I am one sad Dean supporter.

[Cascadian]

I went to the caucuses today and while many were in our ranks, I get a strange feeling about this whole upsurge in Kerry supporters. They appear more "conservative" than your garden variety Democrat. Was I imagining things? I just looked at the numbers and I am just gutted. I almost want to cry to be honest.

Maine and Wisconsin are next. I am hoping Dean can still pull off something. If Dean does drop out than my support will go to Kucinich. I just cannot support John Kerry. A Washington insider who supported the War, the Patriot Act, Bush's tax cuts, and failed to vote on Medicare. Not to mention, Kerry stole the rhetoric he has been using from Dean. You watch. If Dean does drop out, it will be back to same old John Kerry.

I will reluctantly vote for him if gets the nomination but I will hold my nose. Don't expect me to send him money or me wearing his buttons or post his banners anywhere.

:(


John

[Dookus]

1. it would be odd if they were more conservative

since Kerry's much more liberal than Dean.

[XanaDUer]

2. That would be odd, would it not?

eom.

[Atlant]

62. It may be odd, but in NH, it seemed to be true.

When I looked at the results, town-by-town, I'd have to say that,
in NH, the more conservative I felt an area was, the more they
went for Kerry.

Now you can interpret this a number of different ways, but when
you do interpret this, please also consider that in my very own
ward ("precinct"), I was paying careful attention to who took
Democratic Primary ballots and just about 50% of the people
taking Democratic ballots were "Undeclared" folks. In NH,
nearly everyone who is "Undeclared" is either an overt Liber-
tarian (because Lib's don't currently have "ballot status" in
NH) or a closet Republican. Very few of the "Undeclared" are
what you or I would recognize as a Democratic voter.

In a more-normal primary year, there might be a contested
Republican race and a lot of this Undeclared vote would be
drawn off into the Republican Primary where it belongs. But
this year, there was no meaningful Republican race so the
Undeclared-but-Republican/Libertarian voters were perfectly
free to come over to our side and throw a few monkey wrenches
in the gears.

So my interpretation is that a lot of nominal-Republicans wanted
Kerry. I don't necessarily think that's a good thing. We'll
obviously know more on Wednesday, November 3rd.

Atlant

[RetroLounge]

67. Odd? No. Many Republicans I know are voting

in the Dem Primary here in Wisconsin because it's an open primary.

They said they will vote for Kerry because they think bush* can trounce such a liberal.

So odd? Nope...

[PROGRESSIVE1]

6. True. Kerry is the true liberal. Just compare their records.

.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

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

[Dookus]

19. So republicans would vote in a Dem caucus

to help elect the frontrunner, who currently has the best chance to defeat Bush? I don't understand their logic.

[RetroLounge]

68. It seemed pretty clear when Kerry Supporters

said Dean was being funded by Republicans.

[progressivebydesign]

47. I wondered about that at first.

Are they sandbagging the caucus? Then I thought.. that would be silly, if they were to do that, in the true disruptor fashion, they would not have sided with the front runner. Believe me, I did wonder that, too.

[anti-NAFTA]

12. Kerry is softer on NAFTA.

I was a Gephardt supporter, and believe me I loathe Howard Dean for destroying Dick's career; but there is no way I'm going to support Kerry.

It's either Dean or Kucinich from this point on.

[Auntie Bush]

20. Then vote for Clark

He is the only one that can go head to head with Bush and he is a real liberal!

[anti-NAFTA]

23. Kerry before Clark. Sorry.

Kerry at least looks like a trustworthy Democrat although he's not too great on the individual issues. I can't trust Clark even though I like how he attacks the neoconservatives.

[CrazyHarry25]

56. Kerry? Trustworthy?

He changes his story more than Bush.

[Nazgul35]

33. No offense...

but Dick destroyed his own career...

His nasty campaign back in '88 was a foreshadow of what occured in 2004...

His posing in the Rose garden with shrub...

His and Daschle's horrendous strategy in 2002....

None of these things were orcestrated by Dean.....Gephardt destroyed himself...

[liberalhistorian]

42. Neither Dean nor Kucinich

have a prayer's chance in hell of winning the nomination, much less against Shrub, so you're basically asking for four more years of the Bushistas.

I understand where you're coming from, I really do, but sorry, I just can't go for that. The country simply will NOT survive it, especially since, if Shrub actually does win this time, there's no stopping his exremist, destructive policies since he'll think he has a mandate and he won't be up for reelection either.

And Kerry is, in fact, far more liberal than Dean is or ever has been, Dean is far more of a centrist, and even a conservative on many issues, than he's painted himself out to be in this race.

Although I feel just terrible for Dean and his supporters, there was such excitement and hope in his campaign and among those who supported it, and he brought a lot of people into the fold who normally wouldn't pay much attention to politics.

[drfemoe]

54. You're basically saying you are the only one

who knows with a certainty what the future holds. And adding an insult for anyone who doesn't agree with your prophecy. I happen to believe Howard Dean is the ONLY Dem candidate with a real shot to beat *B*. Nov 2004 will reveal the answer to one question. The other may never have a chance to be proven.

Neither Dean nor Kucinich
Posted by liberalhistorian
have a prayer's chance in hell of winning the nomination, much less against Shrub, so you're basically asking for four more years of the Bushistas.

ps. We don't feel terrible, so you can stop feeling terrible for us if you want to. There also seems to be a misperception that most of Dean's supporters are novices in the political process. I can assure you that is not nearly the situation. He has deep roots into the Democratic Party base. It is a very energizing dynamic at work. New people are swarming in and the faithful Dean Dems are showing them the ropes and trenches.

Although I feel just terrible for Dean and his supporters, there was such excitement and hope in his campaign and among those who supported it, and he brought a lot of people into the fold who normally wouldn't pay much attention to politics.

[bitchkitty]

63. How did Dean destroy

Gephardt's career? This is a new one on me.

[RetroLounge]

69. "I loathe Howard Dean for destroying Dick's career?"

Wow, I guess Dean is pretty powerful after all.

Did Dean kidnap Geppy and make him stand in the Rose Garden holding hands with bush*?

[Woodstock]

71. Seems to me "Dick" and Dean both destroyed each other

[blm]

13. Odd. As if they didn't research and see that Kerry is MUCH more liberal

than Dean and his record of 35 years PROVES his commitment to progressive values.

How can that be that people can be so wrong when they CLAIM to have studied the candidates? Like some even still claim that Kerry voted for Bush's taxcuts, even though he voted against both big taxcuts.

And it's funny that so many still have no idea that Kerry is the man who exposed more government corruption than any other lawmaker in modern history.

Maybe these people LIKE government corruption and are angry that Kerry ruined the legacies of Reagan and Bush.

Odd...really odd.

I hope they study Kerry's record for real now.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

27. Who is this?

And who is this?








Answer: One is Dean. One is Kerry.




http://www.issues2000.org/default.htm

[JanMichael]

65. That was my first inclination too. Kerry is NOT a conservative.

IIRC he's got either the second or third most "Liberal" voting record in the Senate.

Go figure:shrug:

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

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

[aquart]

15. I'm not sure that will matter.

I'd vote for a corpse over Bush and I expect most of America would, too.

Bush is going down. My problem is, What Next?

Kerry will end the war, how?

Kerry will find jobs for Americans, how?

Kerry will bring down the deficit, how?

Kerry will provide universal healthcare, how?

Kerry will bust the media and other monopolies, how?

Kerry will end privatization, how?

Actually, the same can be said for any of the candidates. These are the priorities I see. Will any of them be dealt with?

[Cascadian]

18. Do not be misled to thinking that beating Bush is going to be easy.

Reemember, he has some very dangerously smart people behind him. They will spin the hell out of Kerry plus I would not surpised if they whip up some story that they found bin Laden or the WMD. Plus, they will spin on the economy. Don't think they may even do more dirtier tactics. Are the Democrats and Kerry ready for that? What is even worse is that Kerry went along with Bush on the Patriot Act, Iraq, and the tax cuts. He failed to vote on the Medicare bill too! Can somebody explain that one?

John

[no name no slogan]

48. Seriously, go check out DK's positions on these

He has a plan to get the UN in and the US out of Iraq, sooner rather than later (http://www.kucinich.us/bringourtroopshome.php).

He has a plan for a full-employment economy. He has plans for a WPA-like program to put unemployed people to work fixing our infrastructure (http://www.kucinich.us/issues/jobs.php).

He has a solid plan for providing true single-payer universal health coverage to EVERYONE, at a cost that's less than what we're paying now (http://www.kucinich.us/issues/universalhealth.php).

He also has a plan to bust up the media monopolies, and restore true competition to our airwaves, which STILL belong to us-- regardless of what big media and the FCC say (http://www.kucinich.us/issues/media_reform.php).

Dennis Kucinich may not win the nomination. But a vote for him in the primaries will keep these issues front and center for the eventual nominee.

[CrazyHarry25]

57. Great Post

It's funny to me how every election year someone always has all the answers, yet if the get elected, seem to forget the questions....

It's fine that candidates hope to address the problems. HOW is what we should be asking.

[trogdor]

64. Check it out for yourself.

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues

Admittedly, it's painted in broad strokes, but John Kerry doesn't share Al Gore's penchant for detail (who does?). He's not my first choice, but I'll take him over Bush any day.

My suggestion: once the nominee has been determined, we do our best to not repeat Drudgesque talking points about him. 99.999% of what they say pales in comparison to Bush, but that's not what they want. They want YOU to stay home or vote third-party on Election Day; it's as simple as that.

[frustrated_lefty]

4. Keep heart

Have faith. You will feel very silly if you give up on the nominee as he gets the nomination.

If you just float with public sentiment like that, vote for Kerry. That is, after all, how he votes.

[opihimoimoi]

7. A Kerry is far better than a Bush

I too, will vote for ABB and if its Kerry, so be it.

[Cascadian]

16. I am not giving up on Dean. No way!

I am hoping for the best but keeping a wary eye on what could happen.

Howard Dean is still the best one out there!


John

[Gman]

5. Go ahead, hold your nose

that's all anyone can ask. It doesn't feel very good. I know because I've done it before.

[absyntheNsugar]

8. Not sure if Conservative is the right word

Older perhaps....Kerry did build up quite a following during the Vietnam War...many of whom were waiting for this very moment.

[aquart]

17. Then that's a fair and honestly-won constituency.

My sister is for Kerry for that, and for the letter he wrote to the amputee candidate vet whose patriotism was maligned. She loved that letter.

For me, I'd expect him to stand up for the people he most empathizes with. But that also means the people he's around day in, day out. The problems of a CEO are a whole lot more familiar to him than the problems of an outsourced worker.

And I can't get past the war vote. I just can't. If Hillary wants to run in 2008, I'll have the same problem with her.

[Panda1]

10. Me too

I feel as if it's already been decided for us by the media. Nobody but people like us read what the candidates really stand for. The "masses" just hear "electability" and vote like sheep. I'm so upset and discouraged today. The media crucified Dean and Clark. The media annointed Kerry.
Might as well resign ourselves to four more years of BFEE rule because that's what will happen if the media decides this for all of us.

I feel helpless, hopeless and lost today and I have my absentee ballot ready to mail.........does CA get a say in any of this at all?

[blm]

22. The media declared Kerry's candidacy dead for months which dried up his

fundraising. Thank you very much.

The media ignored every positive about his campaign and dwelled on any negative, They set out to destroy his candidacy. They propped up Dean and lavished him with media attention.

Dean didn't hold up once the scrutiny revealed his weaknesses.

Kerry has a 35 year record and it holds up to close scrutiny. But, Kerry had to WIN a primary before the media gave him a fair shake. I can't believe that anyone would say he honestly didn't earn it. He shocked the hell out of the media that had him dead and buried.

Sorry you can't appreciate that Kerry's a REAL liberal and not a centrist like Dean. I really thought you were a liberal, too. I'm thrilled to have someone to the left of Ted Kennedy as a nominee and going to the White House.

I'm a bit shocked about your centrism, but, I won't hold it against you. The Dem party is a big tent, after all. ;)

[Panda1]

24. You know me better than that

I'm as Liberal as they come. And you also know I'll vote for whoever ends up as the Democratic nominee.

You also know that I was a former Kerry supporter and have sent money to his campaign.

You also know that I was "inspired" by Dean when I saw him speaking twice in person. I haven't felt inspired by any of our candidates for decades.....yet I always vote Dem. You know that about me.

You also know me well enough to know that I have read all the positions on all the candidates and that I am well aware of the positions held by all.

You also know me well enough to know that I try very hard to keep an open mind. I'm not a knee-jerk type and I never have been.

You also know me well enough to know that my true issue here is the media. The right wing owned media. You know me. You know my problem with propaganda.

Please don't tell me what I can and cannot appreciate. I've been around even longer than you have....I'm not a naive idiot.

The fact that I changed my mind and made Dean my number one choice doesn't make me suddenly deaf dumb and blind to Kerry's voting record. But, like you, I'm entitled to feel the way I feel.

I've read all you have had to say about Kerry and Dean. I respect where you are coming from. Please extend the same courtesy to me.

[blm]

28. Well...the media hardly annointed Kerry.

He had to win first before they gave him a break.

Dean's SEVEN national covers came BEFORE he won anything. Kerry got one AFTER he won.

Do a timeline, panda. Kerry went after the FCC in June. Shortly after Dean got a press plane and two national covers. Then he gets 5 national covers right before the primaries.

Where do you honestly see Kerry as the "annointed one" by the media? Doesn't the "annointing" come BEFORE the voting?

Seems to me the voting threw a monkey wrench into the media's plans.

[Panda1]

41. Can you tell me then....

....what the plans are? What will the media decide next for us?

Can you tell me that Dean honestly wasn't a target during the debates and in the articles accompanying those covers? Can you point me to the media folks who were saying favorable things about Dean. Can you show me where he didn't get smeared from the beginning? Can you show me how he wasn't set up for a fall?
Can you direct me to the television folks watched by the masses who actually had positive things to say about Howard Dean...or Clark for that matter.

I'm very curious about your current take on the debates in particular because I know you have stated that Kerry never attacked Dean.

I also don't quite understand why tearing Dean to shreds became your main focus. Is he that repugnant to you?

Can you tell me why my vote no longer counts? That's what I'm getting from the media.

[blm]

44. It started for me when he attacked Kerry on Jan.23, 2003.

he called Democrats with records WAY to his left "Bushlite" which was the same as Nader saying there wasn't a "dime's worth of difference between Gore and Bush." Kerry has the highest overall liberal ratings of all the candidates including Kucinich, so his pointing specifically to Kerry was startling to those of us familiar with his record.

From that moment on I cast a wary eye on whatever he had to say because it sounded like he was coopting Nader's rhetoric from 2000. Especially odd since he was a centrist himself.

Dean proceeded to ramp up the attacks on Kerry when he was off the campaign trail dealing with his cancer surgery and recovery. Dean the "good doctor" must have known that added stress was not good for recovery. That showed Dean's bad character and ruthlessness to me.

I also believe he misrepresented himself and the others. He supported Biden-Lugar use of force resolution and the others voted for the IWR use of force resolution. There was no significant difference between the two that would have stopped Bush's march to war, yet Dean claimed the antiwar mantle while labeling the others prowar. The media never really examined Dean's original position and let him escape scrutiny on it by lazily allowing the antiwar label to benefit Dean for much of last year.

He made his name by attacking. I had no sympathy for him when others returned fire. I believe in karma.

I am sorry that people I like are saddened over Dean's sinking campaign, but...

I am a BFEE opponent. Kerry is the only one that can take the BFEE down. He has the acumen to make the case with everything he knows gleaned from BCCI, IranContra and the CIA drugrunning....all of which connect to 9-11 and BushInc.'s foreign policy.

Any victory for Dean was an obstacle in setting up the deathmatch for the BFEE and Kerry's team. BFEE is going down. THAT is what I care about.

[Panda1]

51. I see no further point here

I'm sure we could both produce limitless links to support our own views, positions, and validate the attributes of our candidates.
I don't want to argue with you.

I agree, and have agreed all along, that the main fight is with the BFEE. We are on the same side in that regard. You know that.

As I said, I respect your opinions. However, I don't think that tearing another Democratic candidate to smithereens is the way to win any election...ever. I would love it if you just said positive things about Kerry rather than spend time knocking his fellow candidates. I wish politics wasn't dirty the way it is. But we all know it's the nature of the beast.

Probably Kerry will be our nominee. That will make you happy but it will make me very nervous. I want to beat the BFEE. I don't want Democrats to become disenchanted and stay home, disillusioned again.
I will vote. I always vote.

I hope Kerry can beat Bush. Unless you can get some true fervor for Kerry built up it isn't going to happen. He will be targeted by that $170 million in the BFEE coffers. Convince me he can withstand the attacks instead of telling me how the others can't. Please tell me he'll fight back and pull out all the stops. That's the only way we'll win in 2004. Instead of telling me how the others will fail can you perhaps focus on getting me as inspired about Kerry as you obviously are. I'm open to all suggestions. I want to like him, I really do. I want to feel passionately positive about our nominee. It's now up to Kerry supporters to get the rest of us excited too.

[indigo32]

61. AMEN

"However, I don't think that tearing another Democratic candidate to smithereens is the way to win any election...ever."

[CrazyHarry25]

55. Dean was 'torn to threads'

because he's simply not electable. You want to be liberal? Fine. You want to be far left? Fine. If you come across as angry at everything, you go down in flames...

[drfemoe]

53. being declared dead hasn't stopped Dean's fund raising ...

Quite the contrary. It's so convenient to blame circumstances for alternate reality.

[spooky3]

11. Actually, Tennessee & Virginia & Nevada come before WI.

[lastknowngood]

14. Dean is only working WI the rest are all red states no real

reason to waste time campgaing there.

[SoCalDem]

21. "Open" primaries are the devil's workshop

As an "outsider"_{I am not favoring any particular candidate}, I can tell you what it looks like to me..

Early on, the Rove people said .."we want Dean".. and then they saw the attention he was getting, and how his message had fired people up.. All during this time Kerry was in the doldrums.. (almost Bradley-esque).. and I think there was a "moment" when the WH realized that Dean was an unknown quantity..

That's where the press and the tv folks come in.. They turned on Dean ..on a dime.. They did the same thing on McCain.. and who was McCain running against??

Open primaries/caucuses offer a wonderful opportunity to eliminate people..

Go after the guy with the strong message and the money (well he pissed that away, but..)..

Can't prove it, but these folks are all "networked", so the conspiracist in me sees a lot of possibilities..

Kerry would be the one they would WANT to run against.. He has 19 years + of fully documented positions.. He's the ONLY one that they would run easliy against.. They may still lose because people are truly angry, but Kerry is the known and all the others are unknown factors..

my .02

[vision]

39. I agree the Repubs are waiting to paint Kerry

Kerry is somebody that they can paint with their typical brushes

1) "liberal" which is true, Dean is more of a moderate and they still tried to paint him that way

2) Anti-military, this has already been floated in the media and I have heard it on CSpan's Washington Journal. It doesn't matter if it is true or not, it didn't matter with Max Cleland. Will this stick? Who knows but they will try it.

3) "Waffler", they have already floated this one.

4) Not stiff like Gore but not a good Ole boy like Bush. It will be spun that he is a rich socialite who is not like the common man.

5) Anti-gun. The NRA will be out in full force and will spread this memo no matter the truth.

6) proabortion

7) and finally Pro-gay marriage.

The spinning will begin tomorrow with Bush on Meet the Press. Russert will only give Bush soft balls and EVERYTHING will be spun against the Democrats. This will lead to the press posting a poll showing Bush's numbers going back up and that Bush sure "showed them" on MTP.

This will lead to either possible WMD finds or maybe Bin Ladin being found before the convention or right after it.

It doesn't matter if Dems think that Kerry can beat Bush. IMO the Repubs think that Kerry will be the easiest to manipulate and beat.

This IMO how the Republicans see the Dem candidates:

1) Clark- an unknown, could be dangerous but they think containable with the disdain that they could bring from select Generals and those would be the ones that would get the spotlight. Also they could always spin his connection to Clinton.

2) Dean- a loose cannon that they tried to paint as "liberal" and than as "angry" neither really stuck but than they painted him as "unstable" because of the scream.

3) Edwards- he is potential dangerous as he is handsome and from the south but they think they can spin his lack of "experience."

4) Kucinich- IMO is the one that would really make them quake in their boots. Given even a half way even playing field I think that he would bring so many items on the table that the Repubs are afraid to let him loose. He is also potentially dangerous to the Dems that are in corporate pockets. So they labeled him the fringe candidate "elect-ability" and other terms were thrown out.

5) Sharpton- labeled even more fringe than Dennis, plus him being black and liberal plays against him in many circles i.e. here in Northern rural Missouri.

That leaves Kerry, after Lieberman and Gephardt dropped out, right or wrong I think that many Repubs see him as a conventional candidate that they can hammer in the regular way and so win.

[indigo32]

60. I completely agree SCD

"Kerry would be the one they would WANT to run against.. He has 19 years + of fully documented positions.. He's the ONLY one that they would run easliy against.. They may still lose because people are truly angry, but Kerry is the known and all the others are unknown factors..

my .02"

My brother, who isn't particularly Dem (though he can't stand Bush either)... commented on Kerry being weak tonight too... with 0 prompting from me (though my affinity for Dean is well known... it matters not to him). I'll vote for Kerry... but I'll go through the election season with great trepidation and sadness, cuz I want Bush OUT.

[Renew Deal]

25. Your garden Variety dems don't hang out at DU.

Most dems aren't worrying about this stuff. They pick up on it a few days before and go vote. Most Kerry supporters will be more conservative than you.

[progressivebydesign]

46. True!

I was amazed that none of the Democrats I talked to knew about DU. I did spread the web addy around liberally (no pun intended).

[WilliamPitt]

26. It's probably not nice to call Kerry supportrs 'conservative'

[ozone_man]

29. Many are and the polls show it.

Dean beat Kerry 2:1 in Seattle, but in more conservative Vancouver it was the reverse. New Hampshire the same sort of thing, Kerry took conservative Southern NH, while Dean took SW NH and Dartmouth. No surprises there. Kerry is attractive to the conservative establishment types, Dean is attractive to the anti-establishment types.

[WilliamPitt]

35. Is it conservative voters

or Democratic unity behind the frontrunner fueled by a desire to beat Bush?

[progressivebydesign]

34. There's nothing wrong with "conservative" as a description.

The Kerry supporters I met today were Bush voters who turned to Kerry. That would qualify as conservative in my book. I think Kerry's popularity is a product of appealing to many types of voters. Those that see him as liberal,and those that see him as moderate, and even those who see him as a conservative due to his military, committee, and government experience.. and his demeanor. It's an honest assessment from people who were in the caucuses today with those Kerry voters.

[WilliamPitt]

36. Bush voters who turned to Kerry

This is a bad thing how? DK is my man, but ye gods, folks, how do you think elections are won nationally??

[liberalhistorian]

43. Good point, Will.

BTW, I live near Cleveland and have pretty much grown up with Kucinich in the local news, from when he was elected Mayor of Cleveland when I was twelve years old up to his comeback congressional election, and I'm thrilled to see him in this race. To be perfectly honest, I don't think he'll win, but he's one of the most principled, honest, caring persons who've ever been in politics. I was very glad to see you're his new press secretary, that's a great shot in the arm for his candidacy.

[progressivebydesign]

45. No. Not Bad. I didn't say it was bad..

I said it was odd. Kerry is a great candidate in that he appeals to whatever a voter sees in him. Honestly, Kerry is being portrayed by Bush as being a "liberal". I'd consider him one of the most liberal candidates. Could that be any further from Bush? That's why it's odd.. not bad. But.. I have to say those that were the former Bush supporters were very rude to people at the caucus. Accusing Dean and DK of being spoilers wasn't very nice.

[BL_Zebub]

75. Republicans voting for Kerry is a very bad thing

If their intention is to force the nomination of a candidate who they know cannot beat Bush. And Kerry can't.

(And don't bother repeating the media whore polls. I'd believe a telegram from Heaven before I would take them seriously)

[Samantha]

30. I join you in your sadness

It's an extremely sad day for the Democratic party.

While I never joined the Dean movement, I very much admired your candidate. He does have that aura of authenticity and I very much agreed with him on the issues. Those who today have credited Dean with giving the Democratic party a spine are correct. The shame of it is his message was appropriated by those who did not have the courage to take his stand at the time he did to speak out against Bush* and to oppose the war.

I had a feeling from the beginning that Dean would run into the same difficulties Al Gore did, and today it looks to me as if that is exactly what has happened. When Gore needed the Democratic party the most, during the 2000 Election controversy, its leaders were nowhere to be found. As a result, three years of Bush* occupying the Oval House have left this country all but ruined.

And who benefits from their lack of response to the theft of the election. Those like Kerry who stood silently in the wings calculating the odds of running against Bush* in 2004 and an incumbent Gore. Kerry, like Daschle and Gephardt, decided to protect their own self-interests and left Gore swinging and twisting unprotected against the Republican mob. In that regard, not only did they leave Gore, they left the Democratic voters whose interests Gore represented. That means us.

These same opportunists today, pro-Iraq resolution war proponents, have stolen the political thunder of our number one anti-Bush*, anti-war candidate. Not having the political courage to stand up a year ago, and speak out as did Dean, they do have the political gall to appropriate his message and use it as their own at a time when most Americans are tuning into the election for the first time.

Beyond that, they are buttressed by the Clinton faction of the party. That faction openly declared in a recent Washington Post article they would stop Dean. And stop him they did. My question to this coterie within our own party is why didn't they stop Bush* when it was their job to do so.

The majority of the Democratic party was against the war and some of us vowed we would never accept a candidate who supported it. Today, the war is not even an issue, even as our American soldiers continue to die on Iraqi soil, and the weapons of mass destruction, a huge incentive motivating the American public to support the pre-emptive attack, are nowhere to be found.

Paul Begala, James Carville, Hillary Clinton, the DLC ('we do not select the Democratic candidate but we do have a big influence over who that candidate will be" -- and it won't be Al Gore), Joe Lieberman and most of all Bill Clinton himself control the party, control the message and control the nomination. It is the literal control of this party and thus its candidate which gives power and control to those who dominant and the power brokers have spoken. We the issue-oriented lose to the power brokers and the party elite.

Somehow, someway the DLC strategiests have convinced a majority of Democratics, through the use of the party machinery, that backing a perceived winner is more important than standing by one's principals, for example, opposing an illegal, immoral war. This is simply bullshit. Some issues supersede political endeavors, and pre-emptive attacks, American imperialism, illegal wars are among those things.

When did the Democratic voters become so susceptible to brainwashing?

The message has been sent to those who refuse to back the party program that our issues and our votes are expendable. After all, we have been told, taking the conservative, i.e., DLC element and making a pitch to attract moderate Republicans, Independent voters and the conservative Dems who left some time ago is a much preferred approach to keeping the liberal base. That is their strategy for winning against Bush*.

The irony of this strategy is that it will leave the DLC'ers courting an element they just lost -- the anti-war liberals who no longer feel at home within the Democratic party, a group who will refuse to vote for anyone but Bush* if that someone is Bush*-like -- the defecting liberals who become Independents.

Yes, it's a very sad day for the Democratic party. It officially became Republican-lite.

[CWebster]

72. Bravo!

I nominate this as post of the day!

[David Zephyr]

31. Thanks For Showing Up, For Being There.

You made a difference. Thanks!

[progressivebydesign]

32. Not your imagination... oh, and I'm sad too.

I went to my caucus. And.. I was shocked at how conservative the Kerry voters were. AND.. I was equally shocked at the ones that were originally Bush voters who chose Kerry. Go figure. The ones at my caucus accused Dean and Kucinich of being like Nader.. "spoilers" who are spliting the vote (of course that's ridiculous in a primary!). I was also suprised the aggressiveness of the Kerry people. One woman nearly bit a Dean supporters head off when she suggested to the group that perhaps we needed to remember we are not choosing a president now.. but setting a platform by supporting the candidate in the primaries that believe in your issues.

I was thrilled to have three Edwards supporters join us in the Dean group, giving us another delegate. They were truly gracious people. We had no Clark or Sharpton people, and the only Kucinich supporter was a surly man who said if it couldn't be Kucinich he'd to go to Kerry. I was really surprised.. the other Kucinich supporters I have met have been very open and personable. I thought the leap from DK to Kerry was a big one!

I'm really sad tonight. I'm proud of all of us.. for all of our hard work. And, I know that there are many happy Kerry supporters who worked their butts off too, and deserve their props tonight.

[David Zephyr]

37. Thanks for Showing Up, Too.

It matters.

[WilliamPitt]

38. Bush voters who turned to Kerry

This is a bad thing how? DK is my man, but ye gods, folks, how do you think elections are won nationally??

[DebJ]

40. it shows there is less of a difference btwn Kerry and Bush then

there is between other candidates and Bush. Also shows catering to the notion that the people in DC are basically taking good care of me I don't have to think about it. Security in familiarity. To quote Tom Jefferson:
'History has shewn that mankind is more likely to suffer, while evils are sufferable, then to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed'. People hate change more than anything. The less change, the better. I love your book Will, recommend it all the time, but it's Dean all the way for me. I will not be satisfied with a change in the WH. We need change in the Senate and House, too.
I'd love to see Kerry stay in the Senate and THEN see how he votes.

[shivaji]

49. Dean's demise is a true American tragedy

Dean would have refreshed and invigorated the democratic party and thereby the country like no one else at this time period.

[calimary]

50. He already has. He just won't be able to finish the job. Like Moses,

sort of. He led his people out of tyranny and slavery, but he himself did NOT make it to the Promised Land. But it was NOBODY ELSE out there in the desert with the lost and dis-spirited Israelites, and nobody else out there when it was tough in the wilderness, and certainly nobody showing the courage to stand up and lead 'em out of Egypt when everyone else was cowering under that same tyranny and slavery. Dean was it. He's a modern-day Moses. Dean is why I got fired up, and involved, and why I saw reason to be hopeful again. It wasn't what anybody else said or did.

Certainly I'll go along with whoever is chosen. If it's Kerry (and it sure looks like it will be), I'll find a way to be okay with that, I'll support him, and I'll vote for him. And I congratulate the Kerry supporters who did indeed work hard to make this happen for their guy. But I will tell you this: Kerry damned well better keep acting like a fighter when Dean is no longer there to push him and be the conscience of this Democratic recovery and revitalization. He better not forget that the Good Doctor gave him and everybody else in the Democratic party a backbone transplant. He better keep on using it and not let it atrophy once he no longer feels threatened by other Democratic opponents. And Kerry also better DAMNED WELL NOT tell me ever again to "get over it" about Selection 2000, and to stop crying in my teacups. Because I NEVER shall.

[Atlant]

74. Are you saying that poor Dr. Dean is going to have to wander...

Are you saying that poor Dr. Dean is going to have to wander in
the Green Mountains for 40 years? :)

I hope he'd got a lot of those little "glove warmers" and
"toe warmers" or at least wanders down along I-89 once in
a while so the diesel smoke can warm him up some.

Atlant

[kaitykaity]

52. Glass half full for me today.

I don't think the Doc has got a 'give up' bone in him. I think he understands our fear about JK reverting to being JK, and so Dean will continue to be the thorn in Kerry's side that he needs to keep him honest.

JMHO.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

58. exactly

kerry will go to the right and lose the grassroots

[mzmolly]

59. Ditto!

:(

66. Conservative and safe

I think Kerry may be more liberal than Dean, but he is also a safer candidate than Dean for many people.
This would create a paradox of the more conservative Democrats favoring the more liberal Kerry.
Dean is more of a firebrand and thus not as safe.
Organized groups need an injection of fervor occasionally or else they become stagnant. This seems to be what Dean has accomplished.

[Woodstock]

70. I share your fears about Kerry

Will he be back to the same old Kerry when Clark & Dean drop out? Or will he give Bush hell.

I originally picked Dean because I KNEW he'd give Bush hell. And I knew that was our only chance of winning.

[Snivi Yllom]

73. The same ole Kerry was always there

the media assasination of Dean and the coronation of Kerry is almost complete.