Anyone seen the new issue of National Review?

[dobak]

This is not an attack on Dean, but I am really curious about this.

I did not really believe that the conservatives wanted Dean nominated, or at least I did not think they would come out and say it openly.

Why are they being so open about wanting Dean to get the nomination?

[SadEagle]

1. They probably just enjoy screwing w/our heads.

eom

[dobak]

5. maybe

I wouldn't put it beyond those RW assholes to try and mess with our heads during the nomination process.

Seems like alot of wasted money and time though.

[sasquatch]

2. Conservitives don't know reality

They actually think that Bush won in 2000 and Saddam was behind 9/11. They believe that political suicide will win again.

[_Jumper_]

3. Of the major candidates...

...Dean is easily the candidate conservatives would most like to face. They know that Dean would be another Mondale or Duakakis.

[dobak]

8. I'm not so sure....

I agree with the opinion that Dean would have a harder time against Bush than either Clark/Edwards/Kerry.

I don't think he will be a McGovern/Dukakis though

[Cocoa]

12. do you take the National Review at face value?

not a good idea. Very dishonest publication, it's one of the worst, not a place to go for true analysis.

[kaitykaity]

15. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Any original thoughts lately?

[Cocoa]

4. head games

if you want to decide whether you think the republicans want Dean or not, don't bother paying attention to the National Review, nothing they or similar slick whores put out should be taken at face value.

[Cooley Hurd]

6. Because they are politically naive...

They've been up in their ivory towers for so long that they failed to recognize the vast grassroots support of Howard Dean.

They just need to get out more...

[WillyBrandt]

9. The right wing is not naive

They are crazy, and far more. But when it comes to domestic politics, they are not naive. They are utterly cynical and powermad.

They might be wrong when it comes to Dean--I hope so--but that's a different matter.

[_Jumper_]

10. What % of Americans are grassroots Dean supporters?

Elections are not decided by fringe voters.

[WillyBrandt]

7. They think Dean would be easiest to beat

among the leading candidates, and they are gloating.

And since it looks likely that Dean will win, they are gloating quite publicly.

And I worry that they are right to gloat. I have high hopes that if Dean wins, we'll wipe that smirk off of Smirk's face, but we won't have the Clark landslide we could have.

[BurtWorm]

11. These are the same jackasses who got hard when Bush taunted the fedayeen

to Bring it On. They should be a little more careful of what they wish for.

[UTUSN]

13. Could It Be Any Plainer. n/t

[Cocoa]

14. I see that picture posted here a lot

This bugs me.
makes me think that DU is being used to spread RW propaganda, or that the RW is coming here to get their ideas.

I feel the same about the "pink tutu" photos of dems that are posted here in a very repetitious and propagandistic way, and which also appear at RW sites. There's something not right about that.

[Shanty Oilish]

16. I read it

(I read everything.) Found it at the airport, and didn't need to read far to know they mean it seriously. I hear it from rightwingers frequently. Plus I remember 1972, 1984, 1988. He'll be nominated, no doubt, but I hope he picks some heavyweight ballast for veep, he's going to need it. The only candidate who worries Republicans is Kerry.
Yes of course I tossed it in the nearest trashcan :)

[frustrated_lefty]

17. It's utterly irrelevant.

Concern over whether or not the administration is eager to face your candidate of choice assumes BushCo has the wisdom and foresight to predict every twist and turn which will come over the next 11 months. Bear in mind, these are the same jokers who thought the "Mission Accomplished" photo-op, declaring an end to conflict in Iraq, was a good idea back in March.

Also bear in mind the Carter administration was overjoyed at the notion of facing Reagan. Likewise, the BushSr administration was overjoyed when Clinton got the democratic nod; they fully expected to have a field day with his reputation as a skirt-chaser. Neither party has a particularly good track record when it comes to picking their ideal opponent.

[The Zanti Regent]

18. Who cares about the National Socialist Review?

I don't

[dobak]

19. National Review

The conservative newsweekly.

Founded by William F. Buckley.

Nothing Socialist about them

[WillyBrandt]

20. "National Socialist"

As in Nazi...

[dobak]

21. thanks!

Ahhhh

I missed that little pun

[Robbien]

22. It comes down to money.

The Democratic leadership has the money. Dean is not the favored son of the DNC/DLC so the right believes he will not have the money to fight in a national election.

Times have changed and the National Review has no faith in the change.

[Julien Sorel]

23. That picture is rapidly becoming as infamous as Dukakis in the tank.

It's almost comical watching one side tell the other side who it wants as the nominee, and the other side obliging in a sheeplike manner. They don't want just to win; they don't want just a landslide; they don't want just iron control of the Senate: they want all these things, plus the absolute humiliation of the Democratic Party. "See here? We told you to nominate this clown. And you did!"

The wingers will be laughing their asses off about this for years to come.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

24. Nominating Dean..

..will be the worst choice Democrats ever made.
But hey, thats just a Canadian's opinion.

[Cleita]

25. It's just screwing with our heads.

When Ann Coulter was asked, which of the Democratic presidential candidates she liked, she said Dennis Kucinich. So if that isn't playing with your head I don't know what is.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

26. Thats called "sarcasm".

I think they really do want Dean, though. They have no reason to "mess with your head". If they wanted that, every Republican would be endorsing Wes Clark right now.

[Cleita]

27. Regardless, I don't care who they endorse or don't.

I think Dean will be a fine President if nominated and the Repukes will not be able to buy or intimidate him. I think Clark also won't be intimidated by them.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

28. OF COURSE he'd be a fine president!

But thats not the problem. The problem is being elected.

And of course Clark wouldn't be intimidated by them--I don't think he can be intimidated by anybody, or anything.

[dfong63]

29. why do you think they're telling the truth about what they want?

[LiberalBushFan]

30. three reasons

1: It makes Dean supporters donate more and be more energized since they feel more brave
2: It holds off Dean criticisms from conservatives until after the primaries
3: It encourages more Repub/pro-Bush Indies to vote or donate Deanward for the primaries

[LandOLincoln]

31. Why not tell the truth about who they want?

They did it last time with Nader.


http://www.realchange.org/nader.htm

http://dir.salon.com/news/col/cona/2000/10/24/nader/index.html

[Frodo]

32. From the "carpetbagger report" & NY Daily News

White House political strategists believe Howard Dean has a hammerlock on the 2004 Democratic nomination -- and they're trying hard not to gloat about it.

Senior Bush political managers have been ordered to curb their cockiness but many of them privately say President Bush has drawn the opponent of his dreams in Dean -- a left-leaning Democrat they contend can be tarred as a latter-day George McGovern.

"The best thing Bush has going for him is that Dean is a weak Michael Dukakis," a key Bush official told the Daily News. "Dukakis won 10 states. Unless things turn very bad for Bush, I don't see Dean winning more than five."

The source concedes New York and California to Dean, and presumably his home state of Vermont, but does not spell out where else the Democrat could win.

A second prominent campaign adviser echoed: "We are extraordinarily happy today."

At the end of the piece, a Bush aide said, "We can't say this publicly, but we love that Dean's coming on. Never in a million years did we think there was a chance we'd get Dean."

I've frequently heard Dean fans say that GOP talk of welcoming a match-up against Dean is really just a secret ploy at reverse psychology. Republicans, the theory goes, really fear Dean in the general election, but they say the opposite to throw Dems off.

I'm certainly not inclined, in general, to trust Republican spin, but I think it's safe to say in this instance that they really do believe that Dean would be a weak general election candidate. Dems can debate the merits of these beliefs, but I'm pretty sure this isn't just a stealth scheme motivated by genuine fear of Dean's general election prospects.

[MarkTwain]

33. Ignore This....

... at our peril. And the peril to our country and to our democracy.

Inherently, regressives are not that bright. They tend, like any primitive intellect, to telegraph their moves.

This message is loud and clear. It is a message we need not suffer with a candidate who does not suffer the same negatives and same baggage as the good Doctor.

Continue to bury your head in the sands of hope-springs-eternal, layer it with your righteous anger and vehemence, nominate the Doctor and then just watch the slaughter that's going to take place to our party in November.

[Julien Sorel]

34. Don't worry. Dean will turn down federal money for the general election.

Then, the bigger it looks like he'll lose to Bush, the more money his supporters will donate to him. The night before the election, Dean will set a one-day record for fundraising in a political campaign.