I think maybe the 'third party' surge happening on DU

[WilliamPitt]

from people who backed now-finished candidates is happening because a lot of people got their feelings hurt while debating anonymously on an internet forum.

I feel, personally, that this is an incredibly bad reason to make a political decision.

[Iverson]

1. I see a different phenomenon at work.

It is simple panic over Nader which has reached critical mass for a feeding frenzy.

[WilliamPitt]

3. Nader appears to be a go-to guy

for the aforementioned people who got their feelings hurt.

[Robb]

14. Hey, my feelings got hurt

...But mostly because not enough people voted for my candidate. ;)

I'm not sure what, exactly, would make me want to vote for Nader. Maybe an 80%+ showing in the polls and a strong drink. :shrug:

[Iverson]

26. Nader appears to be a go-to guy ...

... because his name is suddenly in 50% of the page one thread titles. the substance of your impression really doesn't seem borne out by the data.

In fact, I bet that for every one post that you can find in which a disappointed supporter *seriously* discusses voting third party, I can find ten postings of anti-Nader vitriol.

Now, you're too smart a guy to lose that bet, aren't you?

[Iverson]

125. a 10-1 proportion, and you're not taking me up on it?

I think you know, then, that it's time to revise your hypothesis.

[littlejoe]

39. There are no magic words here. Just a plea to the bruised egos

to not let hard feelings get in the way of an all too important task.

I do trust that most will do what is necessary when the time comes, no matter how distasteful.

[polpilot]

133. It appears to be 'Anybody But Pro-War Bush or Pro-War Kerry'. Some

will NEVER support one who exhibited such a limited level of comprehension on the illegal and unnecessary war making in Iraq.

[littlejoe]

157. Kerry isn't pro war.

[bearfartinthewoods]

141. this is an incredibly dismissive position for you to take

i'm no fan of dean but even i can see he got screwed and NOT just by statements on this board. for you to decide that the reason people flocked to dean would evaporate with his viability is not worthy of a political mind.

why would people who feel ignored by the majority not have more than their 'feelings' hurt by the way this primary is happening?

[Padraig18]

2. I think some of them are just messing with people's heads, too.

:)

[Eloriel]

52. I'm sure of it --

and as long as people's heads keep exploding in thread after thread, right AFTER they tell the rest of us exactly what we should/must do, the perceived "defections" and taunts of anti-ABB will probably continue until the hysteria on the other side stops.

I'm not holding my breath for THAT to happen, though.

But it's increasingly amusing, and some of the best entertainment I've seen since at DU in a while.

[jonnyblitz]

66. and its working.

look at all the hysterical Nader threads. I don't mean hysterical as in comical either.

[formernaderite]

152. Absolutely...by calling those who support Naders ideals nuts....

...the status quo democrats are propping up the protest vote as a viable alternative. Frankly I haven't made up my mind, as a Dean supporter I'm still shell shocked by the tactics used against him.

[Doomsayer13]

4. It also plays right into the hands of the Republicans

the more divided we are the higher chance of defeat come November. We must create a unifed front against the right, or else we lose.

[surfermaw]

30. You got that right

Haven't we been saying from the start that any one of the democrats would be a better president than Bush...And please most of us here were always in Kerry's,Edward's,Dean's and Clark's,Corner from day one. I am and Edwards supporter but would gladly accept any one of them..forgot to mention Dennis whom I think every one likes.And Al Sharpton, has kelp the republicans chewing at the bit's in every debate.

[The Magistrate]

5. There Is Not Really Very Much Of It, Mr. Pitt

just enough to provide some targets, and demonstrate the wide disfacor and distaste with which such self-indulgent and naive elements are viewed.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Eloriel]

65. ah, that comment goes so well with one you made recently

about Dean being "treasonous" and refusing to deny that also means Dean supporters are as well. I think I'm beginning to see a pattern here.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

Will Mr. Pitt now start another celebratory thread for you, I wonder?

Do it, Will -- it would be another surefire way to win more converts to Kerry. I'm sure there'll be SOME people who will either want to join in on the not-so-subtle threat of violence or be sufficiently intimidated by it to see the light on your terms. Every vote(r) counts, right?

[The Magistrate]

113. If, Ma'am

You want to play "hunt a member through the forums in pursuit of old matters," do feel free to play the game, but you will play it alone if you attempt it with me.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[John_H]

120. LOL! He's mean. He's dangerous. He's...

the Magistrate.

A new melodrama brought to you by DU Pictures. Rated R: Howard Dean supporters not admitted without parent or legal guardian.

[edzontar]

134. I don't see any third-party "surge", but I do see "panic"

From the Kerry camp that borders on hysteria.

The threats and insults spewing forth from the ABB worls would be funny if they were not so frightening.


Why are these people so "angry"?

[The Magistrate]

150. What You See, Sir

Is rage at the attempt by a small number of left wreckers to assist the criminals of the '00 Coup in their attempt to maintain themselves in office.

That is a thing that ought to excite rage, in every person who values the good of the people of our country, and the world.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Clark4Prez]

6. Right you are

Although I backed a candidate that is no longer in the race, I always said that I would back the nominee, no matter who it was.

I believe that Kerry will be on nominee, and he gets my full backing. I am ABB all the way and I don't believe that "protest" votes do anything to positively change the tone or direction of politics. Just look at 2000 and tell me differently.

[ulysses]

7. what "surge"?

I see a surge of blind hysteria, true. And your condescension (is it genetic, Will?) is noted.

[KeepHopeAlive]

27. I don't really see a large surge either

And, I find the armchair psychoanalysis condescending as well.

[buddhamama]

38. well that's because you're too damn intelligent

for your own good. beware of the green goblin,he's everywhere.
there isn't any surge. the majority of threads here on or about Nader are from Democrats who can't stop talking about Nader.

people really need to make up their minds.
first irrelevent but then all of a sudden
we're not.

now what's that all about?

Good to see you, My Friend. :loveya:

[KeepHopeAlive]

48. I'm scratching my head, too.

It's pretty amazing; isn't it?

Uh oh, not the green goblin! :D

Good to see you too! :loveya:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

8. I think Nader wanted to announce while the anger and despondency

was still fresh. He knew there were organized activists in place and that even if he didn't get them all he got SOME and he needs an org put together fast due to the fact that he no longer has the Greens at his disposal to organize.

He waited two days so that he would NOT look calculating but didn't want to wait too long as people might have gone to another candidate by then.

he's not stupid.

I do think there are some things the Dem party should do about this rather than go LA LA LA LA...it isn't as if Dean's platforms are extreme.

[Mz Pip]

12. Doesn't a candidate

need a certain number of signatures to be put on a ballot? I don't see how Nader would get them without some organization in place.

It's hard for me to see how any third party candidate will get much support this time around. I would think that most of the people who are pissed off because their candidate didn't win will calm down in a couple of weeks.

MzPip

[revcarol]

9. Maybe they went over the edge after so many days of being crapped on

and being bullied into ABB for the primaries and being courted for their votes while the wounds were still fresh.

Many reasons. We , as DU-ers, have some major healing to do on ourselves and with others.

[Eloriel]

67. Nah, couldn't be that

We're just mindless robots who've drank the Kool-Aid, follow a cult leader, etc. Sub-human to boot.

[arwalden]

112. Errr! Aaart-th-eerc! Must. Not... Respond... Don't... Say. Any. Thing.

Too. Eas-

[Kanary]

68. So glad to see a voice of reason here!

I was wondering if *ANYONE* would pick up on the "hurt feelings", and realize that what was said weeks ago is now coming back with a vengeance.

There were many pleas for acceptance of each other, with the awareness that slashing each other makes it harder for that necessary unity to arise.

Now we're there, and I see these statements that we need to be unified, and stick together, etc. In other words, yeah, you got bloodied, but so what, stick your nose to that damned grindstone and be there for the rest of us, in the way we think you should. No understanding, no apologies, no willingness to learn from past mistakes. Just admonitions to "do the right thing", directed to those who may be straying.

Time for some soul-searching.

Kanary

[WillyT]

108. Good Call Kanary !!!

First they dis us and dismiss us,
then plead because they need us

But stoop so low as to ask us to consider their nominee on the merits?

Nah...

And admit to past transgressions???

NO WAY!!!

What were we being told over and over...

"Politics ain't beanbag."

No shit, huh?

:shrug:

[Kanary]

116. WOW, one person heard.. ^_^

Thanks, Willy!

I've been thinking for quite a while now.... all these people involved in campaigns want volunteers, and want everyone to be active.

I don't know ANYONE in my circle of acquaintances who would be willing to volunteer and be spoken to the way people speak to each other here. I don't know where this idea comes from that we're somehow supposed to absorb whatever abuse others want to dump, and jes' keep right on working hard for the party.

Some of us got down off the cross and quit being martyrs a while back....

Kanary

[GreenPartyVoter]

10. Yep, put the good of the country first

I'd rather vote Green, but there won't be a nation to elect officials in much longer if let the neocons stay in power!

[Indiana_Dem]

54. I agree totally GPV! n/t

[DuctapeFatwa]

11. I think it'sjust because bush's policies are very popular, although he

himself is not, and as it becomes less likely that the Democratic Party's nominee will favor a change in the status quo, the small but vocal minority who dislike the policies as much as they dislike bush both stand out more, and naturally become the target of the pro-status quo majority.

[lancdem]

16. Bush's policies are popular?????

Are you sure about that?

[Scott Lee]

20. Some are. Dont forget that the majority still support his war.

As sickening as that little factoid is.

[DuctapeFatwa]

24. Yes. I don't believe that Kerry and Edwards supporters, for instance

are either fools or sheeple or any of the other insulting things that some people call them.

I believe that they sincerely support the policies of the current administration, and believe that not only are Kerry and Edwards more telegenic and well-spoken, but that the supporters of each believe that his man will do the best job of implementing the current policies.

I do not think that they are being deceived or fooling themselves.
Among the voting class, the percentage who sincerely desire change is very small.

[The Magistrate]

31. That Depends On The Degree Of Change, Mr. Fatwa

If you mean fundamental, alter the way the country functions change, then you are correct, vanishingly few desire this.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Darranar]

37. I think fundamental change may be exactly what's needed.

[DuctapeFatwa]

41. I think there will be very visible cosmetic changes

And I believe those will be very welcome and appreciated by those who support the status quo but find bush's manner crude and off-putting.

However, the US will continue its operations to bring its extra-territorial posessions to heel and secure its natural resources there for the benefit of US business interests, and medical treatment will remain a commercial product, just like DVD players or lipstick.

These are popular policies with the voting class, regardless of which party they align themselves.

[Darranar]

43. The former is not popular...

it is simply concealed.

As for the latter, that's another story.

[DuctapeFatwa]

50. They seem to go to great lengths to conceal US casualties, in my view

they are being overcautious. Most of the expendable resources are recruited from lower income sectors, and many from populations that are considered undesirable before they join, and disposable after.

Foreign nationals who "die as a result of ongoing military operations" are seen by most voters as a positive sign that the war on terror is making progress, and by many who consider themselves "liberal" as "tragic but unavoidable."

There is a great deal of support in the latter group for bribing other countries to join the US in commiting war crimes, usually for a share of American petroleum resources located there, and related revenue opportunities, and that will go a long way toward assuaging any misgivings domestically, and if successful, will certainly diminish anti-American sentiment in the leadership of those nations who accept the offer.

The change on the ground for the victims will of course, be limited to the uniform and.or hat color of the individuals who kill their children, but I see little indication that this is a concern to the bulk of voters of either party.

[Darranar]

56. I think the objective is concealed, the means less so...

people like feeling moral, and they like to see their nation as moral as well.

When their country commits atrocities, they buy all the propaganda about "security" and "war on terrorism" (in the case of the US; modify as necessary for other nationalist slogans) because they want to believe it.

If it became clear, though, that the objective is what it is, that might change.

[The Magistrate]

117. Still, Mr. Fatwa

One man's cosmetic changes may be another's signifigant ameilioration of distress. These things change depending not only on point of view, but on what rhetorical devices it is chosen to deploy.

To argue through courtesy within the view you present, it seems to me sensible members of the voting class understand that there is something mean and dangerous that has been let lose in the land, and that may ferment into something that threatens them, not with anything so extreme as revolution, but merely by some personal fear and increased costs incurred by sheltering themselves from it. Many realize the truth that the nearest thing to an ethic in this system is "don't gouge too deep", and understand that that is precisely what is going on, and that it must stop before it begins to upset their own apple-carts. If they act on this, the result will be measurable benefit for many beneath them in the social structure, and that, to me, is a good thing, that is worth some effort to attain.

[DuctapeFatwa]

132. I agree that rhetorical devices are important to the perception of change

and whether that change is cosmetic or a significant amelioration of distress.

I also agree that many of the voting class are interested in sheltering and protecting themselves from sharing the fate of the less fortunate.

And I do not mean to suggest that the voting class is entirely immune from the very human and understandable desire to believe that "things will work themselves out for the best," especially when assured of this by such skilled politicians as Messrs. Kerry and Edwards.

Just as point of view is relative regarding the perception of change, so is the perception of need for it.

Both Kerry and Edwards are fortunate that to be elected, they only need to concern themselves with the perceptions of those who perceive from comfortable homes, with full bellies, and without the vexing distraction of babies with shrapnel wounds and third degree burns and no painkillers screaming in the next room.

[The Magistrate]

151. They Are Important To Managing The Perception, Sir

From whichever side of this question one takes, with the side arguing there will be no change necessarily being at pains to minimize the degree of change that might occur, just as the other must maximize it, through rhetorical device.

In your mention that the voting classes wish to preserve themselves from the fate of the less fortunate, it seems to me you do not notice that many may understand that the best way they can do this is to make easier the condition of those less fortunate than themselves. That is, in fact, the distilled wisdom of wise and skilled rulers throughout long millenia....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[DuctapeFatwa]

155. I don't think that the voters who consider themselves "liberal"

have an ideological objection to the alleviation of suffering of the poor, and many may assert that they actively desire it, but most will be content with a token gesture, if it is presented in a grandiose enough manner, and given the choice of a reduction in capital gains taxes or a substantial rise in the amount a person can earn without being taxed at all, most will vote with the candidate who puts a priority on protecting their investment.

Even among the most enlightened, I would be willing to bet that the majority sincerely believes that raising the minimum wage a dollar fifty will be a significant step.

However, to the person who earns that minimum wage, and cannot afford an apartment even with 3 of them, which leaves 0 hours for transportation between jobs, sleeping or bathing, the magnanimity of the gesture may be less apparent.

The principal problem with that slow and measured change, carefully considered as the decades pass, is that it does not happen, and maintains a near-straight line on the graph, while the conditions that prompted the original call for the change are not so prudent.

It is not unlike an occasional dull throb in a molar, which despite one's best efforts to suck it up, smile big and no one will know, and all the best and most time-tested and recommended techniques for postponing a trip to the dentist, the infection rages on, the dull throb matures into a near-constant nagging ache, and finally blooms into a screaming blinding agony from which the only remedy is much more invasive and expensive than if the condition had been treated in a timely manner.

[blm]

33. I think your assumption is not based in reality.

Kerry has a lifetime liberal rating closest to Wellstone and to the left of Kucinich in some areas.

I support Kerry BECAUSE he is the most left leaning candidate of my lifetime.

Name one other lawmaker who has exposed more government corruption in the last 50 years than John Kerry.

[DuctapeFatwa]

45. Both support the crusade, and current US foreign policy in general and

both are committed to preserving the status of medical treatment as a commercial product.

I think that each has been very candid about their intentions, and that each can be counted on to maintain the status quo.

To the vast majority of the voting class who support current policies but do not like bush, that's reassuring.

[blm]

47. Horse pucky.

Kerry plans on making renewable energy research and energy independence the centerpiece of our national security.

That is LIGHTYEARS away from Bush's policy.

[DuctapeFatwa]

51. see post 41

[Darranar]

53. That's what he SAYS...

If he stops the current structure of global trade, namely the flow of wealth from the developing world to the elites of the developed, I'll be relieved.

But he won't.

[blm]

59. He's only been working on it for 35 years.

Not many of you have ever really studied Kerry, have you?

[Darranar]

61. Yes, by supporting NAFTA and the exploitation...

of Chinese workers.

And Bush's war for oil, too.

:eyes:

[littlejoe]

58. I cannot speak for anyone else who supports John Kerry, but

I don't believe for a minute, not even for a second that He is interested in continuing the policies of this administration.

I believe, if Kerry becomes the next president, that he will be spending the majority of his first administration undoing the many wrongs of his predecessor.

[SW FL Dem]

99. Speak for yourself

I want a President that cares about the environment. I want a President that cares about the problems facing the middle class. I want a President that uses diplomacy to solves disputes rather than resorting to pre-emptive war. How can you honestly say I don't want change?

[DuctapeFatwa]

135. Kerry has consistently supported reductions in capital gains taxes

And I believe he does recognize that the sector for whom that is important are his base, and insofar as he can do so without alienating business interests, he will not seek to hasten their transition to poverty.

[littlejoe]

159. If you want to live in a communist society, then that is your business.

As for me, when I make my million, I would like to be able to keep more of it.

[littlejoe]

158. I just did!

[sistersofmercy]

121. DF...

I do believe current policies will change with Kerry and that is why I support him. You may believe differently, so go right ahead in your course of thinking, time will tell my friend. And I pray that it will. But listening to rhetoric for change and understanding that it takes steps, are two diffent belief systems. I'm not seeking an immediate gratification revolution with an ephemeral effect causing an uprising from the right, I'm seeking a well planned, implemented revolution with the precise timing to set in motion the adjustment and acceptance necessary for the right to adhere.

[joyautumn]

127. Didn't Clinton do that already?

I could've sworn he did that. He kept saying he was working so hard on it and making so much progress.

[DuctapeFatwa]

138. See posts 41, 132

[reprehensor]

13. Don't forget Freeper sabotage.

Divide and conquer, baby.

[HuskerDem]

15. Incredibly immature is what I'd say. Might as well throw in

egocentric too.

[kher-heb]

17. maybe its the constant threats

and the partisan bullying that alienates people.
I doubt it has anything to do with feelings, if anything it is the opposite.

[jonnyblitz]

46. yup. people are tired of the bullying demands for loyalty 24/7

so they are lashing out just to piss the people demanding ABB off. I don't blame them actually, its getting OLD.

[littlejoe]

160. Urgent pleas, more than threats. But it depends on your

point of view.

[Scott Lee]

18. There is no "third party surge on DU". But there is this...

A growing discontent with the Insiders having their bottoms powdered by the ruling DLC elite. Maybe that's what's giving you a grumble in yer gut.

[burned]

19. well Will...

It might be beneficial to us all if we just hush up for a while and let everyone lick their wounds and regain some perspective.

[Indiana Democrat]

21. It's the Media's fault!!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

22. I usually vote third party, but not this year

I wish Dean had won the nomination, but I stand by my statement that I'd back and vote for whoever the Democratic nominee proves to be. However, once sanity is restored to the White House, my vote and loyalty is up for grabs. Personally, if I don't see the Democrats moving to a more people-centered, progressive platform, it is likely I'll be going third party again, and probably for good.

[maddezmom]

35. thanks for your vote this year

and I don't blame ya if you don't do it again. But maybe this year we might get someone in, who will make a difference.

[buddhamama]

23. mass hysteria

can be quite entertaining.

[SaddenedDem]

25. Voting Dean even if it's by write-in

And here's why:

In 1992 I was asked to vote ABB even though Bill Clinton supported NAFTA and many other things I was opposed to. And I did.

In 1996 I was asked to vote ABD (Dole) even though Bill Clinton supported NAFTA, had failed to pass any legislation that mattered to my basic political beliefs and long held issues. And I did.

In 2000 I was asked to vote ABB even though Al Gore was a continuation of the Clinton White House. And I did.

There will ALWAYS be a republican "boogie man." When it is that we stop being asked to vote for FEAR and begin to vote for true representation?

You see, I see ABB as nothing more than a fear campaign which greatly mirrors the republican fear campain of "war, war, war."

I see ABB as sheep being led to slaughter, yet again. By our own party, no less.

You see, it's 2004 and I can't buy ABB anymore. My family is suffering terribly today because of my ABB votes of the last 12 years. I can't ask them to do it anymore.

Why is that so hard for people to understand?

[QC]

36. That'll do a lot of good!

Maybe I should just write in my Aunt Helen. After all, my candidate didn't make it either, and Helen's a nice lady, very smart and assertive. And, of course, my vote would be no more a meaningless gesture than yours.

I understand your frustration with NAFTA and the like, but how much more do you think your family would be suffering if we had ended up with another term for Poppy, and then Dole? If the past three years have shown us anything, it is that today's GOP is truly a radical party intent on repealing the past century. Even timid centrism looks mighty good compared to that.

[SaddenedDem]

42. I will not reward Terry McAuliff and the DNC/DLC

And that's exactly what an ABB vote does.

[adadem]

57. No. It will only make things worse

for not only you but for the entire world. Each and every one of our votes in November affect the entire world.
You would rather have Rove in charge than McAuiliffe?

[SaddenedDem]

62. Maybe you missed this part..

There will ALWAYS be a republican "boogie man." When it is that we stop being asked to vote for FEAR and begin to vote for true representation?

You see, I see ABB as nothing more than a fear campaign which greatly mirrors the republican fear campain of "war, war, war."

[QC]

74. There's no need for a bogeyman when you've got Bush around.

He's the genuine article. He and his cronies are well and truly fascists, and we have good reason to fear them, if what they have done so far is any indication. You're right that parties often try to scare voters, but there's no need to make up a monster under the bed this time. (If someone is under your bed, it's most likely John Ashcroft.)

[SaddenedDem]

78. Nothing like being proven right

So you admit it's a FEAR campaign. At least you're honest.

Didn't work though - I'll still be writing in Howard Dean's name.

[QC]

83. So you prefer rewarding Bush?

I know that sounds very black and white and all, but in a winner-take-all election where only two candidates have any shot at winning, that's what it comes down to.

Again, I understand your frustration with mushy centrism. I've felt it for years. But the election is not all about me and my feelings.

It's about the people who will be killed and maimed in those other wars on Perle's list. It's about those who are out of work now and the millions who will surely join them if Bush is allowed to continue looting the country for his rich friends. It's about women losing their right to reproductive choice and racial and sexual minorities losing their legal protections. It's about children living in poverty. Etc.

Can you honestly look those people in the eyes and say, "Yes, I could have prevented some of your suffering, but I didn't want to reward Terry McAuliffe"?

[SaddenedDem]

85. You really, really don't want to go there

Because I can give you real life stories of children living in poverty.

Because I can give you real life stories of all the things you list.

But the bottom line is simple - Terry McAuliffe says we just won't go there after a Democrat gets elected in 2004.

So, despite your attempt to fear monger, yet again, Mr. McAuliffe proves there is nothing which will prevent all those things happening with a Democrat in office.

The only way I can prevent the suffering is to hold Terry McAuliffe and the Democratic party responsible for their corporatist agenda which takes precedence over all those issues you mention.

Sure, I can stand and look them in the eye and say I tried to prevent it. Can you? Because your ABB vote helps it happen.

[Samantha]

87. You are so focused and I share your sadness

60 percent of the Democratic base opposed the war in Iraq. Many here at this site said they would never support any Dem who voted yes to the Iraq resolution. That meant Gephardt, Kerry, Lieberman and Edwards were eliminated from consideration. The DLC refused to back an anti-war candidate. Today we are faced with renouncing our own resolution in order to avoid feeling guilty should Bush* win election.

The guilt does not lie with voters who stand by their principles; the guilt for a failed election strategy lies with those who defined the game plan ignoring the will of its base. They are the same principals who devised the failed strategy of the 2002 losses. Should we not prevail in 2004, the responsibility lies with the strategists and power brokers, not the voters simply seeking the representation they deserve.

And you are correct in saying that merely acquiescing election year after election year to the DLC's policies totally thwarts any chance we might ever have in insisting on representation of what lies in our best interests. If the 2004 election is lost, let's place the blame right where it belongs, on Al From and the New Dems, who lurched to the right and are attempting to jerk us there with them.

[SaddenedDem]

90. AMEN!!!!!!

Well said, and eloquently put!

[QC]

94. The DLC decided all those primaries?

I'm not a fan of the DLC either, and I'm not wild about Kerry, but let's not forget that when the question was put to the voters, the antiwar candidates lost big.

So it would seem that rank and file Democrats don't believe that the IWR is the defining issue of the election. I don't particularly like this, as one who supported Clark, but that's the game.

Did Al From force them to vote as they did? There's a tendency around here to act as though the DLC is far more powerful than it is, and attibuting the failures of so many of the campaigns is an excellent example. To hear some people talk, you would think that we are all just putty in Al From's hands.

[SaddenedDem]

96. Not understanding that is your first mistake

And General Clark was in the race for one reason - to split off Howard Dean votes to make the plan possible.

After they annointed Kerry and Edwards as the frontrunners, Clark was no longer needed.

You WERE used by the DNC/DLC to siphon off Dean votes.

Not understanding that is your first mistake.

[QC]

100. Let's not be so pompous.

I know that's a struggle, but this pose of being The Oracle of Political Wisdom has grown tiresome.

The idea that Clark was a stalking horse for the Clintons is vintage Freak Republic, which makes its popularity among the leftier-than-thou crowd a bit strange, but then, as the French say, les extrémes se touchent. I don't buy it. I have seen no evidence for it, and consider it nothing more than yet another rationalization for the failure of the Dean campaign.

As for me being used to siphon votes away from St. Howard of the Hamptons, my state has not had its primary yet, so I have not yet had the chance to vote for anyone. If you want to complain about the primaries being so front-loaded that they were over before most people got to vote, then I'll be happy to join you on that.

[SaddenedDem]

104. The truth hurts, huh?

Come on! Look at it logically:

Wesley Clark comes in VERY late. Only AFTER Howard Dean is kicking all the DLC out of the park in fundraising AND voter activism.

He is the personal friend of Bill Clinton - you know, that guy who APPOINTED Terry McAuliffe....

He's the Clinton "go to guy" whenever Clinton gets in trouble (see Kosovo), and Clinton's guy at the DNC is in BIG trouble.

The man enters the Democratic race for POTUS without even being a registered Democrat.

The MINUTE John Kerry is coronated the front runner, Wesley Clark drops out and endorses Kerry.

It doesn't take much logic to follow a straight line.

[QC]

105. Yes, the truth can hurt.

But what truth has to do with this congerie of half-baked William Safire conspiracy theorizing is a mystery.

Like I said, what we are dealing with here is a fevered search for some explanation--any explanation for the collapse of Dean's campaign that does not place any responsibility on Dean himself. So it must, of course, have been a matter of evildoers meeting in a smoke-filled room to take down America's Savior. It simply couldn't have happened because most voters preferred other candidates.

[kiahzero]

163. You mean the truth, like that he was DRAFTED?

How's that FACT (of the incontrovertible variety) jive with your theory?

The MINUTE John Kerry is coronated the front runner, Wesley Clark drops out and endorses Kerry.

I dunno... I tend to think the fact that he said he would drop out if he didn't win Tennessee, and then lost Tennessee, had a lot more to do with him dropping out than a desire to see Kerry win.

Too bad the facts don't fit your analysis.

[Samantha]

110. Of course the anti-war candidates lost big - the DLC refuses to sponsor

an anti-war, anti-tax cut candidate. The voters HAVE BEEN influenced by DLC strategists, i.e., Carville, Begala, Clinton-supporters, et al., inasmuch as these political pundits have ingrained in voters that, for instance, Howard Dean, is UNELECTABLE. Who then, is electable? Kerry and Edwards, both coincidentally, DLC'ers ... see how that works.

I am really not interested in the game per se -- I am interested in seeing someone elected who represents my interests. I was outraged at the Iraq war -- regardless of what opinion the majority of Dems expressed in exit polls -- and I will not vote for a candidate who voted yes to this resolution.

No, Al From did not FORCE Dems to vote in the primaries as they did but he certainly did influence them by implying DLC'ers were electable and anti-war candidates were not. It was the DLC itself that issued a statement that while it does not select the candidate the Dems run, it has a lot of influence over who that candidate will be. This statement was publicly made at the time the DLC was dissuading Al Gore from making a run in 2004.

And no, I do not think we are putty in Al From's hands, but evidentally, he does. He seeks to separate us from our principles with transparent slogans coined to effectuate our deviating from our principles to his. In short, he's trying to brainwash the liberal left to the right of the middle. Go there if you want but I will not be joining you.

[QC]

89. OK, so how does writing in Howard Dean prevent any of these things?

I'm listening. Please explain how letting Bu$hCo have four more years to finish us off will prevent or relieve the suffering that we both are aware of.

[SaddenedDem]

93. It tells the right wingers in the Democratic party

that they failed. They failed yet again.

That I, for one, will no longer stand for less than representation.

That I will no longer assist them in their march to do what the Bush Cabal does unapologetically, with a kinder, gentler mask on it - covered with a (D).

[QC]

97. Suit yourself.

But I think you're pointing up a great example of why progressives lose.

Too many of us tend to think that when we make our brave, noble stand by casting a meaningless vote for a doomed candidate, our duty for the next four years is done. Then we can congratulate ourselves on our brave, noble commitment to our principles.

And what does it accomplish? Not a damn thing. Because politics is not something that is only done on election day.

Consider how the Religious Right took over the GOP. They worked at it for years. They ran for committee seats that the country clubbers disdained. They showed up to volunteer. They ran their own candidates for office and got out the vote for them. They made calls and knocked on doors. They drove old people to the polls. They registered like-minded voters. Etc.

In short, they did the kind of grassroots politicking that lefties used to be known for. And it worked. They control the Republican Party now. The country clubbers have complained a lot about those tacky people taking over their party, but hey, they were outplayed.

Progressives could do the same thing, you know. And I hope that Dean is serious about keeping his organization intact, because this is precisely the sort of thing they could do so well. And constant, committed pressure is the only way we can shift the party in our direction.

[SaddenedDem]

98. I intend to

That was the intent of my original post in this thread.

[QC]

101. Good for you. I support your right to

be every bit as self-indulgent as you please. It's still a free country, sort of, no thanks to those who plan to help Bush get another term.

[littlejoe]

161. Why reward Bush with four more years?

[joyautumn]

130. Dole a radical right-winger?

Is that why he marshalled ADA through Congress? Is that why he fought off the FDA's attempt to ban food supplements? Dole was a moderate Republican with, like everyone else who makes it to GE in a major party, the same-old-same-old corporatist agenda.

[oasis]

28. Talk about hurt feelings, wait till Rummy calls for a draft in 2006. There

is no crying allowed in boot camp.

[Walt Starr]

73. You are WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

Rummy sure as hell is not going to caall for a daft in 2006.
























The plan is for the call to go out in April of 2005!!!!!

[Eloriel]

88. Kerry wants to increase troops by 40,000 in his first 100 days

I don't know how he can do that except by a draft -- and even then it'll be a reach.

[oasis]

128. Okay, Rummy's draft will be in April 2005.

[littlejoe]

162. Talk of a draft is frivolous.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

29. Either that

or there's principles involved. You never know.

[surfermaw]

32. Not to Worry My friends

The Doctor will hold his supporters togeather....He has said he wants to defeat Bush. Take the Doctors advise...and you will like th cure

[Eloriel]

95. The Doctor doesn't own my vote, or me

I have given him my support freely -- he won't try to take advantage of my loyalty by DEMANDING anything. I'm sure he will encourage supporters to vote for the nominee. I'm equally sure he will respect our choices if we don't. He knows above all others that "these kids (even us 55-year old ones) aren't necessarily transferrable."

[kentuck]

34. Nader is hoping for a "surge" but....

he may as well hope Santa will marry the tooth fairy. It ain't gonna happen. Last time, the Greens were angry that the Democrats were spineless. This time, their anger lies elsewhere.

[unfrigginreal]

40. What 'third party' surge?

Are you equating disgust with Kerry to support for a third party? Bullshit...Nader would have to wait a hell of a lot longer than Kerry to ever get my vote, as a matter of fact he would never get it.

[Walt Starr]

80. That's what I can't figure out

Maybe 'Third Party Surge' is code for, 'not prostrating yourself before the great and powerful almighty Kerysaviour' or some such nonsense.

:shrug:

I already told them I'd vote for The Ham Sandwich (D), what the fuck more do they want from me?

:shrug:

[regnaD kciN]

119. It seems like a meme to me, too...

...unless, of course, a vote for Edwards is also being considered as tantamount to "supporting a third party"...

"If you don't pledge your loyalty here and now to Blank-Check-Man*, it means you've decided to vote third-party and give Bush another term!!!"

:eyes:

*you have no idea how long I've wanted to use that name in the forum...

;-)

[movonne]

44. I think a lot of these people saying they will vote Nader are

repugs. I am disliking Nader as about as much as Bush. Does he want another 4 years of Bush. I think he should be working for the Dems just go get this joker out. It is so important for us to win this next election because I think that another 4 years there will be no Democratic party and that is just the tip of the iceberg...no free elections, no freedoms etc.

[genius]

49. I think the surge is from Republican infiltraitors

A lot of the postings I've seen do not come across as anything I would expect from Democrats. Some of those leaning Green are very likely legitimate but I have believed for quite some time that a great many people hre are just trying to cause division among the Democrats.

[GreenArrow]

55. fear and anger

The third party surge and the general level of anger on DU are caused primarily by two things:

1) Terror. Absolute, abject fear of a second part to the Bush regime.

2) Anger that a) Nader (or whomever) could help Bush keep the White House, and b) that many of us will be Selling Out our values and principles in order to elect a candidate who we don't feel and think represents us or the long term best interests of the country... which leads us back to Bush fear...which leads us back to anger, and so on.

[Walt Starr]

60. I don't see a 'Third Party Surge' at DU

I just see a bunch of people with some hangups about a washed up consumer advocate getting into a race without any party backing him. Seriously, the guy won't even get on the ballot in most states and will have absolutely no impact on the race.

Fuck, if everybody on this board went out and got five non-voters to vote for The Ham Sandwich (D), there's no way The Ham Sandwich (D) could lose!

So instead of bitching about Nader on an internet message board, the Nader-Nay-Sayers should get off their asses and do something constructive.

[5thGenDemocrat]

169. I couldn't agree more, Walt

Just convince five currently unmotivated voters to go their polling place and VOTE DOPEY OUT this November.
I already know more than five no-shows from 2000 who'll vote this time solely to get The Pretender out of the White House.
Maybe I didn't need to persuade them -- maybe they'd already convinced themselves. But they're there, they're going to vote and they're going to vote to elect a Dem -- not a narcissistic clown like Saint Ralph (Saginaw is a GM town as well).
John
Of course, the MI Eighth District already has a Dem congressman, two Dem senators and a Dem governor. My state rep is a Dem as well. It's a good place to live and it will be even better with a Democratic President.

[legin]

63. We on the left never asked for very much

All we wanted was:
1. a candidate that was against the war, and
2. a candidate who would slag off the Democratic Party for being a bunch of pink-tutu, spineless, co-dependant, arseholes that they are.

Dean's other policies; just didn't bother thinking about them. I am a basement person; Dean's statements, I just blocked them out.

We bent over backwards to accomodate the centre and what did we get in return ? Somebody who voted for the war. And now Daschle, revitialised by this victory for mediocrity, is going around saying "aren't things going well over in Iraq".

It is a little annoying.

[RafterMan]

64. What happened to the "Hardball" Pitt?

Hurt feelings? Maybe on your side. But I thought you expected a few elbows to be thrown in politics.

The vote is the only leverage people have over politicians, and I admire those who continue to use it. I think the thundering herd will be ashamed of their frenzy, at some point. At least I hope so.

[frustrated_lefty]

69. You also tried to explain the anger

of people on this forum, and it seems you just don't get it. There's nothing wrong with that, at face value. Continuing to explain the actions of a crowd you obviously don't grasp, on the other hand, is nothing short of presumption.

I enjoy reading your thoughts, Will. Forgive MY presumption, but I don't think this is an area where you can speak with authority.

[XanaDUer]

70. It is an incredibly bad way to decide whom one votes for.

Eom.

[revcarol]

72. More than 8 months until the election.

Plenty of time to consider or reconsider.

Why are we assuming that ABB and third-party options have to be decided RIGHT NOW?

That's just another form of the threatening that has been going on.

If some want to express their third-party choice, OK, but we will never know what goes on in the privacy of the voting booth EIGHT MONTHS from now.

[JackRiddler]

71. Excuse me?

Nader is not getting a surge among Dean people, or any other demographic. In three months he will have achieved a threat level somewhere between Harry Browne and Lenora Fulani.

This "surge" is in the minds of the 90 percent of current board posters who are exercising themselves in the hysterics of Nader Hate.

His entry, which he obviously timed to Dean's demise, has cleanly swept away the memory of the latter's outrageous political assassination.

The ongoing Nader Hate serves as a ritual to unite the disappointed behind the depressing reality of Kerry.

But your instincts remain impeccable. As I remember, you even managed to land the very first and cutest Get-Nader post, you slippery young charmer, you. It should have sufficed!

[MurikanDemocrat]

75. I think you are right, and that there is more of a 3rd party surge on DU

than there is in the real world. The message board phemonenon definately has a lot to do with taking things a lot more personally and making choices for the wrong reasons.

[maxanne]

76. I might be inclined

to agree, if I weren't witnessing the third party surge going on all over my state - and being advocated by people who have never even heard of DU.

[Rooktoven]

77. Simply put-- Nader is NOT ABB!

If he were, he'd run as a democrat and support the nominee.

I can't express my contempt for him enough tonight...

[SaddenedDem]

81. That's OK - Howard Dean is. n/t

[wyldwolf]

79. Doesn't really make a difference, though

..after the dem nominee is chosen - maybe even before - third party backers will be curtailed here.

[corporatewhore]

82. only reason i decided to join dem party was seein DKatNationalCampusGreens

Convention

[KFC]

84. Exactly. By the way, I think selling CSCO short is the way to riches

If it is on internet chat boards, it must be true.

I'm hearing that Kerry had an affair.

[maggrwaggr]

86. I think that's a very insulting accusation

I started a thread the other night suggesting Clark and Dean form a third party candidacy.

I don't give a shit about having my "feelings hurt". I never even debated much here, I largely stayed out of this forum.

It's about sticking to what you believe in.

I swore I would NEVER vote for a candidate who voted for the IWR.

And I still won't.

I say FUCK whoever voted for the IWR, I want them OUT of office and OUT of politics for fucking EVER.

If you don't like it, tough.

on edit: If you're talking about Nader, well I say to hell with Nader. He should have run as a Dem.

[arwalden]

91. I Believe You Are Correct

It's "payback" against digital strangers who pissed them off. Someone practically confessed the exact same thing to me today.

-- Allen

[uhhuh]

92. You're Right Will

I do feel somewhat hurt by how things turned out. We ended up with what we deserved. I don't know if it was apathy, or conspiracy, or something else.

I will vote for Kerry, or Edwards, or whoever turns out to be the Democratic nominee, but I will not go whistling to the polls, happily bubbling in his name because something HUGE was attempted and lost during this election cycle.

I will even work actively to see that the eventual nominee gets elected if there is any question as to whether it will be close, but I will be doing it, not because I believe in the guy, but because I despise his opposition.

I think it is truly sad that a large number of the people here are often being spit on for their disappointment. I think there are so few that won't vote for whoever is the nominee that the constant calls to get on the bus are a very bitter pill to swallow.

I think the inevitability of another hand-picked, media-annointed candidate being the standard bearer for the party is disgusting, and I would think that others would too, but I will swallow my disgust, heal my political wounds, and support and vote for whoever opposes the chimp in November.

The point of this is that it seems that people here are so concerned that others here are not going to do the responsible thing and vote Dem in November.It seems many are so insecure about their candidate on the issues, that we get the old, "with us, or against us" attitude when we're not jumping for joy that things went so badly against the people we though could really make a difference in this country.

I doubt that there are very many Dean, Clark, Kucinich, Sharpton, Gephardt, Mosely-Braun, or even, Lieberman supporters here, who would really consider giving that rotten criminal another four years, but I think a lot of us were hoping for something better than "He's not the chimp" as a reason to vote.

Kerry and Edwards have both made some good votes and speeches. They have also made some bad ones. I don't see anything really spectacular here. I don't see a reason to get up in the morning and get excited about the future. I see more of an opportunity to stop sliding backwards, than a real opportunity to move forward.

I feel that we have been conditioned to such a degree to a level of outrage that stopping the outrage would look like progress. I know we need to start there, but I think most of us were hoping for better.

So, to all the loyalty oaths, and pledges in the future, I will answer, ABB, but I wish I could shout it proudly, rather than just fall in line.

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

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

[dawn]

103. Well, yet another Bush supporter.

I hope you enjoy the economic policies under Bush*'s regime. Go out and collect your signatures to endorse Bush.

[Scott Lee]

107. What's the major differences between Kerry and Bush?

no really, I want to hear your case. Show us how Kerry differed from Bush on:

The Iraq War

No Child Left Behind

ANWR

Tax Shelters

The Patriot Act.


Please, the floor is yours.

[poskonig]

115. The Senate ANWR filibuster was Kerry's doing.

He organized it. Kerry supports progressive taxation. Bush supports regressive taxation. Kerry supports affirmative action. Bush opposes affirmative action. Kerry has a strong record on energy and the environment, promoting higher CAFE standards and no roads in our national forests. Bush has enacted clear cutting of our forests, more pollution in our air, and more arsenic in our water. Kerry supports reproductive rights. Bush supports theocratic government. Kerry supports gun control. Bush supports the NRA. Kerry opposes the death penalty. Bush supports a *lot* of public executions. Kerry opposed the DOMA. Bush supports it. Kerry opposed bankruptcy deform. Bush supported it. Kerry has consistenly been against vouchers, educational savings accounts, and abstinence education. Bush supports these things. Kerry supports a variety of measures to support health care access. Bush supports the pharmaceuticals and the HMOs, being against drugs from Canada, and for caps on medical lawsuits. Kerry has supported the nuclear test ban treaty, a ban on chemical weapons, and has been against a variety of useless weapons systems. George W. Bush is for them. Kerry is committed to disarmament, but does not support random wars. Bush supports looting nations for their oil supplies. Kerry supports closing corporate tax loopholes. Bush would like even more tax loopholes for his Enron buddies.

If a person cannot tell the difference, I can only surmise one thing about their intelligence.

[Scott Lee]

123. so then why does Senator Botox now like ANWR drilling?

Use your giant intellect to riddle us that one. Did botox have a sudden epiphany once he saw the unions and lumber industry up north and all their dollaz and support?

Let us in on the secret, because even Lord Botox is not explaining this one yet. Maybe you can save him some time.

[MaineDem]

142. Could you provide proof of that claim, please (nt)

[frustrated_lefty]

106. Sorry, can't do that.

I'm angry and feel betrayed. I don't know what I'm doing in November, but I'm not vowing my vote to Nader. He may end up getting my vote in the long haul, but he, like anyone else, will have to earn that vote.

[BourgeoisPig]

118. Kucinich won't join Nader

[LeftPeopleFinishFirst]

145. But you supported Dean when he supported Biden-Lugar?

nt

[ulysses]

109. behold the mighty and evil Nader surge, sweeping all before it!

[buddhamama]

136. .............

bow down before the one you serve :D

[Forkboy]

139. Great

now I have a Nine Inch Nails song stuck in my head :)

[buddhamama]

144. gotta problem with NIN

you can't be one of 'us' if you do
don't make me call you traitor! ;-)

[Forkboy]

146. er,um

well,I like the first couple CDs,and March of the pigs is a great song.

I like Reznor's version of the Pigface song "Suck" a lot too.

But NIN is no Pig Destroyer (Hey,I heard that big "WHEW"!) :)

[buddhamama]

147. contrary to popular belief

i am not a absolutist. flashing that smile ain't hurting you none either. :-)

[babzilla]

111. I think maybe the word surge

has surged.

What's with all the surging?

First Kerry surged, then Edwards surged.

Now I am supposed to believe Nader is surging?

Surge is the new black.

[freeforall]

114. I hate to say this, but...

as an interested onlooker, if people vote for Nader just because they don't like the Dem nominee, and Nader siphons off enough votes to cause another screw-up and you get stuck with Bush for another 4 years - then the country will deserve the leader it gets.

I would say that now is the time to focus on picking the Dem candidate you can most live with, and then in the election, vote for the Dem - no matter who the candidate is.

Sometimes I think we're more fortunate in Canada to have a system where we elect the party, based on its policies, and don't have to fight over personalities. True, sometimes we like the party and its policies, but not necesessarily the leader, but it sure beats hell out of having a bunch of leaders for the same party from which to choose.

Support the Dems!

(Posted in another forum as well.)

[regnaD kciN]

122. You know, after reading this thread...

...I'm suddenly considering a vote for Nader...

...just to p*ss you off, Will!

;-)

(Just think...if I vote third-party, and Bush winds up winning by one vote, it'll be all Will's fault for starting this thread!)

[edzontar]

137. I too have had these kind of thoughts. The ABB ravings

Are so intemeprate and ridiculous that they make want to ge EVEN.

I won't do it, but that will have noting to do with the nonsense I am reading in threads like this.

[littlejoe]

164. You may as well write in Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck.

[ibegurpard]

124. Ridiculous

And the worst thing about it is you are both smart and well-informed enough to know better. Re-read your "civil war" post for a few clues.

[Forkboy]

126. The only thing surging is rampant stupidity

[MadHound]

129. Didn't hurt this big Green's feelings one bit

I was a DK backer, still am. But I realized early on that he wasn't going to be the nominee(and that's a shame, a man slightly to the right of FDR not getting the nod), that the DLC/New Dems already had a chosen one, and that once again the only true voice for progressive was being consigned to obscurity.

Hence being already disgusted by the spinelessness and corporate corruption so evident in the Dem party, it was an easy decision to go Green once the corporate coronation of Kerry was underway. What went on in these or other message board had no inluence at all on my decision, for my path was alread chosen long before the bombs started to fly in GD2004.

But I could see where you got this notion, and there very well could be some validity to it. But now that the nominee is all but seated upon his throne, it seems the grenadiers now have a new target at which to lob their missles, the people who are going Green/Nader/third party. And their going about their job with a zealousness not seen since pre-Iowa days. I guess having a new scapegoat to target has given them new vigor. That and seeing that nonDem progressives seem to be a legitimate target around here, and VOILA, the hate just starts to flow

But even that kind of hate doesn't bother me. It just proves my point on how utterly bankrupt the Democratic party is when it's members have to stoop to insult, fear, and bullying in order to get votes.

[molly]

131. Logical reasoning comes with maturity

it's kind of like kids in a sandbox.

[Forkboy]

140. and sometimes

it doesn't even show up then.

[mmonk]

143. I tend to agree Will Pitt

[bitchkitty]

148. I'm voting Democratic -

this time. Next time they'll have to earn it. And if I vote for Kerry, I fully expect to vomit afterwards.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

149. Spot On, Will

Although some of them might be pretending to claim that they're just "having fun" with it.

:eyes:

DTH

[Jen72]

153. I see that too.

nt

[mzmolly]

154. Actually if anything it has more to do with having opinions shoved down

our throats like a bad eggsalad sandwich.

[Guaranteed]

156. Nothing's changed. We voted on principle then, and we are now. nt

[mmonk]

165. I've noticed principle in the White House

[Guaranteed]

167. And Kerry and Edwards voted with it. nt

[mmonk]

168. my son didn't vote

so republicans could take away his 14th ammendment rights protection (he's disabled) by loading the courts. Actions have consequences no matter how noble the intentions. A protest vote isn't worth throwing his rights away (just my opinion).

[nuxvomica]

166. I voted third party once and regretted it soon after the election

Remember John Anderson? Boy, what a message that vote sent! I was ticked off at Carter cuz I believed everything I read in the press so I voted emotionally and wound up helping the Raygun get elected. I didn't even consider voting for Nader in 2000 cuz I'd been burned before, even though I agree with a lot he has to say.