If we lose in '04, whose fault is it?

[JNelson6563]

I was informed by a Kerry supporter today that if we nominate Dean and lose in '04 it'll be because of me and my "ilk".

Does anyone here really believe that a loss in '04 will be the fault of supporters of the candidate the others cannot beat (if Dean does indeed win the nom)?

I mean, what does that say about the other Dems if they cannot win the nom? They can't win their own party but they're a safer bet than someone who can?

I see this closely tying in to the incredible fear of Karl Rove. I think that is pathetic and if we let it rule us as a party we of course deserve to lose.

I urge you all to read Machiavelli for starters. Rove is a Machiavellie fan but apparently does not full grasp the depths fo the man's writing (seems to have not comprehended much of the foresight layed out in The Prince for instance).

No, I think if we lose in '04 it will be because of many things. Dems turning into cannibals for one. Certain Dem candidates making poor choices that would determine their careers. The cowards in our party who fear and tremble at the mere thought of Karl Rove.

Those are much more appropriate targets for blame than folks who supported Howard Dean for President.

Just my .0125

Julie

[Democrats unite]

1. I don't like Dean, but if he is the one running & loses...

It won't be his fault. It will be all Democrats fault. Let's put the blame where the blame will be due.

I just cannot fathom another four years of Bush!

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

44. Just don't blame the "left"

If we lose (God forbid) blame it on the centrists because all of our leading candidates are centrists.

[Endangered Specie]

49. BLAME NADER!

Even if he doesn't screw things up in '04, if he hadnt screwed up in '00, we wouldn't even be where we are today.

[okieinpain]

67. exactly, I was looking at some of the polls, and I keep wondering

who are the 10%+ democrats who are planning on voting for bush.

http://www.davidwissing.com/gen2004polls.html

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x9400.xml

[fishguy]

2. It's you fault, JNelson

I am personally blaming you.

j/k of course

[Malikshah]

3. The sentiment is sick

It is the fault of those who cannot see past their own petty world.

It is the fault of those who allow their own egos to stand in the way of progress.

This is what we've been stricken with since Dec of 2000. Those who make such statements regardless of candidate affiliation have obviously not learned thing one from the crisis we and the world have been suffering through since * and his regime took over the planet.

My own suspicion is that those that make such statements about "it's so and so's fault" look at politics as some sort of grand game, some form of intellectual king of the hill where they can become powerful through abstraction as opposed to the mendacity of their day to day lives.

They don't realize that folks are dead now--long after their analytical mental masturbation game has runs its course.

The pundits and media who speak of such things are just as guilty of this game.

Don't let them get you down. In the end, truth will out.

[Lindsey]

5. The blame goes to the media,

Terry McCaulif, and the apathatic Americans who have no clue what's going on. I've said it a million times - I'LL VOTE FOR ANY DEMOCRAT OVER BUSH - EVEN JOE LIEBERMAN. HE MUST GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[arewethereyet]

27. the media are a small number of votes

the people in general represent a whole lot more.

[arewethereyet]

4. it will be the fault of all democrats

one player does not win or lose anything.

This assumes that we are a team. We are, like it or not but teammates have been known to not feel that way.

[mot78]

6. Depends

There are two scenarios:

1. If Dean gets nominated, than Dean, Trippi, et al will be shot by a political firing squad, and the DLC will effectively come back to power, and further persecute our base and force them to go Green. Of course, this scenario might not play out if Dean is really the Democratic Goldwater, rather than McGovern II.

2. If an actual DLCer (Lieberman) or a candidate the DLC feels is ok (every candidate but Dean, DK, Sharpton, CMB) loses, than everything and everyone DLC will be purged, and many will join in, including moderates on the same part of their spectrum.

[VolcanoJen]

7. Now, that's a good question.

I think we're doing the horse/cart thing here, but it's still a damned provocative question.

These things are so impossible to predict. A myriad of things could happen between now and 11 months from now. The climate could really change, or the climate could stay the same. I definitely feel as thought the climate has already begun to change, in the sense that in my real-world experience, more and more people are ready, and willing, in fact, eager, to talk about politics.

We can play "shoulda, woulda" after November... however, if the Democratic nominee loses, I would say that, for the most part, the blame should be placed on their campaign and its management. Oh, and also on every single person who thinks that Four More Years (and, possibly, Four More Wars) of Status Quo is a good thing.

[mlawson]

8. Ultimitely, the SCOTUS.

Had they not (been allowed) to select Junior, THREE YEARS AGO TODAY, he would not be running as an incumbent. President Gore would be ahead of McCain, Frist and the other repuke candidates, and the US would NOT be in Iraq!!!

[arewethereyet]

17. not that your point is not well taken but...

do not lay a present failing of the democratic party (thats you and me by the way) on history.

We DO make our own future and we make it better if we are mindful of the past.

This is a quitter mentality and its killing the party. Stop it.

[mlawson]

20. Where did I say anything about quitting???

I will fault the Dem leaders of that time, 2000, for not fighting the SCOTUS ruling until this day. They could simply have refused to cooperate with the illegal bush regime, but instead they just rolled over.

Now as to today, we had better HOPE that the best candidate gets nominated. But if history is a guide, the power brokers inside the party leadership will greatly help the one THEY choose, and that person might or might not be the one who can win. And I am not referring here to Dean.

Otherwise, I do not understand your post.

[arewethereyet]

26. before the battle is even waged, you are placing blame for defeat

on events four years old. That is defeatist. I for one refuse to consider the past as any cause for a future that I can craft by my own hand.

I choose to look forward after I have learned any lessons the past has to give.

[K8-EEE]

9. Isn't It A Bit Negative....

To be assigning blame for losing the gen election before the freaking PRIMARIES?

I think Bush will lose....I think even conservatives are disgusted with him. But like last time, I fault the people who don't vote. That's like, half the people! Their fault when the despots rule.

[NNN0LHI]

10. The question is whose fault is it when we win

You know? Glass half full and all that stuff.

Don

[JNelson6563]

55. haha Don

I agree, I do not foresee a loss. Everywhere I go in my reich-wing strong-hold I hear folks talking about how bad things are.

I thought the comment very likely a commonly held position by certain camps and thought I'd put it to the board for discussion.

I see the glass as half-full and likely to increase soon. :hi:

Julie

[Democrats unite]

11. Why do I only see one Dean picture in here?

eom

[Malikshah]

18. Not everyone who's for dean

Has his image in their messages...
It's called individualism and defying categorization.

That's not the issue-- the issue for me is

1) IFF there was a supporter of another candidate who said this..they should be publically shamed.

2) ABB should be the mantra for all.

I'll not only take a bowl of jello over *, I'll take a moldy, half-eaten bowl of jello over the tyrant.

[radwriter0555]

12. Is it really "losing" when the gop cheats to 'win'?

no matter what the cost?

[Bread and Circus]

13. That's a tough question to answer, Bush stole the WH from Gore...

Who's fault is that? All of ours? The crappy media? Corrupt GOP'ers?
Gore's? Monica's? A blue dress? Florida? Butterfly ballot?

---

If I can get the straight story from Dean, then I can follow him, even to doom (but hopefully victory). The dude has got to come clean though. Is he a lefty firebrand or is he a centrist with a clever strategy? Folks want us to buy both stories. I just want the truth.

I am still holding out for Clark. If I don't get Clark on the ticket,
I will still support the nominee and I won't blame anyone's supporters, especially if they are honest.

[elfin]

14. Our fault if

we become so driven by ideology and hatred for Bush that we nominate a divisive candidate who cannot appeal to swing voters and moderate Repugs.

[JailBush]

15. The way I see it...

Kucinich is my favorite. Dean is probably second or third. I don't trust Wesley Clark, and I loathe Lieberman.

If Lieberman was chosen to go up against Bush and he lost, I'd be furious with Lieberman's fan club, because it's absurd to promote a candidate who inspires such hatred in his own party.

If Clark, Dean, Kucinich or any of the others (except Gephardt) battled Bush and lost, I wouldn't be quick to blame their supporters. I'd feel a lot of anger at Democrats in general; the party is obviously out to lunch. I don't blame Greens for jumping ship, but they have some problems, too; the Green Party of Seattle is hopelessly corrupt.

There are really so many elements to blame. The government and media are obviously corrupt, and the public is obviously apathetic and stupid. What more is there to say?

But losing the presidential campaign doesn't have to be a total loss - even though it scares the Hell out of me. In fact, what choice would we have but dig in even deeper and fight tooth and nail for LOCAL REFORM?

In that spirit, I wish more people were more actively involved in a variety of causes. I especially wish they'd get more websites online, websites that go beyond rhetoric and actually discuss some issues.

It kills me to so much attention focused on Iraq and the economy while the environment and public education are virtually ignored.

[shindig]

33. You don't trust wesley clark why?

I'm curious.

[cosmicdot]

16. not having a paper trail to Diebold et al voting machines

will play a part

[BertrandL]

19. Dean is too liberal?

I'm a Kerry supporter -- yeah, sucks to be me, now -- and I'm surprised that this whole "Liberal Dean" thing has taken off at all. I think his views are much more centrist than, oh, say, Kerry. He scores some points for opposing the war and favoring equal rights for gays. But really, calling Dean liberal is a play of desperation.

-- Bert

[JNelson6563]

54. I think that is most laughable of all

the "Dean's too liberal" meme. It seems to be what the corporate press tries to hit him with most often. It seems funny that the person who informed me yesterday that a Dem loss would be the fault of me and my "ilk" is a Kerry backer.

If the whore press thinks "liberal" label fits Dean, wait'll they try it on Kerry. Think of the screaming heads reacting to one who is very liberal (and Kerry's IWR vote won't win him pts on the right).

Julie

[jumptheshadow]

21. You can't blame an effective nomination campaign

But you can blame:

1) Terry McAuliffe for creating an undemocratic primary schedule -- and he is getting hoisted on his own petard.

2) Anybody who insists that debate, discussion and dissension be quelled before the nomination is decided, especially when Dean's Internet campaign has favored the technological elite rather than the party's base.

[ozymandius]

22. Julie, this is an old rhetorical debate tactic.

I have heard Kerry use this in a debate against Dean. (I forget the date and context.) Anyway, Kerry pressed Dean to pledge to uphold some issue Kerry favors. The rhetoric issues that Dean will be "unprincipled" if he does not do what Kerry says he should do.

The savvy debater says that his opponent will not dictate the terms of his campaign.

Rove's affect on the campaign should be disregarded when creating one's issue statement. We know his MO and it operates on a level of spattered filth and blood being drawn. It really does dishearten me that frightened people will often hurt themselves through their foggy perceptions rather than concentrate on dry reality.

Last time I checked, Karl Rove was not a Democrat. He does not want to help us.

[JNelson6563]

58. Framing the language

That is really what you describe IMO and you are right. I think it was the American Prospect that had a great article on that a few months ago.

Interestingly, scanning GD especially, you can see how effectively the R's have done this to the point that supposed Democrats are using the same exact lines to attack one another.

Sad.

Julie

[littlejoe]

23. I'm going to place the blame

on Oprah Winfrey.

[Woodstock]

43. she sure helped California go Republican

I never liked her show much anyway, it's not my cup of tea, but I will certainly never watch it again after what she pulled in CA.

[Curious Dave]

24. We're missing a huge point here!

Assuming its an election that everyone can walk away from saying "it was an honest election"...

If we loose in '04 it will be because more VOTERS voted for the other person!

I'm reminded of the story (apocryphal perhaps) of a conversation between Adlai Stevenson and a campaign aide after Stevenson's loss to Eisenhower. Expressing surprise that Stevenson so resoundingly lost, the aide commented "But all the intelligent thinking people voted for you". To which Stevenson replied, "Yes, but I needed a majority to win"!

My point is this. Much of what I've read here seems to presume that the average voter is not smart enough to see through whatever con or snow job is sent his way. We always make the mistake of assuming that when we win it was because the voter was so sophisticated in his choice, but when we loose its because the voters are easily duped fools. We can't have it both ways.

I think that if we loose (and thats a big if at this point) it will be because we failed to articulate to an intelligent electorate what makes our party's candidate the better choice. If we lose it won't be because of what happened last week, last month, last election... It will be because we collectively failed during the campaign.

As something of an aside I'll also add this. Admittedly I'm very new to the DU, but maybe that in and of itself provides a certain perspective. Try to imagine the affect the tone of discourse frequently seen here would have on a politcally undecided "lurker" in the forum (and don't forget they are out there). I see a lot of anger, bitterness, extreme partisianship, and sad to say but even hatefulness expressed in these threads (Roanld Reagan deserves to suffer as much as humanly possible before he burns forever in hell! Come on now...). Attitudes like the ones I've seen a lot of here will turn away undecided voters in droves.

Casting a vote is often times an act of hopeful optimism. Lets try to remember that when we go through our day and each try in our own way to influence the outcome of this election.

Now everyone can go ahead and call me an idiot who doesn't know what he is talking about based on the fact I'm new here and don't have +1,000 posts to my credit. :)

[Duder]

28. Welcome to DU Curious Dave

From one of the "ilk". :)

[JNelson6563]

59. Good Post Dave

I agree with you. Thanks for posting it and Welcome. We could use more intelligent posts like yours! :hi:


Julie

[Blade]

25. No one's to blame..

except for the Democrats who did not vote.

[Walt Starr]

29. If we lose it's Kerry's fault, IMO

His and Gephardt's for pulling shit like this on the sly:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/12/12/politics2015EST0748.DTL

[Mz Pip]

30. The 50 % of the electorate

that didn't vote. It's their fault. We'll do what we can but if people don't get out and vote maybe we get what we deserve.

MzPip
:dem:

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

31. The Dean strategy will either work or it won't work

If Dean wins the primary and beats Bush, you can gloat for years, and you will tell the stories of the campaign to you grandchildren. If Dean wins the primary and Bush actually gets elected - contrary to popular belief - it will not destroy the Democratic party (probably) and most likely not America either.

Since Bush, Dean, Kerry, and Clark all want to keep us occuping Iraq for "years" and the damage Bush has done will take years to recover from no matter which Democrat is President, in the end it's not going to matter who is President - if we were to get majorities in Congress and Bush is still President, that would be just as good as the reverse. Our best chance is to get Bush out of course.

[mitchum]

32. CYA already? I didn't expect posts like this until the fall

you have the power

[arewethereyet]

34. amen to that brother !

do or do not, there is no try - (words to live by)

the point being that once you start making contingencies, you've allowed yourself to lose.

[JNelson6563]

61. No CYA here

I was just sharing and absurd statement another poster wrote to me.

Frankly, the poster showed their ignorance in saying such a thing to me. While I am a Dean supporter I've always been ABB and (here's the important part) most of my efforts go toward the party.

I sit on the local Dem board and chair membership. I've done so for only 5 months. I have doubled our membership, recruited some 70+ volunteers and raised thousands of dollars for the party. Whoever wins the nom will be the beneficiary of my efforts and yet none of the nominees benefits before the candidate is decided.

No CYA here. I know how much I've done for the Democratic cause. I can only wonder what the person who made that statement to me has done for the good of the party. ;-)

Julie

[maggrwaggr]

35. Ralph Nader

again

[Dr Fate]

36. If we lose, it will be the candidate's fault.

If they want to learn how to handle the media better, then they can start researching the internet news a little bit...

If we nominate a candidate that refuses to stand up to Bush/media, then we will lose.

As far as I can tell, Dean and Clark are the two that I cant see Bush/media rolling over without a hell of a fight.

I'm for Clark, but I think many DUers keep forgetting that Dean is a fighter and no pushover- It's hard to imagine Bush/media taking him on a "cake walk"- I'll bet he's a fighter who would stand up to Bush/media- that is my impression...

[Bucky]

38. 'Coz it's a democracy, it's our fault, not the candidate's

Democracy is a government type for grown ups. This is why Republicans throw temper tantrums when we ask for an inclusive election.

[Dr Fate]

39. It's going to up to the candidate to inspire voters & turnout...

Of course we DEMS will have to be active, but we need a candidate who can inspire the base AND inspire independents, moderates & non-voters.

This will be up to the candidate and how hard he fights Bush/media...

I think Clark/Dean would do the trick- but Edwards or Kerry on a Clark ticket would be pretty good too..

[DoveTurnedHawk]

37. I'm a Smug Bastard

And one of the things I pride myself on is my political acumen.

It's clear to me that certain candidates are more electable than others. It's clear to me that beating Bush is any candidate's most important attribute, since Bush is such a disaster.

So yeah, I'll be pretty bitter if people who are not, in my view, sufficiently emphasizing electability end up nominating a candidate who, in my own personal determination, is less electable. If that candidate goes on to lose despite the best efforts of myself and others, my "I told you so's" will be small comfort against the horror that will be Bush's second term.

But I guess it'll be better than nothing.

DTH

[jumptheshadow]

45. Applause to DTH

You nailed it, guy. Some candidates are just more electable than others. The reason it gets so hot in here is that none of us want to see another four years of Bush.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

40. It will be a lot of people's faults

The Dem Party, Terry McAuliffe, the media, Republicans who are too lazy to bother to learn the truth, politicians who only care about power, winning and NOT about the country. The Dems should be concerned enough to find the very best candidate who is most likely to beat Bush and if we don't - we don't deserve to win. This is an emergency situation and we should be desperate to win. If we can't do it now when this country is in so much trouble - we will never do it.

Sometimes I feel that there are a lot of people who deserve to have someone like Bush for President. Most of us here don't deserve such a fate - it's unfortunate that we have to pay for others stupidity.

[jpgray]

41. The idea is that sometimes best for the primary isn't best for the GE

And by that I mean the General Election. :)

I believe Dean is one of the best we've got, though, and I believe he will do more or less as well as any of the major candidates. The election will be close, however, and I'm sure both sides will be crowing about how the other cost Democrats the GE if we lose with Dean--I can hear it now:

Deanie: "Well, if you guys supported him more, we would have taken it! Plus, your guy couldn't even win the primary!"

Calrkie: "That's because you cultish Deanies fell for Dean's act and ignored his lack of electability! Clark would have *trounced* Bush!"

[Woodstock]

42. If we lose it will be because of all the venomous attacks on our own

It really saddens me to see all the negativity on this forum toward Democratic candidates. I'm not saying don't discuss the issues. But most of these threads have gone too far IMHO. We're all in this together. The unnamed Democrat does well against Bush. Well it's up to us to make our nominee fit the bill in the eyes of the voters who backed the unnamed guy. It will be MUCH easier to do this if we haven't totally ripped him to shreds amongst ourselves first. This goes for the candidates, too. I was already disappointed in our reps, and now these vicious attacks from within are even more disappointing. If there was a third party that had a fighting chance vs. Bush, I'd consider switching. They need to pull themselves together (and so do we.)

[Ramsey]

46. Our own stinking fault

From what I've seen around here today, we will suck our own blood until we are dry and then we will bitch and moan in agony for four or eight or twelve more stinking years as the walking dead that we apparently are.

[John_H]

47. If we can't beat the chimp

It's our fault no matter what

[DoveTurnedHawk]

48. I Think You Misunderestimate Him

That is dangerous, IMO. He will have jingoism, incumbency and a shitload of money on his side. We need to be sharp and forward our best candidate, or else we will lose.

DTH

[Zomby Woof]

50. an upbeat take

You better Watch out
you better not cry,
you better not pout i'm tellin' you why,

Santa Claus is coming to town,
Santa Claus is coming to town,
Santa Claus is coming to town,

He's making a list checkin it twice,
he's gonna find out whos naughty or nice,

Santa Claus is coming to town
Santa Claus is coming to town,
Santa Claus is coming to town,

He sees you when your sleepin'
he knows when your awake,
he knows if you been bad or good
so be good for goodness sake

You better Watch out
you better not cry,
you better not pout i'm tellin' you why,

Santa Claus is coming to town,
Santa Claus is coming to town,
Santa Claus is coming to town,


the kids and girls in boyland will have what you believe
there gonna build a toy land all around
the christmas tree.

You better watch out you better
not cry you better not pout i'm tellin' you why

Santa Claus is coming to town
Santa Claus is coming
Santa Claus is coming
he's coming to town

[liberalpress]

57. the kids and girls in boyland will have what you believe...

..It's "the kids in girl and boyland will have a jubilee!"

Sorry. I'm anal about lyrics.

[rucky]

51. America is becoming less and less of a place I want to raise my family

n/t

[populistmom]

52. It would be a combination of factors

Namely two:

1. Idiot sheep
2. Diebold

[ermoore]

53. How about DEAN?!

Or whoever is nominated. I mean, anyone who is able to get the nomination should be able to win. If they don't it's cause they screwed it up. Just like last election, it wasn't SCOTUS' fault or Nader's fault, it was Gore's fault. All he had to do was carry his own home state and the FL debacle doesn't mean a thing. Quit tryin' to already blame this shit on someone else and put the responsibility to win where it belongs -- with the candidate.

Oh and also quit being so scared of Rove, buncha pansies.

[Q]

64. Were you on the moon during the 2000 election?

- Do a bit of research and discover the truth.

[liberalpress]

56. Ours...

...for not voting.

[eileen_d]

60. No, candidate supporters would be the last folks I'd blame

Democrats who didn't vote would be the first.

Depending on how the candidate ran the campaign through the GE, I might lay a little blame there if s/he really screwed up.

And there's always Rove.

[Iverson]

62. wugga wugga ...

Hugga ugga bugga mumble mumble NADER nerble warble mrmee mrmee mrmee wussum goffl GREENS missum nubble offa bunna ...

(repeat 83x)

[Nlighten1]

63. Diebold and E-voting in general

[lostnfound]

65. It's God's fault. He's obviously dead set on having an Armageddon. n/t

[areschild]

66. Media and rigged elections

[Eloriel]

68. And don't forget the voting machines

That's my fear -- that if we lose based on the machines, as we have in the past, we will make horribly flawed assumptions about what went wrong.

[janx]

69. You make some solid and reasonable points.

These are lacking on DU too much these days.

[deutsey]

70. It will be the Democratic propensity for forming circular firing squads

.