"Can [insert candidate here] Beat Bush?"

[WilliamPitt]

Only if you help them.

Helping, for my money, is not picking one candidate and sticking to them like airplane glue. That's the characteristic of a person in the general election, running against some psuedo-benign shithead like Bob Dole. You stick to your candididate like flypaper in that case, hands down and no question.

We're not running against some psuedo-benign shithead. We're running against Death, period.

I have run a fundraiser for Kucinich here, started several Clark defense threads here, stood up for Dean on multiple occasions, and battled the Kerry fanatics tooth and nail, while also starting a thread praising each candidate individually and in depth. I'm a Kerry guy, as stated, but I don't give a flying fart in a tornado who gets it in the end. I will help The Candidate.

The problem, right now, is twofold. Right now, The Candidate is _____________. No amount of hope or yowling or "I think" can change that. At some point, a lot of us are going to have to come to grips with the reality that our guy or gal ain't getting invited to the big dance. I'm ready for it. Are you?

Also, we're running against Death. Period.

So, can (insert candidate here) Beat Bush? Hell yes. Absolutely. These guys are sitting in a deep, deep hole and asking for more shovels, because that is their nature.

_________________________ can win, but only if you help. 'Help' can be defined as not destroying every other candidate but your chosen beloved. We're going to have to live with one of these people not too long after the snow flies, I think.

I guarantee we'll be happier with any of them than with Bush et al. And here's a neat thing: After we win, WE ARE THE BASE, and we can run right up The Candidate's back and dance on his or her face. The Base can do that. The base has that power.

Think on it. Sounds like fun to me.

[TahitiNut]

1. Good point.

I'm disappointed by the zero-sum thinking inherent in the 'ABB' meme. Anyone with a keen sense of the obvious should be able to see it's "ACBB" (Anyone Can Beat Bush*). Any time I see someone posit that "<so-and-so> can't beat Bush*" or that "<so-and-so> is unelectable" it makes my brain fry and my blood boil. (I fart in their general direction.)

Bush* is, by any principled measure, the worst to occupy the office of the Presidency in this nation's entire history, bar none. He's even worse than any of the runners-up! In a nation of over 180,000,000 eligible presidential candidates, I'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who'd be worse who's still walking around free -- and many who aren't.

For anyone who proclaims themself a partisan Democrat (which I'm not) to besmirch any Democratic (or even another party's) candidate with the notion they "can't beat Bush*" is sheer hypocrisy, IMHO. It violates the truth and denies reality -- effectively participating in the obscene mythologies promulgated by fascists.

If the facts were known, Bush* might not even get the votes of his own daughters, IMHO. It's the job of us citizens to make that truth more known, not to engage in the destructive mythology of Bush*'s 'electability' -- which is just plain not deserved.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. I Did Post-Grad Work In Political Science

I have worked in several campaigns...

Am I a bad guy if I suggest that unseating an incumbent with a quarter of a billion dollars, a party with Leninist like discipline behind him , and a fawning press will be a large challenge?


I refrain from the ____________ can't beat Bush arguments on this board because I don't want to alienate folks or dampen their enthusiasm but I hope we don't misunderestimate (sic) Bush in 04 because it will be at our peril...

The first rule of any competition, sports, war, debate, etcetera is never to underestimate your opponent...


edited for spelling

[TahitiNut]

16. "The first rule of any competition" is to not give up before you start.

The next rule is to focus on the real strengths and weaknesses of the opponent -- and the strength ain't Bush! (I don't know how much simpler it could be. The emperor is naked.)

[TreasonousBastard]

2. Hear! Hear!

Besides the trolls and fifth columnists here, there are a few people who just don't get it.

There's only one winner at Convention Time, and if it's not my guy or your guy, are we gonna pick up our marbles and sulk all the way home?

Some of 'em I like better than others, but the big thing now is to get all of their names out there to the public that can't name but one or two of them, if even that.

And not beat them up. The other side will do enough of that.

I'm putting together candidate sheets with all of their positions, records, and where to get more info. And I'm not saying who I like. (Not that it means a lot in this state, what with a June primary.)

[xxqqqzme]

3. Only if there is a

paper trail, paper trail, paper trail, paper trail, paper trail, paper trail!

[Skittles]

4. I'D BE HAPPIER WITH A HAM SANDWICH THAN BUSH

AMEN.

P.S. Dole - "psuedo-benign shithead" - LOL!

[Lady President]

5. Agree with the second half of your statement

I completely agree that once The Candidate has been established we all need to organize our efforts to help him/her win. I have long ago come to terms with the fact that my candidate may not get the nomination and I will happily volunteer for the person who is chosen. I also refuse to bash any of the candidates for the simple reason that they are all superior to Bush*.

On the other hand some of do need to stick to our candidate. Every candidate needs to have a few strong advocates to post news stories and more important get the message out to the general population. All the candidates are better than Bush*, but some are better than others. Although, I wonder how many of the people who bash are actually active volunteers with the campaigns. Personally, I feel if I say anything negative about other candidates, it reflects poorly on my candidate. We can stick to a candidate, but should represent them in the most positive light we can.

[joanski01]

6. I don't read the bashing threads.

It gets me too depressed. So far I have contributed to three of the candidate's campaign, we well as to the DraftGore movement. I voted for Kerry in the MoveOn vote. I like them all, except Joe Lieberman.

I would also like to know why it was that a whole lot of Dems liked John McCain when he was running, but now that we have General Clark, he gets a royal bashing.

[neebob]

7. Me, either

I don't read the bashing threads because they're boring. Actually, I read very few threads about candidates. There's plenty of information outside of this forum to help me make up my mind, and I wouldn't presume to think anyone cares who I like right now. In the end there's gonna be one Democratic candidate, and we can all either work for that person or sit around and bitch about the Chimpster until it becomes illegal ... or we can't afford internet service ... or we're too busy worrying about loved ones who've been drafted.

[jonnyblitz]

8. well, if u read the "bashing" threads you might get an answer

to your last question. Clarks supporters here at DU have completely turned me off to him and I am a vet. They call everyone who posts negative articles or who might raise a legitimate question ,,other than just fawning and gushing, extremists with an agenda. Yes, there is some gratituis bashing and wacky conspiracy threads on Clark but some of the more vocal Clark supporters don't differentiate between the two. As a 10 year navy vet who served in Desert Storm I don't need the DLC wing of DU telling me I am a leftwing extremist with some nefarious agenda because i question his support of school vouchers(for example).

[PAMod]

9. As always, WilliamPitt, well thought out and well written

I'm anxious to see what the tone at DU looks like once the nominee is known.

There are so many bright, articulate & passionate people posting here daily, I can't wait until I agree with all of them! (well, most of them - there are a few...)

Keep your eyes on the prize!

or

since you equate defeat with death,

"Do not go gentle into that good night
...RAGE, RAGE against the dying of the light" - Dylan Thomas

[wyldwolf]

10. YES! Insert Candidate Here CAN beat Bush!

Senator Here, who caught hell growing up for his bizarre name, had developed a thick skin by college, where he was fondly known as 'Serty or SertCan, and is well equiped to fend off the GOP's smear campaigns.

Yep! Gimme ICH! ICH! ICH! Insert Candidate Here!

[bearfartinthewoods]

11. please forgive me for caring

i do care who gets the nomination because whoever gets it will be the person to whom i'll stick like fly paper in the general.

it will be that person's policies i will be defending.
it will be that person's history i will be defending.
it will be that person's integrity, termperment and political accumen which i will be stuck with, going up against bush.

so forgive me for caring who you all vote for in the primaries.

forgive me for giving a flying fuck who will be the next president.

that is what the primaries are about. finding the best person with the best chance of winning. how can anyone not care about that?????

just because a few people seem incapable of discussing this stuff without gettting nasty does not diminsh the importance of the discussion.

ON EDIT...so glad to see you start a thread about this.

[REP]

13. "Pulling Victory from the Jaws of Defeat"

You hear that phrase a lot in regard to Democratic candidates. Why is that?

The party has a long history of finding a way to lose. Lately it's been finding the most colorless, lowest-common-denominator type candidate (Dukakis, anyone?) and in part it's due to too many in the party having a tin ear and no sense of pitch. Yes, the media play their part, but too often the Dems make it easy to distort the message - sometimes, because there isn't one or it's just too vague.

There are some candidates running who, frankly, would be bad for the party and the country. There are some others who have some good ideas but absolutely no idea how to get them across without scaring the living crap out of people. Some of the first type have some realistic shot at the job, and they are worrisome. This has nothing to with one's "chosen beloved" candidate; it has to do with not wanting to see another victory pulled from the jaws of defeat.

Realistically, there are some candidates who just cannot win this election, either due to inept campaigning, off-pitch message, or the baggage - real or imagined - they carry. There's no point in pretending that every Mother's son (or daughter) really, really has a chance. It's a nice thought, and a pleasant lie to tell children, but this is not the story hour. Same thing with the "base has that power." Nice thought, but please. I don't think the next President will be taking my calls, do you?

There's nothing wrong in supporting the candidate of one's choice. Thinking that "anyone can win," though, is not good strategy. There are candidates who scare peole who don't argue politics as a hobby more than Chimpy scares them. That is the reality.

I want to win. Don't you?

[diamondsoul]

14. Once more, I agree with your point overall.

I make just a single counter here. That some of us need to stick to our candidates like glue at this point in the race. Without us, those candidates would be dropping like flies, and I don't believe that's best for the party nor for the outcome. Dean is a fundraising blitz right now, and we all know what kind of bankroll Bushie Jr. has, the others need some steadfast support just to remain in the field as long as possible. That's where I see a benefit to the staunch supporters, even if I sometimes don't care for their methods.

I'm beginning to read less and less of the bashing threads. I jump in where I think I can post an intelligent defense of a candidate (ANY candidate- except Lieberman, and since I can't defend him, I don't talk about him.), but generally it's just not worth the frustration of reading them.

The point is, you aren't alone, even if we are outnumbered lately.

[Hubert Flottz]

15. I don't know, but I've been told that Arnold can Lick them!

Bush that is!

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

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

[KoKo]

18. Dean/??? .......Kucinich/??? Is Where My Heart Is.......if they don't make

it......Kerry/????? (If he gets his act together, renounces Bush on the FAULTY INTELLIGENCE and CALLS FOR AN INVESTIGATION......and picks a VP who is a BLOCK BUSTER.....Yeah....I could deal with him..and come on board if he did that.

GRAHAM/??? ...Well, if Graham would "reveal his SOURCES" and Whistle Blow Bush into Hell...I would really start to deal with him....and unless he gets more controversy he will be "Dead" soon enough.....so he needs to "TRUMPET" his ANTI IRAQ INVASION VOTE.......and TRASH BUSH....and REVEAL INCRIMINATING INFO ABOUT BUSH BEHIND THE SCENES!

to get my attention.............

Gebhardt......????YUCK.....I've tried and tried to like him...He would have to do something REALLY SPECTACULAR....to counteract "Rose Garden Photo."

After that.....it's dead for me........:shrug: