There is a lot of work to be done for the Democratic Party...

[jrtruth1]

The first job is to look at what went wrong and to change things. DUAMM made some excellent points (link below). I'm a Democrat who lives in California. I saw first hand what happens when you let your message get distorted. We now have a Governor named 'Arnold'... do you want a President 'Arnold'?

The worst thing you can do politically is turn people off. We need to really think about what our association with people such as Michael Moore has done to the party and to progressive politics.

I'm not asking that we "dump our principles". I'm asking that we get smart and think about how we can win elections.

http://www.duamm.blogspot.com/

It is time that we, as Democrats, start getting it. A good portion of this country is populated with plain, simple, conservative folks. And while that doesn't mean that we need to cater our ideology to them, we do need to be much more careful about the manner of our presentation. While it is our duty to express our position on any war, we simply cannot embrace adolescent personalities like Michael Moore. When we do, we immediately turn off a large segment of the American public who would much rather ally themselves with a simple, religious man like Bush than a fringe character like Michael Moore.

Let's face it, Americans don't usually vote on the complexity of issues; rather, they vote with their gut and for the candidate whom they sense is most like them. Take one look at Michael Moore and ask yourself if he will ever resonate with the church-going blue collar workers of America. For many of those people, it was he they were voting against, not John Kerry. And that, we contend, was the impetus of conservative resurgence late this summer and the margin of victory in this election.

For those who doubt our position, consider the state of America since Bush took office. Our economy is down considerably. Our standing in the world has been irreparably damaged. We fought a war on a faulty premise and failed to secure the peace. And Bush's approval rating had dipped below 50% shortly before the election. Now consider this: Bush won.

Once again, thanks to everyone who supported our cause. We are proud to have contributed to the democratic process.

God bless America!

Democrats United Against Michael Moore.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[NVMojo]

1. I'd rather follow Michael Moore than anyone in the State Dem Party

cuz all they do is fight for power among themselves while the Repukes take over every aspect of this state.

[Crunchy Frog]

12. Me too. n/t

[nascarblue]

52. I second that, A big mistake to alienate Hollywood. That's exactly...

...why the Republicans have been attacking Hollywood so much. Because its the last forum we have to show people the truth in a way that everyone can understand. Documentaries are powerful. Truth be told, if it wasn't for Michael Moore, Kerry would have gotten completely blown out of the water.

People in the US have such short memories. Don't you remember how much impact Fahrenheit had on millions of people and mobilized the base?. It would be a HUGE mistake to disassociate from these people. And yet, on a Democratic Party review panel on C-Span, one of the strategists said "We have to get away from people like Michael Moore." This isn't smart. As a matter of fact, I was shocked at how out of touch these advisor guys were... Two of them were campaign advisor's on the Kerry campaign. Chad Clanton and Jim Jordan. (see my other post) If anything the candidate should refrain from all the schmoozing with stars. He would still get all the support from guys like Springsteen, Pearl Jam, etc. He doesn't need to be on stage with them every week. That was Kerrys fault.


These guys were worthless. I strongly suggest you guys go to C-Span and look for the video for the Democratic panels that aired on C-Span tonight. You will be disgusted that this was the best they could come up with. The DNC and the DLC are in seriously bad shape!

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

2. Yeah, it's all Mike's fault...

For telling the truth.

Yawn. It's a simplistic and trite attack.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

3. "Democrats United Against Michael Moore"?

:eyes:

Yeah, right.

The Democratic Party chose him as their official spokesman--NOT.

The Democratic Party has the right to tell an independent film maker to shut up--NOT.

DUers should care what some milquetoast Democrats (or people posing as milquetoast Democrats) think about anyone in the movie industry--NOT.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. hmmm... so we have to compromise

and move furhter to the right... yep right... next thing you know you will be a dying party (hold it, the DLC is leading the DNC that direction) and you wil ask... WHY?

By the way, you have a minor point, think FRAMES and FRAMING THE ISSUE

[illflem]

7. Required reading

How Democrat Brian Schweitzer freed red as they get Montana from decades of rep control and got elected governor carrying with him several other Democrats into state government. Read about his excellent strategy here
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0412.sirota.html

[Radical Activist]

5. Sorry but I'm not going to listen to someone from California

tell me why we lost votes among "simple" people in the heartland. There's a reason Michael Moore was so demonized by the right and labeled fringe. It was because Republicans who saw his movie changed their mind and decided to vote against Bush. Moore had to be destroyed because the GOP was scared to death of him. Democrats who fail to defend Moore are playing along with the Republican game. If John Kerry had the guts to say half the truths that Moore points out in his movies we would have a new President-elect today.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. If the election was clean, we wouol be seeing Kerry

as president.

It does not matter who votes, but who counts them... and Karl loves that saying, applies here to a T

[PassingFair]

10. For once!

I totally agree with you!

[nascarblue]

53. I couldn't have said it better

[salin]

6. what a joke

michael savage and rush limbaugh can peddle their hate daily...

but lest we say anything that suggests that we agree with the work michael moore has produced that raises questions about the bushco agenda... oh my... bad democrats.

but the drugs of rush aren't a problem...

the obscene gambling of bill bennet isn't a problem...

the womanizing and multiple marraiges of countless repub office holders.. topped by Rudy Guiliani moving his mistress into the Mayors mansion... not a probem...

the graft and using taxpayers dollars for corporate benefits that go right back to one's own family... not a problem for Phil Gramm who is being considered for Secretary of the Treasury...

All of those foibles and flaws can be overlooked - but NOT the style of Michael Moore (whose messages have generally been on the mark...so style appears to be the issue here).

Sorry, not buying. Seriously doubt that this effort is even being pushed by a democrat, let alone one who cares about the future of the party - if so they would have likely taken on something that moves us forward rather than can be used to create ridicule (e.g., "see, even on their own side they don't like/believe him...")

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

9. Good luck with that.

:eyes:

[Crunchy Frog]

11. First of all, Michael Moore is an independent voice

and is not in any way a spokesman for the Democratic party. Secondly, he is not anywhere near as radical as the "personalities" embraced by the Repuke party, such as Limbaugh, Savage, and Coulter. If people can listen to them and not be turned off the Repukes, but suddenly find themselves getting the vapors when faced with Michael Moore, then that's just an indication of what a sick society this is.

Thirdly, what exactly do you propose the Democratic party do about MM, since he isn't its official spokesman? Maybe we should have a high profile burning at the stake, then the good people of the heartland could finally embrace our party and start voting for it again.:eyes:

If our country's going to vote for Bush just because of Michael Moore, than it deserves everything that it gets. But it didn't, that's just a bullshit excuse by people looking for a convenient scapegoat.

And this election was a choice between Bush and Kerry, not a choice between Rush Limbaugh and Michael Moore. Anybody too stupid to see that deserves Bush too.

[ulysses]

13. the party, full of fight and righteous anger, rares back

and throws its purse at a progressive independent filmmaker. Thousands cheer!

[Crunchy Frog]

14. Just wanted to add that

that blog is one of the most ridiculous peices of shit that I've ever seen.

If that's the best that the Democratic leadership can come up with to understand why the party is losing, they deserve to go the way of the dinosaurs, which they seem committed to doing anyway.

[BeachBuckeye]

15. Hey Al From!!!!!

Are you visiting with us here on DU? Sure sounds like it. Go back and tell Evan and Joe Lieberman and the rest of the DLC we're not going to help them drag the Democratic Party over to the "Right" side.

[jrtruth1]

17. So something is wrong with wanting to win?

We don't have to go 'right', but we do need to change how we're going campaign.

Obviously, the Michael Moore thing doesn't work.

[IllegalCombatant]

20. i didn't see mm in any dem ads

so you may wanna adjust your sights

[Crunchy Frog]

28. You're right. Let's grab the torches and pitchforks,

hunt down Michael Moore and have us a good old fashioned lynching. Then he won't be able (God forbid) to speak out in favor of the Democrats or against the Repubs. And the good simple folk of the heartland would see our dedication to their values and would start voting for us, and we would finally start winning.

I finally see the light. Lynching Michael Moore is the key to Democratic victory. Pass the matches please.

[NightTrain]

16. *sigh* Here we go again!

Hey DUAMM: How about uniting against the real enemy, namely the Taliban Wing of the Republican Party? Bashing Michael Moore is just killing the messenger.

[jrtruth1]

18. How did Michael Moore help?

I mean, we sure didn't seem to get much from Moore.

All that happened was that MM made a fortune and we got our butts kicked in the election.

[IllegalCombatant]

21. he helped take away the bush 'fearless' leader image

with f911

no-one will forget the scene with him reading my pet goat while we were UNDER ATTACK

for starters

[Lydia Leftcoast]

24. Whaddaya mean "we"?

:eyes:

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

26. Excellent point, Lydia

The fact that the DFL (That's the Democratic Farmer Labor party for non-Minnesotans) made excellent progress in Minnesota this election is a major factor in keeping me optimistic.
Blaming Moore for Kerry losing the election is like...like...blaming Moore.
Typical circular firing sqaud comments by the Original Poster. I'm getting sick of them.
Psst...jrtruth1...the enemy is over there.

[ClearMessage]

19. As a fan of Michael Moore,

I have to partially agree with you. I do believe that Fahrenheit 9/11 could have been more effective if it was less obviously-biased.

Many republicans that might have benefited from watching it, refused to do so because it was so over-the-top anti-Bush.

If Moore could have made the exact same points, but with less sarcasm and ridicule, perhaps there would have been less backlash against us?

[datasuspect]

22. god forbid

we ridicule our fearless leader!

for shame!

[ClearMessage]

29. Ridicule doesn't get us anywhere

As I said, I am a fan of Moore, and I watched F-911 several times and tried to encourage my republican acquaintances to watch it as well. They all refused on the ground that it's a rabid, biased, non serious propaganda piece.

F-911 was an important film, and I'm glad it was made. I just wonder if it might have been more effective if the rhetoric was toned down a bit so it could have reached a wider audience.

Ridiculing Bush may be fun for us, but it doesn't help us. It may in fact be hurting us by alienating American voters with our over-the-top hatred.

[datasuspect]

31. let me get this straight

"we're" hurting ourselves by alienating american voters with our over-the-top hatred?

i guess rush and hannity are paragons of inclusiveness?

a fan of michael moore, eh?

"rabid, biased, non serious propaganda piece."

maybe we didn't watch the same movie. i didn't think it was any of those things, i guess telling the truth shows bias. not just bias, but rabid bias.

how should "we" portray bush then?

[ClearMessage]

32. we needed to have republicans and swing voters watch F911

"rabid, biased, non serious propaganda piece" was not my opinion, but that's how it was perceived by many that refused to watch it. Those are the people that should have watched F 911 more than anyone else.

Calling Bush a dumb incompetent criminal chimp, may be true, and may make us feel good, but do you think that's the way to win over voters?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

33. LOFL. Do you know where you are?

Just askin'.

[datasuspect]

35. "gee, i musta took a wrong turn at albuquerque"

[ClearMessage]

36. I'm not sure I understand the question...

care to explain what you meant?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

41. You're telling Romans how to eat spaghetti.

But do go on.

[datasuspect]

34. so i ask you again,

how should "we" talk about bu$h?

[ClearMessage]

43. using less inflammatory language

don't forget, whether we like it or not, many Americans believed that Bush is their protector since 9/11.

Now, we know that's bull, but by attacking their "protector" with what might have seemed to them as extreme rhetoric, we might have created a situation where they are not willing to even consider our points.

No need to jump down my through on this one. We're all on the same side here. My only point is that we need to be smarter in the language we use if we want to start winning.

[datasuspect]

44. not trying to jump down your throat

just find all this "we" and "we're" stuff disconcerting.

so again, should "we" be praising bush?

should "we" level no criticism of Him (capitalization is sarcasm)?

is bush off limits?

someone who is idiotic enough to think that a draft-dodging coke head is their "protector" is probably beyond the reach of the democratic party . . . why/how could "we" reach them without becoming republicans?

and anyway, i thought god was our protector. or is bush god?

[ClearMessage]

46. of course we should not praise Bush

we should use powerful & intelligent language to detail his failures.

Bush didn't win because he's a great candidate, or because of his "great" ideas. It's all about marketing, and the republicans are better than us at that.

The millions of Bush voters that we call idiots, will not start voting for our guy if we keep calling them idiots. They will vote for the guy that tells them they're great Americans.

They are probably simply uninformed, and we should be reaching for them. Why would we want to alienate voters by calling them morons?

[datasuspect]

47. contradiction

first you spoke of people who view bush as a protector (bush jihadists).

now they are uninformed.

do "we" have to become republicans to win bush voters?

[ClearMessage]

48. no contradiction.

They think that Bush is their protector, because they are uninformed.

btw, this makes no sense at all:
"do "we" have to become republicans to win bush voters?"

[NVMojo]

51. are you related to the Clear Channel?

[ClearMessage]

54. lol, no.

[Forkboy]

37. yeah,I believe this

rabid, biased, non serious propaganda piece.

Then why do they love Rush,Fox,Coulter,Hannity and every other fucktard republican that spews rabid, biased, non serious propaganda?

Fucking save it :puke:

[datasuspect]

39. Forkboy

you're a gentleman and a scholar.

thanks for having the balls for saying what i wanted to say.

[Forkboy]

42. Wrong on both counts...but thanks!

:D

[ClearMessage]

40. I don't think that the average swing voter

listens to Rush, Fox, Coulter, Hannity.

The hard-core republicans are beyond our reach. I'm talking about the more moderate swing voters that could have been won-over.

[NVMojo]

50. I know a few republicans who were so disgusted after seeing the

movie, they campaigned for Kerry and probably voted for him. So watch out with the all encompassing crap phrases. Thanks.

[George_S]

23. Probably a freep front

http://moorewatch.com/index.php/democrats_united_against_michael_moore/

And Moore woke me up. Does that mean I believe everything in his films? No. Nor does he expect me to.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

25. lame flamebait

[LiberalAndProud]

27. That is hateful.

Michael Moore put it on the line to get John Kerry elected. This is how you thank prominent Democrats? Crucifying our allies is not the direction we should take.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[Forkboy]

38. Fucking stupid ass blog as well

[bvar22]

45. The Republican Party and the CorpoDLC FEAR MMoore.

Michael Moore enjoys many distinctions.
In addition to the Palm D'OR, he is one of the few (if not the ONLY)private citizen
to be ATTACKED from the podium at a National Political Convention!
Go Michael Moore!!

The Republicans FEAR the populist Michael Moore so much that they have mounted an All OUT ATTACK against him. The CorpoFascists have started a unified campaign to marginalize Moore in order to discount his message.
We have seen this before...

1) The same people who fund the Republicans also fund the Republican Wing of the Democratic Party (the DLC), and have ordered their lackys at the DLC to marginalize Michael Moore.

2) They have sent their talking points to the US CorpoMedia to make sure they ALL have the same orders.

3) The CorpoFascists have an unlimited budget, and are very skilled at molding public opinion. They have funded an all out PR campaign to monitor liberal WebSites (like DU) and post their insipid talking points about Moore.

I hope you noticed the low post counts, and the simultaneous appearance or two new posters playing tag to reinforce the message.

[boi1946]

49. Yep, LET'S KILL THE MESSENGER!

Anyone who tries to shed some light, tries to make people think (just a little), deserves to be vilified.
One of the few ways you can get some nation-wide media attention is by being outrageous--MM can do that and he gets his point across--whether you agree with him or not. I would also like to know how many young voters he got out to vote with his "Slacker" tours, and his books.
Sometimes being diplomatic works--other times, you just gotta get in somebody's face.

[Moderator]

55. I'm locking this thread

reason:

Flame bait full of personal attacks