto about 18%-19% but Kerry got twice as much because Gephardt fell on his sword for Kerry.

Kerry's numbers douled with the addition of Gephardt supporters... he moved up, Dean did not move down.

[youngred]

69. Gephardt deliberately sacrificed himself for Kerry?

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

what do you have to say about the rest of what I said then? it still isn't a valid analogy

[PatGund]

114. Understand

Dean is first in my heart, but my second choice is Any Democrat But Bush.

Understand that one. Clark's my first choice, Dean's my second, but I'll hold my nose and vote for Lieberman if that's what it takes to get Bush out and a Democrat in.

[TLM]

43. I will not vote for any candidate who supports the GOreing of Dean...

It is as simple as that.


If these DC insiders want to make backroom deals and join forces to shut out the grassroots... then they can say goodbye to my vote.


If they want to dogpile on Dean, just like they did to Gore... they won't get my support.


They will have very effectivly driven me out of the system and crushed any desire I have to participate in a system where the powered eleite DC insiders control a rigged game to keep the power in their hands and out of the hands of the people.


It has little to do with Dean... it is what he represents. A candidate put forth by the people and the people alone, with no special interests or special corporate lobbyist back room deals or any of that status quo DC insider crap. Dean is the one guy who represents real change in this system... all the rest of these guys are DC insider power brokers.

If they sucessfuly shut out the grassroots and are able to keep this system in the hands of only DC insiders... I will be done with trying to take part in a system that clearly does not want me.

[kiahzero]

45. What constitutes the "Goreing" of Dean?

If these DC insiders want to make backroom deals and join forces to shut out the grassroots... then they can say goodbye to my vote.

What activities, specifically, are you speaking of?

Are you suggesting that the DLC somehow 'fixed' Iowa?

[TLM]

58. The fix in Iowa was part of the system....

the caucus is set up to allow fixing... candidates can do what Gephardt did and throw themselves on their sword to throw their supporters to another. But talk about a costly victory.

Remember what they said about a month ago... about the cell phones and making sure Dean did not win?

Dean's 3rd place finish was the result of Gephardt and Kucincih both sacraficing themselves to throw support behind Kerry and Edwards. The was clearly a DLC insider move in Kerry's case. One DLCer drops to save another DLCer.

As for the Goreing of Dean I mean the dog pile... the attacks on everythign and anything he does no matter what. These other candidates have spend 10 times the energy attacking Dean than they ever spent attacking Bush.

[kiahzero]

61. So.. basically

Dean loses = Dean was "Gored"?
I'll agree that Gephardt ran very negatively against Dean... with that exception, the political negativity was in equilibrium.

I'm not the only one that remembers Dean making headlines by bashing the rest of the Democrats.

[TLM]

71. Dean loses = Dean was "Gored"?

No, if Dean loses as a result of dems relentless and dishonest unending attacks on every inconsequential bit of minutia they can attack = Dean was Gored.

At this point I would probably still vote for Edwards... but Kerry, Lieberman, and Clark are out.


Dean did attack other dems... for their voting record. Not for their speaking style, not for their clothes, not for their hair etc. If the other dems want to attack Dean's record... that's fair game. It is these endless attacks on Dean's personality that piss me off.

[cprise]

169. Gore was a Dem. victim, too

Lieberman kept criticizing him about his populism during the campaign (this was reporterd in the press), and THEN he told reporters that Gore should give up the court battle because Bush really won the vote!

And recall the reaction of the Washington Democrats to the Black Caucus' position and protests... non-existant.

Where were the DLC, Kerry, Daschule, and the rest?

[Tom Rinaldo]

123. Six or seven times I was asked on DU

... whether I would support Dean if he were the nominee. Usually I was specifically being asked as a Clark supporter, with a whole thread dedicated to testing the potential loyalty of Clark supporters to Dean if Dean were the nominee. Each time I said yes, and also that I would actively campaign for Dean if he were the nominee. I remember that the overwhelming majority of other Clark supporters said the same thing, yes we would back Dean if Dean won, and most were willing to work for him.

For those of you here who had no part in pushing those repeated loyalty tests, there is nothing hypocritical in taking a stand now of Dean or no one. Though I disagree it is your life and your vote. If however you were among those who were constantly asking backers of other candidates if we would be willing to support Dean if he won, why were you putting us through all that?

[ShimokitaJer]

49. It isn't the DU Dean supporters you need to worry about

When Dean made his statement about being unsure whether or not his supporters would support another candidate, I believe he was referring to the former non-voters who are supporting his campaign. Admittedly, Iowa was a reality check about the ability to bring these people into the political process, but a caucus is also a lot harder to get former non-voters involved in than is a primary.

In contrast, people who post on DU are, by virtue of participation here being based on self-selection, NOT the kind of formerly non-involved voters Dean was talking about. Should Dean drop out of the race, I have little doubt that most Dean supporters from DU will give their support to another Democratic candidate. If they didn't want Bush out of office, they wouldn't be here. NBD rhetoric is great for getting people riled up, but it is no more a statement of fact than is Kucinich's formerly apparently sincere belief that candidates who supported the war should not be supported.

Just as some Kucinich supporters were turned off by the push to support Edwards, some of Dean's supporters will not transfer automatically to another Democratic candidate. However, Dean himself has said specifically that he will support whatever candidate gets the nomination, so you don't need to "think" he would agree with you -- be assured that he does. At the same time, Dean has enough respect for his supporters not to assume that his backers, many of whom have not previously been motivated to get involved in politics, will continue to have enthusiasm for whoever is picked.

[eissa]

57. I'd support the dem nominee

I understand the position that some here are taking regarding their votes not being transferable; I think many of us Dean supporters were hoping for some real change in the party. To me, Gephardt was the poster child for the weak dem -- standing next to * in the Rose Garden to support some illegal war, spending a lifetime in Washington while implementing little of the democratic mandate (health care, education, etc.) Although I disagree with Kerry on the war issue, it's a glitch in an otherwise outstanding career in dem politics.

Bottom line: Dean is not out yet, despite the wishful thinking of some on this forum. Having said that, IF he doesn't make it, I will support the dem nominee; the thought of 4 more years of this administration makes me :scared:

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

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

[He loved Big Brother]

67. That's a tough question

Before Dean came on the scene, I had given up hope that I would ever feel like supporting a Democrat again. Given the fact that the party seemed to hand Bush everything he wanted on a silver platter, I had zero faith left that they would ever represent me. Dean brought me into the party. Kucinich, after changing his stance on abortion, also gave me hope.

If Dean isn't the nominee, then...well, I guess I am just thankful I don't live in a swing state.

[TheWebHead]

73. never mind the fringe

we need to look at it positively. Dean has brought in many new voters and only the irrational fringe are going to go down with the ship if Dean doesn't survive. Most of these new voters Dean brought in are all about ABB, and Dean's participation will be net positive to the eventual nominee, and will allow us months to pursuade these very few holdouts who threaten to take their marbles and go home.

[DoNotRefill]

78. Tell that to Bush I...

Bush I was supported by the pro-gun crowd in '88. He stabbed them in the back in '89, by issuing an EO regarding importation of guns. Net result? In '92, they either didn't vote or told him to fuck off by voting Perot, and they did so in large numbers, enough to swing the election to Clinton.

People who support Dean are also a passionate bunch. Many of them are pro-gun Democrats, along with anti-war Democrats, young Democrats, et cetera. Expecting them to support Kerry is a pipe dream. It ain't gonna happen.

You alienate the grassroots at your own peril. I'd thought we'd learned that, but apparently not. Want to know who REALLY won Iowa? It's NADER...

[AntiCoup2K4]

80. My signature line says it all.

AB-PNAC without question, AB-DLC if at all possible.

[library_max]

82. Why oh why

would we want to ask this when Dean's supporters are still in the heat of their anger and disappointment? Are we TRYING to get them to tell us to go to hell?

Either Dean's campaign will snap back together and ride to the nomination (still a very distinct possibility) or it won't. If Dean comes out on top, what good will have come from having asked his supporters to give up on him prematurely? If he doesn't, why not wait until they've had a chance to get used to the idea? or even better wait until Dean himself has made an endorsement (which I believe he will do if it comes to that).

[indigo32]

87. Thank You

:-)

I am BTW an ABB Dean supporter.

[Logansquare]

83. Oh, sheesh

I keep on saying ABB, ABB, ABB, keep your eyes on the prize...etc.
But I think you'd rather hear this:

Yes-I-am-a-Deanie-and-will-only-obey-my-master-please-do-not-touch-my-orange-hat

[youngred]

85. I'm glad you feel that way

I wish some of your bretheren (and those who are nobody but my candidate) would agree

[Northwind]

86. No

Nobody But Dean in '04.

If the Dems do not nominate Dean, they will deserve oblivion, and they will get it.

I survived 8 years of Reagan, 4 years of Bush I, 8 years of Clintonian politics-as-usual, and so far, 3 years of Bush II. I can easily survive another 4 years of Bush II.

Dean is the only acceptable choice. Remember that when you go vote in the primary.

[Zinnola]

93. I agree, I am sick and tired of Washington Insiders

telling us who to vote for. Dean is the first candidate I have given money to and have thought of going to swing states to work for. That will not happen if Kerry, Edwards or Clark wins. The first two for their support of IWR and Patriot Act, but most importantly because this is politics as usual not listening to the grassroots. I live in California and believe I am not in swing state. If Dean does not win, I will not bother to vote, and remain and Independent.

[freetempe]

92. Deaniacs may well stay home in November...

I really wish I had seen this thread sooner....

I am a Dean supporter but would not consider myself a Deaniac. I am still thinking of voting for Clark in Arizona in 2 weeks but I am waiting to see what happens in NH. Dean is still my man. Having said that I personally know several Deaniacs who are new to the political process and will definately not be voting in November if he isn't on the ticket.

Dean has been attacked from every angle. The attacks on this web site have been the worst, which is hard to comprehend. It makes me sick that my fellow Democrats are destroying the party like this. Even now that Dean isn't the front runner, the attacks persist. Why?

Some people never learn. John Kerry is Mr. Establishment. He is a Bonesman, a pro-Iraq war voter and a Bush enabler to the very core. Yet he gets positive press from the so called liberals on this board. I can tell you now that if John Kerry is the nominee, he will morph back to being Bush-lite.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

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

[JVS]

129. Those who support Bush-lite deserve the real thing!

[RetroLounge]

100. After the way Dean &his Supporters have been ravaged on DU

I say F*ck the others.

Pile on, pile on, pile on, and then say "It's just politics."

I'll hold my nose and maybe vote for one, but zero dollars, zero support, zero footwork and zero everything else.

Gephardt got what he deserved, glad he's gone. He's a worthless tool and now that he's no longer a candidate, he can be bashed all I want. So f*ck him and his rose garden pro-bush bullshit.

Kucinich is a sell-out to a pro-war candidate. Another Tool in progressive disguise.

You get what you deserve...

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

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

[candy331]

110. I'm beginning to think that this

might just wind up to be the straw that broke the camel,s back. The democratic party is unraveling from within and keeps pulling the string. Dean offered a small taste of what freedom could be like and was out in the forefront to help us fight for it. Once some of us got what that taste would be like we are unwilling to settle for anything else that we consider inferior and a sorry imitation. No substitute will do here. Dean and no one else.

[shance]

126. Candy - usted esta briliante***

Youve just summed up my belief as well.

We know what its like out of the box and we are not going back in. If they could only see what we see.

[dkf]

142. Thanks Candy331...you've expressed what I feel brilliantly.

I'm no longer willing to settle.

The Dem party will just keep losing until they figure out where they are going wrong.

I refuse to accept this any longer.

[Walt Starr]

149. There ya go!

I'm not playing that old time politics any more. There's now a FOURTH WAY. We don't have to play by the old rules any more because they simply no longer apply.

The Democratic Party needs to rethink the policy of destroying that which originate s outside the party elite, or it will go the way of the dodo.

A major loss in 2004 will spell the end of the party, and the elitists are setting the party up for just that loss.

John Kerry indeed! Might as well run Ted Kennedy, he stands as much of a chance of winning as Kerry.

[Guaranteed]

152. My GOD you're a fricking GENIUS!!

You absolutely NAILED it. THANK YOU. :)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

155. Well said. You explain exactly what the Dean phemomenon is about.

I'm a Dean supporter, not because I love Howard Dean, but because of what he represents. An alternative to republican vs moderate republican(D) politics as usual.

[youngred]

159. perhaps you should take another look at Dean

he represents the height of moderate Republican with a D after their name politics with ONE exception

[library_max]

164. Well, politics is too much for some people.

It requires a thick skin and toleration for compromise, among many other things. It's a shame to see so many intelligent, articulate people of good will turning their backs on politics, but there are limits to persuasion. I sure hope some of you will calm down and think better of it. We're going to need you, no matter who the nominee ends up being.

Let me ask you this - if Dean had won Iowa big and seemed full-speed-ahead to take the nomination (still not at all unlikely, except for the Iowa part), what would you say to supporters of other candidates who said that they couldn't stomach Dean and wouldn't vote for the nominee if it wasn't their preferred candidate? Wouldn't you be telling them that the issues are bigger than any one candidate? Wouldn't you be trying to interest them in the big picture and the importance of getting rid of Bush the unelected, worst president ever?

If not, how were you proposing to win the fall election after Dean's nomination? Did you really think you could win with the support of nobody except those who were for Dean from the beginning?

[askew]

167. Candy331 - Perfect description.

That is exactly how I feel. I am not willing to settle for the pale imitation of what we could have had with a Dean presidency, so no my vote is not transferrable. And for the record, I am not some young, new to politics, optimistic person. I am cynical as can be. But, I am just no longer willing to be taken for granted by my party. And if I vote Democrat-ABB, I am telling the party that their "goring" of Dean is acceptable. That it is ok to turn their back on Democratic ideals and vote for illegal wars, the PATRIOT act, Bush's tax cut, etc. And I will not do that any longer.

[youngred]

146. How might I ask, is Mr Kucinich a sellout pro-war candidate?

His opposition to the Iraq war predates and comes with more consistancy than Mr. Dean's.

Seems everyone you don't like is a tool, or perhaps its you who's playing the tool as you're being played by the media and Mr. Dean.

You're right about one thing though, when you " hold <your> nose and maybe vote for one, but <give> zero dollars, zero support, zero footwork and zero everything else." You do get what you deserve

[Cheswick2.0]

143. not really a proper question

Aren't you all finished calling for loyalty oaths yet? I am not taking one.

[youngred]

145. But its ok

to do it to Clark and Kucinich supporters?

I would hardly call this a "loyalty oath"

[library_max]

151. You're right, but the timing sucks.

Give them a chance to feel what they feel. What's the hurry? If Dean comes back and takes the nomination, what difference will it have made? If he doesn't, why not give his supporters a chance to get used to the idea? In context, it sounds as if we're asking them to give up on him after just one primary.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

153. I'm voting for the anti-war candidate Dem or Green.

That eliminates Kerry and Edwards.

[Rich Hunt]

160. the 'non-transferable' thing is exaggerated

Some people are saying that. Now I'm reading on blogs that this is a widespread 'Deaniac' thing. It is simply not true, and those who have propagated this must apologize.

I disagree with the 'non-transferable' thing, but let's just say I understand. But it is not a widespread thing, no need to panic.

Things are the way they are to get people invested in the process so that they won't renege on ABB.

[cprise]

168. Are puppets truly evil

...especially if Bush is not very bright?

Can't the puppetmaster transfer its hand to another receptacle?

And hasn't it done so in the past? Now I am talking about Clinton. Look at the kind of things that keep coming out of his piehole:

The former U.S. president delivered an impassioned plea to business leaders "to make a bigger difference in the things that we care about."  That involved creating integrated systems and infrastructures around the world. "You change the reality of human history by systematic action," he said. "Our job is to move the world from interdependence to integration."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/Default.aspx?id=4020745&p1=0

Is this not creepy?


What is our friend, democracy or NAFTA???