Democrats for Bush?

[noiretextatique]

They are a far greater threat to Kerry than the 5 percenters. Does anyone know if there is an effort underway to get these folks to vote for their (stated) party's candidate? Let's call them "Zell Miller" Democrats, for purposes of this discussion.
Funny...I haven't seen a single post imploring this group to vote Democratic. Are they selfish? Egomaniacs? Naive? Brainwashed? Or, perhaps they just want Bush to win :eyes: or maybe they're out to "destroy the democratic party" :shrug:

[lancdem]

1. Are there that many?

Some of them might be pro-life and vote for Bush because of that.

[TexasProgresive]

30. How could anyone vote for* as prolife

he leaves a wake of death and destruction wherever he goes

[ibegurpard]

2. Here's the problem

that would cause too much self-examination and willingness to acknowledge that the Democratic Party has many INTERNAL problems that are causing people to abandon it. Much easier to blame Nader. Much easier as a Democratic Party bigwig to ENCOURAGE people to blame Nader. Then they don't have to address any of the internal problems.

[drdtroit]

6. Here's the solutuion

We need to exterminate and scorch before we can begin replanting and renovation. BUSH MUST LOSE!

[mzmolly]

17. A-Men!

:hi:

[noiretextatique]

20. couldn't agree with you more

just offering another group for some to implore to vote for kerry.

[noiretextatique]

13. bingo

or they excuse them away, e.g., "those people never vote democratic."
which begs the question...why continue to court their votes?

[Frances]

14. So will Nader cause so many internal problems within the

Green Party that it dies?

[knight_of_the_star]

43. Green Party isn't running Nader

They don't want him this time around.

[Redleg]

33. Any Democrat who would vote for Bush is no Democrat.

Period.

[drdtroit]

3. Perhaps as usual

They are only figments of an administration propoganda machine.

[noiretextatique]

11. in fact: they are not...they are mostly southerners

and mostly white.

[cookiebear]

4. I don't know any.

I really don't. The only people I know voting for Bush have always been extremely conservative and kind of ... strange. Sad.

[mzmolly]

5. I'd be the first one to start a thread if I thought these people posted

here. ;)

Are they selfish? Egomaniacs? Naive? Brainwashed? Or, perhaps they just want Bush to win ... or maybe they're out to "destroy the democratic party"

Well if they vote for Boosh, I'd say all of the above are true. :shrug:

Here is their blog.

http://democrats.bushblog.us/

They're not real busy though. The last entry was on: Friday, March 26, 2004 ;)

Here is another site, I think they've got about two members. Ed Koch and Zell Miller :P

http://democrats4bush.com/

Let's keep in mind: Many Repugs register as Dems so they can vote in the Primaries, thus the polls showing the number of Dems voted for Bush are not really very accurate.

[noiretextatique]

9. 2000 election statistics prove their numbers are significant

who knows...there might be some here. of course, i know these folks are DINOS.

[drdtroit]

15. And totally AMORAL!

[mzmolly]

16. Yes, but it misses the point that many registered Dems are not really

Dems. Sorry if my post was confusing. See the post about Alabama for example ;)

Or perhaps I missed your point about DINOS. LOL

[noiretextatique]

18. yes, they are DINOS, but greens and independents aren't

even democrats. as someone else mentioned, it seems there is more than just one rift in the party.

[mzmolly]

24. Neither are the DINO's

:shrug:

[noiretextatique]

25. DINOS are registered democrats, they run as democrats

they are elected as democrats...zell miller and denise majette are but two examples. sure...they love republicans, and probably long to be republicans...i don't argue that. but they are DEMOCRATS, if only in name only.

[mzmolly]

29. Right, and post #7 explained some of the reasoning. Also as I said

many R's register as Dems so they can effect the primaries. They are no more Dem than Bush is.

Their are indes that vote Dem or R, and R's that will vote for Kerry. That's the way it is every election year.

However, there are several polls showing Nader could have a major impact on the outcome of this election regardless. His competetor in the GP is running a safe state strategy. Nader of course, is not.

Also, I thought I had something in common with Nader supporters here. I sort of feel like were all coming from the same place. That place being, "Bush is a dangerous facist who is ruinous to this planet and is killing people" frankly.

"Well, he's certainly better than Bush. . . He's got a lot of good in him, but there's got to be a lot of good citizens on his back to push him." ~ RALPH NADER

And as Jim Hightower has said:

"But all of that aside, now we face the reality of an Administration that is absolutely nutty. There's that old country song, "It felt so good when it stopped hurting." So we've got to stop the pain. But in doing so, we should not fool ourselves that we have gained some progressive victory. What we will have done is to get us back to a ground level where we can build again for a progressive victory that is several years down the road."
- November, 2003 ~ JIM HIGHTOWER

[noiretextatique]

35. for whatever reasons, democrats will vote for bush

this thread is commenting on the fact that there doesn't seem to be as much attention paid to them as to greens, independents, and so on. yet...we all know the so-called "centrist" strategy is designed in part to appeal to these folks...the people who seems to vote republican anyway :shrug: in the short term, it's clear the goal must be to oust bush, inc, and unlike some here, i have been voting for the lesser of two evils since i started voting some 25 years ago. so, i don't need anyone to remind me, cajole me, implore me, or otherwise annoy me about who i should vote for. being black in this country makes things REALLY clear...for most of us anyway. perhaps that's why african-americans are more of the most consistently loyal of democratic constiuencies...the alternative for us is the party of trent lott, among others.
i am commenting on HYPOCRISY in this thread, and i am commenting on how the left is so often called to task, while the centrists and the rw are given a pass...one of the consequences of the successful demonization of the left by the rw. in my view, that is something we need to address as progressives and liberals...and in my view, that is a part of what's happening with the nader phenonmenon.
do dixiecrats, DINOs, conservatives, etc have the same moral obligation to stop these madmen as do liberals and progresssives moderates and centrists? of course they do.

[mzmolly]

46. I understand, but DU is not the place to reach Bush voters. Believe

me I try to reach them too. :hi:

Further, there are plenty of anti-Bush threads here, but it seems people feel compelled to defend Nader, that I don't understand.

Should we stop criticizing Bush for fear we'll alienate his supporters and turn them off to Dems. NO. We have the right/obligation to examine everyone running for President.

I should also point out that NO ONE has been more examined her then John Kerry.

[noiretextatique]

48. that doesn't apply to kerry, does it?

:D i know you are reasonable, but criticism of kerry here is usually equated with "bashing," whether it is constructive or not. i welcome any thoughtful discussion about nader...please tell me when one happens here.
even when he criticizes bush, some people find fault with that. i truly doubt their will be any changes of heart or mind with deep political analysis of "nader is an asshole" variety.
i do defend nader, for three reasons.
one...he is not disenfranchising people in order to win (like republicans)
two...he brings up issues that neither of the big two do
three...in a participatory democracy, even the "good guys" need to accept competition, even in the worst of times.
otherwise, as so many here were so fond of saying when people spoke the truth about ronald reagan's record, we are no better than them.
imagine if the republicans felt that kerry should drop out of the race and the implored and threatened him to do so at every turn...oh wait, they did that: with gore. never mind.

[mzmolly]

49. Bashing is what were being accused of in regard to Nader though.

Hell yeah I've *bashed* Nader, and I've bashed Bush and I've even bashed Kerry. ;)

I've also been called a Neocon, a sheep, a dlc shill for defending JK on occassion. :eyes:

It's hard to have a thoughtful discussion around here period N. Especially on Nader as he is full of venomous accusations himself.:P

Now if we want to have a thoughtful discussion about David Cobb, I'll be glad to parttake as he appears a thoughtful candidate.

I will always try my damdest to respect the Nader supporters I befriend here and IRL. But, I am certain I fail at times.

Further, I have no intention of quelling my questioning of Mr. Nader here. And, I am certain anyone who supports him will feel free to question Mr. Kerry. :shrug:

Peace - off to work, where I can sit on my ass and read DU pretty much all night. YEAH! :hi:

[noiretextatique]

50. no problem with you, my dear

i respect your equal-opportunity approach...one i share. david cobb would get no more of a chance here than nader...and i think YOU know that. the issue here is much deeper than just nader...who i have no problem with at all, btw. i can't recall who said this, but someone said: if the republicans hadn't been allowed to steal the election, nader not be considered the pariah he is now. as to who did the allowing...if it happens again in 2008, perhaps we will finally figure that out.
have fun at work...i should start working myself :hi:

[mzmolly]

52. Thanks, right back atcha!

:hi:

Have fun *working* ;) I know I will. :boring:

[Frances]

7. I grew up in Alabama

when almost all people were Democrats

Once blacks got the right to vote, they voted Dem. So whites began voting Republican. Not all of them changed their party registration.

A relative just returned from South Alabama where the mayor, a white man, is a registered Dem. The mayor told my relative that he's really a Republican. It's just that there are more blacks than whites in town and the blacks wouldn't vote for him if he told them that he doesn't really vote Democratic.

And yes I think the mayor would like to see the Dem party destroyed.

[noiretextatique]

12. i agree, frances

thanks for sharing your story.

[Mnemosyne]

28. I was living in Alabama a few years ago..

and seems that a few of the elected democrats love to change party after elected.

[Blecht]

36. Frances nails it

They're bigots!
End of story.

Tradition had them being Democrats, and when the party embraced African Americans, they went to the other side in all ways but forgot to change their party affiliation.

[wtmusic]

8. They're a "lure" group

Nothing to them. Republicans for Kerry will have a far greater impact. Much more likely to pull centrists away from Bush.

[lgardengate]

10. Miller started the group.

I think they are mostly in the south and all are conservative Dems.

[gibbyman]

21. the Link republican for kerry

http://www.republicansforkerry.org/ the

[noiretextatique]

23. thanks for posting this: "republicans for kerry"

it's most definitely needed to counter some of the nader hysteria here

[ulysses]

19. what's always amused me

is that no matter how much Our Fuckwit Zell backed every Bush proposal that came down the pike, no one (outside the left) ever said "boo" about him or denied that he was a Democrat until he *officially* endorsed the Boy King. Up to that point, he was quite the darling of the centrists, and if he'd put out A National Party No More without endorsing Bush, the DLC would be loudly singing his praises today.

[noiretextatique]

22. ahem...i couldn't agree more

i wonder if majette has joined her mentor...yet :hi:

[OKNancy]

26. You do know that Majette is the most liberal member

of the Georgia delegation don't you? You may not like her, but she votes 100% liberal. Even better than Lewis.

[noiretextatique]

32. yeah, and zell miller is her mentor

and she voted for alan keyes. maybe she's had an awakening, or maybe georgia politicians aren't exactly "liberal."

[OKNancy]

37. Voting record

Her voting record is exactly the same as Maxine Waters ( I'm sure she is considered liberal), that is, 100% correct according to ADA.

[noiretextatique]

38. a link would be helpful

thanks.

[OKNancy]

40. I assumed

Everyone knew how to find Americans for Democratic Action.
http://www.adaction.org/2003housevr.htm

[noiretextatique]

44. incorrect assumption

they do post a disclaimer about their method of ranking, but majette's voting record is decent. thanks for the link.

[GreenInNC]

27. in 2000

In the 2000 election it is estimated that 7.7 million Democrats voted for Bush

[Cascadian]

31. Check this link out!

They DO exist!


http://democrats.bushblog.us/



John

[2Design]

34. if they are for Bush they are NOT democrats....there is not

a single person who believes in Democratic values who would be for Bush.....NO way....NOT

[noiretextatique]

39. actuatlly, they are democrats

they may be DINOs, but unlike greens and independents, they are actually members of the democratic party.

[2Design]

53. they may say they are members of the democratic party but they are

NOT democrats...and should be voted out of office...or we need a new democrat to go up against these rethugs...in dem clothing...

[robbedvoter]

41. "Democrats for Coleman" "Democrats foe Bloomberg" - old GOP trick

I know credibility means nothing to you, but this one is beyond funny. How is Ralfie these days?

[noiretextatique]

45. democrats voted for bush in 2000

democrats will vote for bush in 2004, and democrats voted for ronald reagan in 1980 and 1984. zell miller is the standard bearer for "democrats for bush." yeah...it's funny so many democrats make excuses for their own party members voting against their candiadates...really funny.
for probably the millionth time since i've posted here, i voted for gore, boxer and lee in california, and governor davis. i will likely vote for kerry as well :eyes:

[genius]

42. I can't believe any Democrat could vote for Bush.

[West Coast Democrat]

47. Somehow I don't think these so-called "Democrats".......

would have voted for any Democratic candidate. It's as though they are living in some sort of Southern time warp. So I'm not too concerned.

[noiretextatique]

51. in sum: democrats aren't really democrats

and therefore we shouldn't worry about the ones who will vote for bush (they aren't *really* democrats), but greens, independents and others should vote for a democrat...and if they don't, they are selfish, egotistical, immature, unrealistic, and on, even though they aren't *really* democrats either. furthermore, it's prefectly fine to implore people who aren't democrats to vote for a democrat, but utterly ridiculous to implore people who are democrats (aside from those invented by republican trickery) to vote for a democrat.
i think i've got it now...thanks.