But he can never win

[Az]

This seems to be the mantra of those who want to find the most electable candidate (win vs principal). Have we forgotten that these people have already proven they can win. They are elected officials. They have already shown they can win elections. Let the ideas they champion run so the people have some sort of choice.

[Jackpine Radical]

1. Differences of opinion about who's gonna win

is what makes horse races & primaries.

Personally I'm bettin' on Dean as a winner, but if Dennis sets some fires & gets the nomination, I'll not only vote, I'll work for him.

I guess I like Dennis' positions better than Dean's, but I'm used to being "too far left for my own good" & would generally be afraid that Dennis wouldn't have Dean's attractiveness to the uncommitted voter & he's more subject to attacks from the press. Also I heard Dennis at Bobfest in Baraboo last year & have to tell you that boy needs a speech coach and a voice trainer really badly.

[silverlib]

2. I agree

but I'm of the heart to support the candidate that most mirrors my views in the primaries and then support the the Democratic nominee. If I do that, then my voice is represented on the issues that matter most to me. I look at the primaries as the vote to support my heart and election day as the vote to support my party...The icing would be if I could vote my heart and my party, ANYBODY but Bush in 2004.

[CWebster]

3. You overlook the fact

that Kucinich doesn't have an appeal in the Democratic party outside of a limited demographic--how the hell is he going to win the entire country when even I--on the Left, won't even vote for him?

[whoYaCallinAlib]

4. You are so right, CWebster.

I get so frustrated with some members of this board who don't see that you have to win the swing voters in the middle to take a national election. If you are too far left or too far right, it's hard to get those swing votes.

Just because you are good at bashing Bush doesn't make you the darling of the middle.

[CWebster]

5. It's more than the swing voters--he won't get the

Democrats--he will get the Greens.

[Az]

7. Have you noticed voter turn out lately?

There are more than enough voters out there to sway the election if someone will just stand up and be a champion. Playing to the center plays to those who have not decided. Which means you have to maintain a condition of being undecided. This is no way to move forward.

Think of it this way. The center is like a bunch of people milling around doing nothing. They don't know if they want to go anywhere so they are willing to stand still. They get annoyed at people who tell them they have to move. If you play to this crowd you are playing to stagnation. The more you try to win using these people the more you will create candidates who really are these people You will create a stagnant do nothing centerist party.

Instead of telling them what they must do we need a candidate who can proclaim their ideas in such a way that they will want to move. The right is very able to overreach its ideals and the people follow. Gues what, thats what the center does is follow. By trying to follow them we become the happy little puppy tied to the end of the GOP train heading off to the right with the directionless in tow.

If we do not pull the center back from the right we are only helping the repukes. We need to make them understand why liberal is not a bad word. We need to remind them that it is We the People and not We the Incorporated. We need to show them that the government is theirs and not a tool of oppression. We need introduce to them the possibilities of the futures rather than fears of the future. We need to lead them instead of letting their apathy lead us.

[CWebster]

8. Someone is already

standing up and playing champion to a much wider audience -Dean. Is he perfect? No, but his disadvantages are assets in elections. There can be nothing but a fiscal conservative to follow up Bush. His position on guns is something I can accept. He is tough, decent, intelligent and practical.
It is not playing to the center.

They will crucify Kucinich on so many fronts. Tweety devoured him....Tweety.

Remember what happened in 2000 with the Nader run, for the love of christ, the risk is too great.

[Az]

10. Ask yourself this

How do we make someone like Kucinich winnable? Do you think the repukes thought Bush would be able to tear up Gore on the debate floor? Do you think they looked to him as an intellectual leader? Do you think he could have found Afghanastan on a map if it was clearly labeled? They made him winnable. They brought the people to him.

Its a question of tactics. The right takes a position and then repackages it to seduce the center. The left for some time now has been trying to become one with the center and they are losing their identity and the left for their troubles. We need to take a stand on the issues and then make the candidates winnable. Otherwise the right will simply play the same game and we will go sliding off into oblivion.

[indigo32]

13. But the leadership has to be the ones to do that

I'm a just a citizen who wants Bush out, and liberal issues forwarded...but first and foremost the first issue has to be addressed. I understand what your saying. We have a party leadership right now that isn't taking the reigns on this one and their gonna have to be the ones to do it. Best way to fix it will be to get more involved in the party I think. Which I am.

[Az]

The problem is the net result of the process

Here is what happens. Initially we the voters slide to the right to appeal to the centerist voters. We tell the leadership we need to woo these people. The leadership being one with us decide to head towards the center. Thus we get elected officials who have strengths more in the center. Then the next cycle comes along and now we have leaders who favor a more center or right policy. We again fear the power of the center so we let them tell us policy. Eventually we have leaders who no longer are playing at being center/right but in fact are center/right and are no longer interested in getting this party back to the left. Thus we become the washed out center party with no goals other than winning in name only. DINO.

[indigo32]

30. I have a problem with that theory

in that surely the progressive left is the most vocal of the Democratic Parties constituency. And yet at the moment we've got the DLC, yes I'm aware they aren't the DNC but they've got major players as members, screaming at us to shut up.

[CWebster]

14. It isn't his position on the issues

he is a weirdo for mainstream politics. Nader is more conventional in some ways.

I don't care for his swing on choice, just as I am uncomfortable with Kerry's war vote for political reasons. Maybe it is easier for men to dismiss.

Bush didn't win. He bullied his way in and Gore ran a horrendous campaign in the wake of Clinton when it was easy to demonize the Democrats---and then there was the third party threat... Ready for a repeat performance, this time with the Greens voting Dem in a contest where Kucinich MIGHT AS WELL BE GREEN.

[charlie]

6. I'm pretty nonplussed

that the argument you're using here and to Az in the other thread is exactly the same that I'm sure you've endured from "centrists", particularly the bit about this primary being too important to waste votes on sure losers. There's value in voting for a longshot even if unsuccessful -- it registers a headcount for the issues you wish to champion within the party.

[CWebster]

9. It is NOT a risk i am willing to take when

there is a viable alternative.

And if we lose or the nomination goes to Lieberman because of votes thrown at unlikely candidates, I will be breathing down your back like the anti-Nadar forces attack the Greens.

There is not the luxury of idealistic purity. In this election, we know what we are up against, and the vote is to oust them with the best shot we have. Don't allow our best to be lieberman, because it wil NEVER be Kucinich. Never.

[charlie]

11. Stunning

"Ideological purity"

"Nader"

"Greens"

Never thought I'd see the day the Dolstein-Jiacinto duo became the D-J-CWebster troika.

Dean will do fine, but no thanks to primary commissars like yourself.

[CWebster]

15. Maybe

i just think it is more important to win this time around, and I want to vote for the best of all possible choices--rather than settle for a more centrist sell-out.

If it makes you feel more superior by casting me with those you seem to view with disdain, so be it.

[charlie]

16. Superior?

No, just shocked at your adoption of their (and DLC) tactics. You just threatened me for having the temerity to consider voting for someone other than Dean in the primary.

Here, I can help you -- copy and paste these, they'll save you the trouble of typing 'til end of 2004:

A vote for anyone but Dean is a vote for Bush.

Greens gave us Bush.

[Dhalgren]

17. If progressive ideals

and liberal principles and the Democratic tradition cannot win elections - and being on the winning team is all you care about - sounds like you should vote for Bush.

[CWebster]

18. Maybe you should

since you ensure a greater liklihood of that coming to pass.

[Dhalgren]

20. Please step back and take a breath.

Flailing around, belittling other Democrats is not the way to unseat Bush. I will vote for the Democrat I choose in the primary, and then vote for the Democrat in the general election. No amount of hysterical blather from you or anyone else will change this sequence.

[CWebster]

29. excuse me, but am i allowed to argue a point

without your condescension?

Thanks.

[blindpig]

31. what demographic?

I'm a 49 yr old econazi pawnbroker in SC. Demograph that! DK's policy positions are the best I could ask for. He might not win the primaries but we can at least hope that he'll push the party in the right direction. Otherwise we're doomed in the long run.

[ShaneGR]

12. Big difference between Lakewood Ohio and national

Massive difference actually. Humungous.

[Nederland]

19. Kucinich can't Win

He can't win because he can't explain his sudden switch from an elected official with a consistent, 20 year long pro-life record to a die-hard pro-choice presidential candidate. For even the casual observer, it smacks of opportunistic politics. When pushed on the subject by Chris Matthews, his performance was truly sad. This single issue will make him suspect to a large contingent of Democrats and untrustworthy to a majority of Americans who will wonder what issue he will flip-flop on once in office.

[Dhalgren]

22. If he can't win, why do you care?

I am very sure that there are seven or eight Democratic candidates that "cannot win", but if someone else supports them, fine, let's vote and see how it shakes out. We need to stop doing the RNC's work for them. The terms "Democrat" and "can't win" should never be in the same sentence on this forum. Just mho.

[Nederland]

25. Here's Why

If he can't win, why do you care?

I care because the longer it takes to settle on a nominee the worse off the party will be, regardless of who that nominee is. The longer it takes to win the nomination, the less money that candidate will have. The longer it takes to win the nomination, the longer we have news clips of Democrats bashing Democrats on TV. No, I'm not pushing for a coronation. I'd just like to weed out the obvious losers as soon as possible. Kuncinich is one of them.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

24. I saw Kucinich on Hardball

I saw Kucinich on Hardball and he was not very impressive. Was Mathews as tough on him as the press should be on everyone? Yes. Does that make this less troubling? No.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

27. I saw Kucinich on Hardball

I saw Kucinich on Hardball and he was not very impressive. Was Mathews as tough on him as the press should be on everyone? Yes. Does that make this less troubling? No.

[styersc]

21. George McGovern had been elected, Mondale had been elected,

Dukakis had been elected.

On the other hand- Kerry has been elected several times. you may have something. Based upon your argument- I support Kerry (or is the fact that he is the most electable of the candidates count against him).

[Feanorcurufinwe]

23. I love the ignore function

I love the ignore function. There are only two people on ignore but I think I have increased my lifespan a year or two by not having to read their BS. Can you guess which one posted in this thread?

[THUNDER HANDS]

26. isn't that what they're doing now?

At this point in time, everyone who's donating money to candidates knows who they all are and who looks like the legit candidates.

The Top Tier (IMO) is:

1. Kerry
2. Dean
3. Lieberman

The Middle Tier (IMO) is:

4. Edwards
5. Gephardt
6. Graham

The Lower Tier (IMO) is:

7. Kucinich
8. Sharpton
9. Braun

The last three are the least qualified to be president, that's why they're the lower tier candidates. Not because two of them are black and one's an ultra-liberal.

When one says "he can't win" about Kucinich, they're just being honest. Kucinich hasn't done anything deserving of the presidency, and neither has anyone in that lower tier - nor John Edwards for that matter.

[jus_the_facts]

28. NObody will win but the (*)

.....that's how it's been set up AGAIN...hope like hell I'm proven wrong but I seriously doubt it...so all this blowin' sunshine up each others asses about who can beat these fuckers is just that...all conjecture....my cynicism will never allow me to have any hope....there's been NOTHING to show that anything we discuss here in regards to all this BS that's gone on and is going on makes one bit of difference in changing ANYTHING....so why even bother getting any hopes up? It's just going to make it all the worse when it's proven we are wrong...just like last November...remember? I refuse to allow myself to have delusions of grandeur about it all...gotta keep expecting the worst cuz that's all that's been blown up my ass for the last 3 years....sad but fuckin' true :evilfrown: