Colbert, the Democrats are destroying themselves

[nadinbrzezinski]

He gets it, do you?

[moobu2]

1. Obama is fracturing the party, yeah we get that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. It's both of them, now get it?

And it is high time Dr Dean seats BOTH down and 'splains the facts of life for them

But the specter of '68 is back in fashion

[Diane R]

4. Say what? He's ahead. More money, more states, more delegates, more integrity. HRC should quit.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. As I wrote above, Dr Dean better ;splain the facts of life to both

since the last thing we need is a brokered convention, even if for observers, like me... this is entertaining, we cannot afford another 1968

[DemBones DemBones]

10. Dean is backing Obama. He doesn't care what happens

to the party.

[Spider Jerusalem]

13. Hillary can't win. SHE doesn't care what happens to the party, I suppose.

Overcoming Obama's delegate lead without massive victories which she won't get is a mathematical impossibility. You can't spin that. You can't make it go away. You may not LIKE it, but it is a FACT.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. I hope you've got evidence

that said, as an OBSERVER, whoever is the candidate I will hold my nose in November... they are both DLC and I could go on

That said, somebody, Dean, whoever, better splain the facts of life to BOTH and their partisans

By the way, you realize that '68 cost the Dems the white house for a generation.

Good

Want to repeat that, or better start facing the facts... they are BOTH doing it, and partisans don't help

[DemBones DemBones]

7. Yes, Obama is destroying the party.

And his wife has signed on by venting her rage because she and her husband had to pay back their college loans and don't have a trust fund.

Poor babies. They only earn over $1 million a year and live in a house that cost more than $1 million, with a vacant lot next door which was a gift from the Rezkos.

Obama supporter Rezko is now on trial in federal court, just what the Dems need.

[Gore1FL]

12. By mathematically winning the nomination?

[Jawja]

28. Yes. Obama is

fracturing the Party by challenging Hillary's RIGHT to the nomination by participating in the democratic process.

:sarcasm:

[TAWS]

2. Maybe he should be the compromise canidate

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. Now I must say this

Colbert's caricature of the right wing being sworn in would probably be FUNNY

Can you handle four years of the Word? And the SOTU could be watchable once again

:-)

[meow mix]

8. can we all just agree, that everyone is destroying everyone else.

its a split down the middle.. i dont see the purpose in finger pointing

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. Yep, but the comedian pointing it out

means more than one in the newsroom is thinking about Chicago and '68

Court Jesters speak openly of what most of us are afraid to speak off (well not all of us, but you know what I mean)

[Maccagirl]

9. Yes, I get it in spades

and unless we want to hand the reins of government to President John McCain the whole world will be blaming us for screwing it up again-and we will deserve everything we get.

[RandomKoolzip]

15. Democrats have divided themselves into two camps and each camp has

collectively tied their identities to one of two celebrity politicians. The ugliness brewing behind the identity politics battles of the 90s is coming to the fore in this decade in such a way that it threatens to tear apart any kind of unity we felt under, and against, Bush. We are fragmenting again without a fixed enemy against which to froth. In an effort to see the other camp's opponent defeated, much heated rhetoric has been pooted forth to make it seem as though the two candidates are at polar opposites of some ideological spectrum; this is not true: this is a war not of opposites, but of adjacents.

My goal is to see a Democrat take the White House again so that some ideals we ALL hold true become legislation. I am willing to bet either candidate will get us there, but only since McCain is such a weak contender. Both C and O seem compromised to me.

[DemBones DemBones]

18. "Gore on the second ballot at the convention"

may be our only hope, but without either Clinton or Obama on the ticket as VP.

[RandomKoolzip]

20. He ain't runnin'.

The actual Cult of Gore, to my eyes, is a much uglier bunch than the fictional Cult of Obama.

[murielm99]

22. Yours is the best post I have read all night (or morning). n/t

[ChairmanAgnostic]

29. I like ogling cute dems myself.

[merh]

16. I get it

but sadly, as can been seen by the posts in this thread, others don't and probably never will.

:(

[DemBones DemBones]

17. Yes, I get it. Hillary Clinton could have won easily in November

but a freshman senator decided in his first year in D.C. to run for president. He lies about his opposition to the war, so that people actually believe he voted against the IWR, when he wasn't in the Senate to vote on the IWR at all.

He has also voted for all funding bills to support the war and voted to renew the PATRIOT Act, and people still believe he's anti-war and pro-civil rights!

Hillary Clinton is not my favorite Democrat by any means but she beats the hell out of any Republican, and also beats the hell out of Obama.

Obama is a stalking horse for the GOP.

[Spider Jerusalem]

21. There's no way in hell Hillary Clinton 'could have won easily in November'.

Of all the potential Democratic candidates, she has the CONSISTENTLY highest negatives (around 45%). She might win blue states; she probably WOULDN'T win many others. Not to mention that, last time I checked, this was still the DEMOCRATIC Party. Not the Royalist Party. The candidate nomination process is NOT a coronation; the idea that Clinton should have automatically been the nominee is rather antithetical to democratic principles. If Clinton cannot win the nomination process of her own party, with all of her advantages, why is it reasonable to expect she would fare any better against a Republican challenger?

[nebula]

19. That's the BIG, MAJOR difference between Reps and Dems

Repubs are always unified, Dems are usually divided.

Which is why there's a serious need for a third major party in this country.
The Democratic party needs to split into two separate parties.

It simply is not possible to represent the diversity of viewpoints in America within the restrictive two party system. The two party system is undemocratic. I am sick and tired of having to choose between tweedle dee and tweedle dum.

[misanthrope]

23. I agree but the current system of election...

...does all it can to ensure a two-party system remains.

[LeftCoast]

24. You know, I like Colbert, but when I'm looking for political analysis

he's far from the 1st person I think of.

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. He and Jon are the court jesters, they will say that the rest

can't or wont

[cornermouse]

25. One little problem.

Real democracy means that people should get to vote for a candidate of their choice, not one picked for them by the first 3 or 4 states. I can think of no better way to discourage people from voting in the general election than telling them "Here's your candidate. Vote for him/her." without letting them actually take part in choosing him/her.

Unity is not everything.

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. Wont argue the real problems that US Democracy has

we can start with the fact that we have an electoral college, follow with the winner take all system (does not work quite that well in delegate counts for the Dems)

Refoirms we need... and don't expect to see them any time soon. NEITHER NATIONAL PARTY WOULD BENEFIT

1.- Proportional representation
2.- ONE national primary for ALL parties in the same day. End this shit about one state having them ahead of everybody else

3.- Stop closing the system to new parties

But for the moment, let's try to focus on a little historical fact, a highly contested primary ain't ever good for taking the WH. Usually you are left wondering what happened?

[skooooo]

26. Colbert was exaggerating and being silly about it..

He gets it, you don't.

It's not "tearing the party apart."

[Perry Logan]

27. It's just one of those things liberals like to say.

Like all groups of people, we liberals tend to say certain things over and over, whether they're true or not. These are peccadillos of the left.

We like to predict disaster for ourselves ("We're gonna get CREAMED in November!"), no matter how well things are going. You see this proclivity at DU every day.

We like to call our leaders cowards and weasels, especially when a vote doesn't go our way. Who knew passing legislation took such physical courage?

We like to tell one another not to get too overconfident or happy--because then the bad guys'll wipe us out.

And we like to say the Democrats are tearing themselves apart when they engage in any sort of political debate. These are among our favorite liberal memes. That's why Colbert's comment resonates with us.