If we lose next year, wouldn't 2004 be more like Goldwater '64 than '72?

[mot78]

If Dean, or Kucinich for that matter, get nominated and lose, the loss may not be a bad thing. Remember in 1964 when Barry Goldwater purged the GOP of Rockefeller Republicans? Nelson Rockefeller, Goldwater's rival for the nomination, was booed at the convention, in the same way that Lieberman has been booed at debates. If a non-DLCer gets the nomnination and kicks From, Reed, and McAlluffe out, it would definately be a unification of our base, and would be a death-knell for the Green Party.
In addition to purging the DLC, we need to develop our own media and think tanks, both of which will happen no matter who gets nominated. We will need these institutions in order to influence southerners and swing voters.

[mlawson]

1. I would see it like 1984 again.

The power brokers cause a Mondale type to get the nomination, the voters LIKE bush better (regardless of his record), and he wins a landslide. Gary Hart (Dean, Edwards) get pushed aside, even though they COULD have won.

I don't see this as necessarily redefining the party ideology; it will be simply rewarding the Dem candidate who has the most political chits to cash in.

[David__77]

2. The establishmemt must not be given the power.

We must choose, not the power brokers. That doesn't mean that only a non-politician will do, but it does mean that length of service in congress or wherever else is not a decisive factor, or at least should not be.