How uninformed are the Dems around you?

[LittleClarkie]

I just got back from a Dem breakfast with a few of the county people in my area. Last month, I corrected one of the women who said that she was afraid that the Abramoff scandal would spill onto the Dems. "No Dem took money from Abramoff" I told her. She thanked me for the info.

This month, same woman says that she's worried about Reid having taken Abramoff money. "No, that was the tribes Abramoff represents, not the man himself." She answers back, "But there was a vote that supposedly took place after he took this money." I pointed out that 1. Reid also represents Las Vegas and so would be looking out for them as well as the tribes and 2. I didn't think Reid had voted the way the tribes wanted, depending on the vote she was talking about. She didn't know how Reid had voted and admitted that wasn't in the story she saw.

She also said something about how she didn't like our last candidate much because he'd never sponsored any legislation. Now, y'all know me. How do you think I reacted to that one? I told her that was horsehockey (literally), told her about the Randall Cunningham Act he just proposed, and also mentioned Iran Contra, something she didn't know about. A Democrat who didn't know enough about our last candidate to campaign properly for him. Thrillsville.

I chastised her and told her not to listen to the right wing media. I don't think she liked someone several years her junior lecturing her, but there you have it.

Do you have problems like this with your local folks knowing stuff they should?

Oh, and I handed out a copy of Feingold's Patriot Act press release, with telephone numbers to call Senators. So hopefully they will use it.

[Pacifist Patriot]

1. Very. It's maddening!

[saltpoint]

2. Hi, LC. Informed & unified bunch in my circle -- although preference for

one candidate over others might be enough to produce a bit of a tangled primary season.

Still, it's a great blend of pro-Democrat and anti-Bush sentitments.

Unless we nominate Joe Lieberman and Zell Miller as our ticket, the votes in my address book are all blue.

There's some sense that the Abramoff scandal could touch higher-up Republicans, but a sense that the scandal is all-GOP.

[LittleClarkie]

7. Oh, they're all blue

Just somewhat uninformed. The one I was speaking to liked Howard Dean and said we should have picked him for 2004. But now she likes Hillary for 2008. What a combination. She thinks Hillary will be tough enough. I said her war stance would be a problem. She said Hillary was probably waiting for the death count to be higher to say anything. Oh, yeah, good plan. (blech)

On the plus side, she's met the liaison that was hired because of Dean. It's good to hear about grassroots activity here. But otherwise she makes me kinda nuts.

[saltpoint]

13. She thinks Sen. Clinton is waiting for the death count to rise?

Good god almighty, how high does it have to BE?!

'1' is too many.

Well, LC, if you are involved in grassroots politics where you are, then I feel that your clarity will prevail over some of your colleagues.

Carry on and continue to kick butt.

[LittleClarkie]

16. That's one of the ideas for the breakfast

For a bunch of Dems in a very red area to get together and get to know each other, so that when it comes to organizing, we'll already have a foundation.

[Faygo Kid]

3. Be kind. Remember, they are on our side.

I am a news junkie. Maybe too much so. I find the situations you describe frustrating, but not as mind-boggling as those who still support Bush, down the line, and nothing shakes their faith or ever will. I figure that's about one-third of the populace - a frighteningly huge number who would acquiesce in a dictatorship.

[LittleClarkie]

14. One of the people at the breakfast was embarrassed

because she watches BookTV on CSPAN. I answered "That's nothing. I sit and watch Senators vote. How sad is THAT?"

[Faygo Kid]

17. I like Book TV on CSpan, too.

I watch the results of the vote, if not the actual voting (got to draw the line somewhere!). It's not sad at all. If everyone was as informed as you, we would not have The Madness of King George.

[Greyhound]

24. If it's only 1/3 I'll be less worried. Here's hoping.

:beer:

[acmavm]

4. The dems around here think that Ben Nelson is a dem. That's so

uninformed as to be braindead.

[blm]

5. Most od the Dem spokepeople on TV knew nothing about Kerry's record

as the senator who uncovered more government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history.

Our DNC and Dem pundits had been schooled in defending Bill Clinton, his record and his problems - THAT'S IT. They knew little of ANY OTHER DEMOCRAT and their positions and their campaigns. They acted like know-it-alls but knew little to nothing about any serious aspect of the campaigns.

Thank undergod we have a fresh start with Dean. The old Clintonites kept operating under the illusion that the media was the same in 2000 and 2004 as it was in 1992 when Clinton won.

[Joanne98]

My Dem group is so clueless they're supporting Sherrod Brown!

I'm supporting Hackett. I'm tired of having to spend half my energy fighting DEMS!

[LittleClarkie]

10. But isn't Brown a pretty good progressive?

I've met several over at DailyKos who think he's a better progressive than Hackett.

Eh, I don't mind primary battles. How else will we de-DINO ourselves, anyway.

[OzarkDem]

11. Sherrod is worth supporting

He's one of the few Dems in Congress who actually stays on top of the issues.

I've become disillusioned with Hackett. While I think he has a good future, he's really green. I was shocked to learn that he was a Repub for most of his adult life, didn't vote for Clinton and supported Ross Perot. Yikes, he has a lot to learn. I'm glad to have him in the party, but I'm not sure he's ready to represent me in the US Senate. Who knows what he'll change his mind and support next time.

[LittleClarkie]

12. I suspect alot of our "Fighting Dems" and band of brother

candidates are former Republicans. The war turned several, I think.

[OzarkDem]

15. Perot supporter

That's different from being a former Repub.

As I said, I don't have a problem with it as a fellow Dem, I don't think its so good for someone who is running for Senate who has no political experience. That's two strikes against him.

I still think he should have run again for the OH-2 Congressional seat.

[sandnsea]

20. Why fight them??

Why can't you both just support who you believe in. That's why I quit going to local Dem groups, sick to death of people ripping each other apart. They're both good Democrats, we're lucky to have them both on our side.

[AtomicKitten]

6. The company I keep are very well informed.

From Greens to moderates.

It is John Q. Public (not the DU'er :)) that is woefully mis/uninformed thanks to our crap media.

[napi21]

8. VERY uninformed! I do my best, and I constantly send emails

and explain to them as much as I can, but I get sooo discouraged!

I had some guests stay here during the holidays, and I asked if they ever heard of PNAC? NO! They actually asked me "Why I think the US hasn't been attacked since 2001?" AArrrggggghh!!

I never let them know I'm discouraged,a nd I take the time to explain every situation, and even print copies of documents from reliable news sources, or email them to people, but it's astounding how much people don't know!

The guests I referred to are very preoccupied with other thigs. He is a pancreas transplant patient who is also blind, and he aging parents require both him & his wife to do a tremendous amount of different things. Thank God, they are both strong Dems, but it scares me, if they don't know about any of this stuff, what about everybody else????

[OzarkDem]

9. We have it too

It tends to be worse among Dems who rely only on the mainstream news media for their information. They believe whatever they're told and our party has done a shitty job of communicating with our own people.

[laheina]

18. One of the folks at our county group put together a mailing list

and one of the ladies, who is quite progressive, seems to spend a lot of her day sending out email that she receives from progressive organizations and news articles. They just set it up through yahoo.

It doesn't seem like it would be hard, and it's a great way to keep interested people informed.

[sandnsea]

19. No, it's DU LIVE!!

Which is a whole other kettle of fish. I honestly can't take it anymore and will just wait until fall to do election campaigning. They can rip each other apart until then. At least you have people willing to listen.

[LittleClarkie]

21. They don't fight, luckily

but since we're all in a very Red area, some of them would be called by DU, and have been called when I describe them, DLCers, or at least centrist. The one who liked Dean now likes Hillary, so that's weird. We're just in the phase of trying to figure out where else to get our news. I get mine on line. Some of them get it on cable. Others go to the internet, and those are probably the more progressive folks. We just building the beginnings of an organization for a party that people used to joke could meet in a phone booth in our county.

But there isn't much strife, so that's good.

[sandnsea]

22. We divided into work groups

Chose like 6 key issues that are important at the state and national level. The leader of each group is responsible for bringing news back to each meeting. They're all pretty good at bringing internet info back to the group, even alerts and good newsletters, although I usually have gotten it through DU quite a while before. But maybe if you had some of that, more people would be getting news from wider sources which would help kick some into reality.

Then you can start the infighting, hehe!

[Katherine Brengle]

23. Most AMERICANS are uninformed--it is not particular to either party...

While conservatives seem to be less informed than liberals, we are basing that conclusion upon what they believe, rather than what they know about the political system.

When it comes to knowing who your representatives are, what they have done in office, what is going on within the party structure, most Americans have no idea.

Many Americans can't name all of their Congressional reps--I would bet a vast majority of Americans can't name ONE state senator.

Those of us who spend a great deal of time talking about this stuff have a hard time understanding that most poeple just don't bother with it. This is a problem and we need to do the best we can to educate others without making them feel inferior--remember, there was a time when we didn't know all of this either.

[blm]

25. That's odd.

I really think those people who claim they understood Vietnam and yet knew nothing about IranContra, BCCI or CIA drugrunning showed themselves to be under-informed.

[Kurovski]

26. Kick(nt)

[demgurl]

27. I don't have many Dems around me, but

they stay informed through my rants. If it was not for me ranting and raving about their exploits I am not sure how much any of them would know.

[LittleClarkie]

29. Someone I thought was starting to get it

has gone back to his pre-election state, and was on my case last night for making sound, as he perceived, that the Republicans were evil and the Democrats were wonderful.

It's funny about this guy. I spend alot of time listening, and not alot talking when we're together. Politics is one of the things I will open my mouth about when it comes up. He reckons we shouldn't talk about it, however, as he thinks we don't get along during those conversations. I, on the other hand, don't get to talk much in or conversations otherwise, so I don't think he's used to me trying to talk over his usual interruptions. He has a tendancy to answer for me anyway. One of those "Do you know about such and such... no I didn't think so" before I can open my mouth. I ask him then if he'd like me to leave so he can continue this conversation with himself, but he doesn't often understand what I mean.

He says I get a tone in my voice when talking about Republicans. Maddenly, he either says he hates politics, avoids hearing anything about politics, but then seems to have an opinion on several subjects anyway. He's upset that Soc. Sec. might not be there for him, thinks personal accounts might be better than Soc. Sec., and wouldn't listen when I said that perhaps personal accounts might not be a spiffy as the Republicans were making them out to be. He thinks Bush One should have "finished the job" in Iraq and gotten Saddam, but then also seems to be against the war in Iraq now. He thinks "a majority" of Muslims are protesting and that this shows that they are not a peaceful people. He thinks religion causes much of the problems in the world, and without it, people wouldn't have much to fight about (sort of a John Lennon view). I suspect human beings would find something else. (I love John Lennon, but finding peace isn't as simple as erasing things to be mad about).

He was a Naderite, but didn't get a chance to vote in 2000. He likes Michael Moore, but seems to have slipped away from believing alot of what he saw in Farenheit 9/11. He told me in 2004 he hated Bush and wanted to vote for Kerry, but never actually got registered to vote. He lives in a black area, and I suspect that they are understaffed and undersupplied with machines from what he tells me (sound familiar?) He used to chuckle when someone called Bush a Nazi. Now he doesn't seem to feel the same. He still thinks Bush is an idiot, but he doesn't think either side is any good. Maybe he's just reverting to his Naderite status. I dunno. It was an upsetting conversation. I don't do face to face conflict well. About half way through our discussion I was misspeaking and having trouble thinking of things to say, which is what happens to me understress.

What does this have to do with my subject? Well, how can someone who hates poltics and avoids it like the plague, isn't registered to vote and hasn't voted in 20 years treat me like I'm the one who doesn't know what she's talking about.

He's also my ex-boyfriend. Can you tell. I guess it upset me because I thought he was with me against Bush, but 2 years seem to have deadened his feelings. And he made me feel like I was the one who was wrong, who was too extreme. But then I'm not sure how he even thinks he knows what I believe, since as I said, I don't get to talk much in our conversations.

Maybe he's right and we need to avoid the subject.

Sorry about the rant, guys. I've been upset about this most of the day, and just had to get it out. Damn, just when you think you have someone on your side...

[Lorien]

28. I talked to one last weekend who called Cindy Sheehan a "nut"

This woman claims to be a liberal, but she said that it pisses her off that Cindy makes people feel like "what our soldiers are doing over there is wrong or something. It's wrong to make them feel like being there is wrong". Er, OK, but then I asked her to explain how "patriotic" it is to send a soldier into a conflict that isn't necessary, that was based on lies. She couldn't really answer that.

She also went off about "political correctness" and said that she is fine with others calling her a "dyke" (she's a lesbian) because she thinks all the "correctness" out there is even more offensive. I told her that what she calls correctness, I simply call good manners, and that was the end of that conversation.

[LittleClarkie]

30. I get the feeling many folks just don't think that deeply about it

when they can't explain their line of thinking exactly. I just ranted about a friend down thread who doesn't like the Iraq War, but thinks most Muslims are protesting those cartoons, and that Bush One should have finished the job in the first Gulf War. Well, if he feels that, then why does he hate the current war? He should be all for it.

I wouldn't mind some uninformed people if they didn't state their semi-opinions with such force, as if you were the one with the problem instead of them.