sacrificing liberal votes to win moderate votes

[yellowdawgdem]

It's hard to look at, but I'm wondering are we sacrificing the liberal end of the spectrum in trying so hard to reach undecided conservatives and undecided moderates?
I myself have felt somewhat detached from the whole candidate thing, because I didn't and don't have a really strong preference. Even with Clinton, I wasn't that interested initially. But when I started to see the changes he created little by little, I grew to really like and respect him. And it has taken me a really long time to develop a liking for Clark, which I finally have. I totally distrusted him at first, thought he was the establishment republican candidate. And he has disproven that, and won me over with a certain honest demeaner and likeableness. It's not that I am saying I am now a Clark person, because I still am about as abb as they come. But pointing out the big change in my thinking, since he entered the race.
When I think about Dean, it's more like I feel anger that he didn't win more primaries. Because his populist appeal was so high that I have difficulty believing the primary results would not reflect at least some of that support.
I want to believe that our primaries aren't rigged, but that is sort of a stretch for me, and I am of the opinion that there are multiple factors influencing this years' prez race. One factor is that I think more voters than had been recognized see John Kerry as the most electable candidate, whatever that means. Another factor is bbv, and another is the possibility that the democratic establishment has gotten corrupted to a certain extent. They have some power to manipulate behind the scenes, and I think it is this possibility that has the Dean people, the Clark people (and others) angry to the point that they will not vote abb. They have an idea that the media "disappeared" their candidate, and that the dem establishment pushed Kerry in there, and it reeks of behind the scenes manipulation and deal-making. Me, I care to a certain extent, but think that- even if it is true- I expect this sort of thing from our govt, it doesn't surprise me very much. And I can still like and appreciate Kerry for what I see as presidential material. What I find disturbing is the possibility that he might not be able to fire people up, and thus could lose the election to Dubya. or that the same bbv guesswork could figure in.
I guess I am wondering if anybody else has any of these thoughts, or perhaps some completely different point of view as to the quandary of political compromise.

[Maat]

1. I agee.

But no matter what...we still have to continue speaking up. You see, I'm 45, and I've seen some things cycle..and seen society make some progress to. It seems we're veering right again..and I'm fighting the same battles I fought in the seventies. Hope we don't regress too far; however, this younger generation has been raised..used to working women, birth control, inclusiveness. I do not thing they will accept less...when push comes to shove.

[corporatewhore]

2. sad thing is we dont have to sacrife we can get old school cons to join if

we run an anti patriot act/anti freetrade cannidate against bush.They ara fucking pissed at this (even cons dont like it when their jobs go to india) Noself respecting small govt promoting big centralized federal govt loathing conservative can support the patriot act I worked hand in hand with them to get an anti patriot act res in austin .This drives me insane.we could really capitalise on this issue and get them to joinWhy would they vote for a pro patriot act cannidate if they wanted change and what

[Hippo_Tron]

3. But is Dean really that much more liberal than Kerry?

Kerry supported IWR, Dean supported Newt Gingrich's overhaul of medicare. Kerry supported NAFTA, Dean doesn't want to get rid of it. The point I'm making is that every time somebody finds an example of Kerry veering to the right, somebody will find one for Dean. John Kerry and Howard Dean are both have liberal ideals but are both in touch with mainstream politics, otherwise neither of them would've come this far.

[rucky]

4. That was a great summary of the whole process

my feelings exactly. though recently, I chose to "attach" myself to Kucinich, in hopes of stirring up some passion & maybe adding to the progressive clamor - at least as a reminder that we're still here. And if I'm ambivalent about who ends up with the nomination, then why not?

[yellowdawgdem]

15. At least Kucinich is hanging in

Maybe you are right to just go ahead and support him anyway. By the way, I think that bobbing Bush head is way kewl!

[yellowdawgdem]

5. Dean not preferred for being liberal

I don't think so, that Dean is more liberal than Kerry, in fact he seems more liberal. Which is even more interesting, since it's his direct personality and candor that seems to attract people to him. Not his being particularly liberal.

[mrdmk]

6. Folks do get caught doing things just because they are in

There will be a lot of baggage on anybody who has played politics for a living. For anybody to say he is the perfect candidate is a joke. Most of us here would at this point like to see a candidate in the White House that will change the political leanings from conservative to progressive. Do we put a put somebody in office because they are electable such as the election of 1972.

In 1971 the Pentagon Papers were released in the New York Times. Richard Nixon was the sitting President at that time up for election. The Democrats had a difficult road ahead of them at that moment because Nixon was still very popular in that year. One of the Democratic candidates were Senator George S. McGovern who was considered to be moderate of the left but antiwar. One of the other opponents was Senator Eugene J. McCarthy who was also antiwar but considered a liberal and a outsider by his parties standards. Both of these men were highly educated, were professors for their respective colleges, held offices both in the House and Senate, both very well qualified to be president and both had run against each other in 1968 Democratic primary.

There was a very difficult Democratic convention that year. McCarthy started campaigning early and fired up the young voters to come out and make a difference. Remember the Vietnam war was in full tilt at that time and a lot of young men were dying in that war daily and had a stake in their representative government. McGovern had joined the party's race for nomination as an antiwar candidate also, but also was considered to be a moderate and in the good graces of the Democrat Party.

McGovern won the party nomination but lost the election to Nixon by a land-side, 61% - 38%. Kissinger announced before the election that "peace was at hand", and Nixon started to bring the troops home. McGovern had problem with his running mate Thomas Eagleton who was replaced by Sargent Shriver made for campaigning problem. The Nixon campaign painted McGovern as way to liberal and smeared both of his running mates. Thus Nixon was elected the undisputed winner.

So the question comes down to who do we vote for. The candidate we think is going to win, or the that will do the better job, or the candidate that has the same issues that the voter has. This is the real question as voters, we must ask ourselves.

[NV1962]

7. Thoughtful stuff

Loved every bit of it.

Not sure if the "NBD" or "NBC" extrapolation will work out that way, but you're on the mark with the anger, which lashes out to a certain extent disproportionally against Kerry and Edwards these days. In a sense, they're secondary (collateral?) victims of the blackout.

A nagging afterthought: if you can figure this out, and more than just a few others can, why is it that in the Kerry and Edwards camp they're blissfully hugging the bear for that rousing ride in the limelight?

Let's make no mistake: this isn't a dark ops world, it's just plain ole stupid "newsinfotainment" corporations (but I call 'em crackwhoresrace addicts) staging a show.

Judging from the hypocritical brouhaha over Janet Jackson's tit that did a cameo somewhere between a horsefart and a beerbelch, it's clear they can't run a dog pagentry and predict a winner - but the sad reality is that their resulting mess is what is engrained top of mind for the Nielsen families.

This is the Big Sh*t that James Carville was warning about: let's forget about the li'l Kerry/Edwards cr*p and pummel some sense into those dangerous toddlers in the newskitchen, or we'll all be shat upon comes November.

Again, let's make no mistake here: the pundits and their fellow bobbing TV heads are just whores, and you don't slam them either - you go after the pimps for a real fix of the problem.

Edited for typos and including a hearty "Niters!" :hi:

[Dr Fate]

8. I'm a Liberal and I always vote Democrat...

its all about strategy for me- Rome was not built in a day, and a perfect or better modern Republic/Democracy is not either...I'm much more Liberal than the DEM platform, but I still see the DEMS as one of the most useful instruments for change and getting things done...

It's up to the "Liberals" out there as much as it is to the candidates. We can either move forward in history with a Democrat, or backwards with a Repug- which will it be?

[DrFunkenstein]

9. Bridge-building Liberal Or Polarizing Centrist?

Kerry is further to the left of Dean, but Dean scores points by taking on the GOP "us vs. them" mentality. Some people like that, others don't. Personally, I would prefer someone who makes liberalism more palatable to the general public, rather than someone who strengthens the divide.

[NV1962]

10. Kick!

:kick:

[jpgray]

11. Kerry is probably the third most liberal, after Sharpton and Kucinich

Take a look:

[NV1962]

13. Cool! Didn't know PoliticalCompass had a US Primary version...

Thanks for the heads up!

If anyone is interested in taking that test, to figure out where you would be located on that same chart, along with other candidates, go here:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

[jpgray]

14. People should bear in mind some subjectivity is involved

Such as what weight to give what issue, etc. But overall it seems pretty accurate.

[Endangered Specie]

12. I hope that we can pick up moderate votes and maintain the liberal ones

Any Liberal with a good amount of sense isnt going to vote for Bush, directly, or not (3rd party)

Bush's second term would be likely more devastating than his first, seeing as to how he WOULDNT have to worry about elections after that point.