In another close election losing the LEFT means losing the election

[JCMach1]

Democrats and Democratic candidates need to remember this moving forward. In 2000, the very liberal left split from Gore in enough numbers to ultimately cost him the election. This is not a Nader rehash thread. I don't care why this split happened-- but the reality is that it did... You just have look at the UMICH study that was done to see the results.

If things are as close as polls are projecting in the Fall, the Democratic nominee will need the lions share of those votes.

So tell me how your candidate will at the same time keep the far-LEFT liberals happy AND appeal to enough Independents to take the election?

[oasis]

1. Where is the far left to go? Bush will appoint 3 judges to the SCOTUS

in 4 years. And don't rule out a draft to supply PNAC with armies of occupation.

[lastliberalintexas]

27. Thank you for taking me for granted

Appointments to the federal courts are the ONLY reason I will vote Dem this year. But no more. If my party doesn't want to represent me, I will find a new party that will.

Why we think we can win by (potentially) putting up a nominee who voted for almost anything this administration has asked for in the past 3 years is beyond me. Do we really think we'll keep the base by nominating someone who supported the Patriot Act, NCLB, and the IWR- to just name a few.

But I guess at least you're honest in admitting that most in our party don't care what the left wants or thinks. :shrug:

[Armstead]

31. That had better not be the response

The Democratic Party has an opportunity -- and need -- to address the issues that many liberals and progressives want addressed.

If the Democrat leaders want to turn their backs yet again, they will pay a price.

[The Magistrate]

46. Well, Sir

If "liberals and progressives" act as you suggest, those who do will have to honestly own up to the fact that they are, in truth, no more than a ragged auxiliary of the reactionaries of the '00 Coup, and abandon any pretense they have the least interest in advancing left and progressive policies, but would rather see continuance of the worst excesses of reactionary mis-rule.

[formernaderite]

55. what crap...

All I hear is democrats bemoaning how the DLC hijacked the party, and they've got no choice but to deliver moderate mush with no discernable message to the public. Yet they're shocked they lost during the midterm elections.
So unless we go with a bland party simulating nothing...we don't really care about progressive issues.
Nader didn't siphon votes from the democratic party...he brought over new voters. He also consolidated alot of third party voters, like Libertarians who thought voting for Nader seemed the most viable in establishing a true third party candidate. The Libertarians would NEVER have voted for the democrats. I also know a few socialists and anarchists who voted Green...maybe the socialists could have voted for Gore, but it seems funny the anarchists voted at all.
Dean may have an excess of human qualities...but he does seem the least automatonic of the lot.

[Terwilliger]

40. Is that considered support through attrition?

"There's no one else who is close politically so they have to vote that way"

[oasis]

60. The Xtians slowly took over the GOP by staying the course. Do you

think that rank and file Repugs thought that fundies would eventually be running their party?

Falwell and Robertson were patient enough to take baby steps in order to achieve what they wanted.

The way to go is to take over the party from within.

[Melodybe]

2. You should e-mail Kerry and Edwards and tell them that.

I have.

[FreeperSlayer]

3. WTF?

The far left is going to vote for Bush? What happened to ABB?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. The Far Left will vote Green again

like they did in 2000-if the Democratic nominee appears to be no choice. Oh sure, there will be some who realize that our country is at stake, but when they vote Dem they will be holding their noses.

[Walt Starr]

16. And take some of us who voted Gore in 2000 with them

Count on it.

[Snivi Yllom]

45. good for you

...and Dean is NOT done although his tragid demise has been prematurely declared.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

25. The left is ABB. Green is ABB.

I'm a Democrat and will be voting for the anti-war candidate in November. If he's a anti-war Democrat he'll get my vote. If not, I'll still be voting against Bush and the war. I'll be voting Green.

[dreissig]

32. ABB is Wishful Thinking

How nice for the moderates to think they can get away with alienating the Left, but it may not happen! Leftists may become another unattached constituency and lose interest in voting.

In 1968, the Democrats foolishly nominated Hubert Humphrey on the theory that the Left was locked in. This allowed Nixon to squeak by.

[Arugula Latte]

51. Good point, but what about McGovern?

Couldn't we draw the opposite conclusion from '72? It's a hard balance to please the left and enough of the moderates to win the general election. I don't know what the magic combination is...

[The Magistrate]

54. The "Magic Combination", Sir?

It is no great secret: it is for the ultras of the left to show political maturity, and act not for their self-gratification, but to strike the most effective blow that can be struck against the most virulent reactionaries of our polity. No further progress can possible be made until the criminals of the '00 Coup are hurled from office, and their companions no longer hold a majority in the Congress. These are the realities of the current political landscape; those who will not face them of their own choice, but rather insist on being scratched just right behind the ears before moving to the aid of the people, will be acting in material support of the reactionaries, and that is a damned odd way of demonstrating commitment to left principles.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[jpgray]

5. George W. Bush, that's how. People want him out.

I think we could almost run Kooky the clown and get a close election with this gasbag.

[Indiana Democrat]

6. You'll never keep the "Far Left" happy.

America is not "Far Left". Never has been, never will be. So it stands to reason, they will never be happy.

[lcordero]

8. I'm curious

What do you consider "far left" issues?

[Indiana Democrat]

11. "Green"...

...issues. And to a lesser extent, issues supported by Kucinich and Sharpton.

[Rich Hunt]

35. yeah,

those people are 'far left' here, but in Europe, they're just 'liberal'. Sad, isn't it?

[JCMach1]

18. They are not all green issues

I am thinking about the Michigan study where the people were self-identified as being very far to the left.

This core group made a critical difference in the outcome of the election.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

7. Kucinich is still there and I believe liberals still represented.

DK represents the majority of the 'far left' as we may refer to it. Kerry is also very liberal. Dean finished 3rd, but his policies are very centrist. Lieberman... well... And Gephardt dropped out, but I don't think he had a lot of the 'left' tied up.

:shrug:

TWL

[dreissig]

33. Kerry Voted for the War

Kerry voted for the war at a time when we were desperately looking for support from high-ranking Democrats. He could have made a difference in delaying (or even preventing) the war. Instead he was more worried about what Republicans thought about him than Democrats. A lot of Democrats were permanently turned off by this. Kerry's vote was a statement of values, and we interpreted it as such.

[Iverson]

9. endless triangulation is like religion

It brooks no evidence to the contrary. The far left is already gone. The left is what you're talking about.

There is so much that is so bad about the Bush administration that the simple truth should suffice to get the support of Mr. and Mrs. Middle America without stampeding away from the Democratic base.

A good start would be to avoid nominating a supporter of Bush's war. Most decent folk understand that you don't just go around killing people who haven't attacked you.

This may be asking too much.

[BootinUp]

23. If only what you describe

were true, it would be great. But polls point to a different reality. Most Americans support Bushies war, including a hefty percentage of Democrats (more than the number that voted for Nader in 2000.)

[Iverson]

26. sounds like you agree with me

That is: it is too much to ask.

[Lexingtonian]

10. um, "Remember Florida"?

:D

Seriously, the amount of voters Gore lost to Nader on Election Day 2000 was on the order of 0.5% of all votes cast, or ~500,000. When all is said and done with registration drives and GOTV Democrats should have 3.5 million more voters on Election Day 2004, Republicans about the same as 2000 or up to 1-2 million more.

I'm not sure the nominee has to do a whole lot of overt pandering to marginal constituencies; he has demonstrate that he's not overcommitted to a very narrow slice of the ideological spectrum or overextended across too much of it.

[DemBones DemBones]

12. Kucinich is the farthest left, most liberal candidate

and I am committed to his campaign because of that. He's the candidate I've waited for for decades. Yet many people who claim to be liberal Dems say he's TOO liberal and can't win. It's very disappointing, certainly, because they're talking him down as much as the media is. But he will continue getting his message out, picking up delegates, and keeping the others from going too far right in debates. In Boston, he can use his delegates to influence the platform and make it more Democratic. Or, perhaps, people will "get it" and vote for him so he gets the nomination. "Slow and steady wins the race."

As for the general election, I'd vote for most other Democratic candidates. Dean is the only one I've said I can't vote for, and that's obviously not solely because he's not liberal enough for me (though he isn't.) It's because he has run an arrogant, divisive campaign, and has displayed a talent for dishonesty. I think that all caught up to him in Iowa. He's had great media coverage, good endorsements, raised a ton of money, and gotten a lot of people to his Meet Ups, but in the end, a candidate has to have voters get out and support him at the polls or caucuses, and he couldn't do that in Iowa.

Don't assume, though, that because Iowans didn't give Dean much support that they are anti-liberal or pro-war. Dean has been unfairly beating up on the men who had to vote on IWR, and falsely proclaiming himself the ONLY candidate to oppose the war from tha start. But he's not proposing that we get out of Iraq ASAP, he's saying we have to stay there for years. Since that's what Bush says, I don't see how Dean is supposed to be anti-war.

I think Iowans voted in support of Kerry's and Edwards's liberal policies on taxes and the economy and on healthcare. They also indicated they wanted to support someone they believe can beat Bush. I have long thought that many voters would decide it has to be Kerry or Clark, since they're the only ones who served in the military. Like it or not, that's probably going to be a big factor.

And now I need some coffee :donut: before I analyze Iowa any more. ;-)

[JCMach1]

19. My own position is that I am still supporting Dean

because for me the IWV was a big deal.

I am honestly sorry that I can't go with Kucinich mainly because of his personality/t.v. persona. I am truly sorry, but something there (for me) is like nails on a chalkboard.

However, I will support the nominee regardless of who it is...

Heck, I would even support a higher order of simian to replace the chimp -in-chief.

[eridani]

61. If you don't call the positions 'liberal,' voters like them

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2003/september/aljazeerah_reports_r.php

Pew foundation poll--

Fully 72% of Americans agree that the government should provide universal health care, even if it means repealing most tax cuts passed since Bush took office. Democrats overwhelmingly favor this proposal (86%-11%) and independents largely agree (78%-19%). Even a narrow majority of Republicans (51%) favor providing health insurance for all even if it means canceling the tax cuts, while 44% disagree.

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Iraq/press_12_03.pdf

70% say UN should lead reconstruction of Iraq, that the war has not reduced the threat of terrorism, that pursuing Al Qaeda is more important.

http://www.tompaine.com/op_ads/opad.cfm/ID/6727

GOP candidates who favor privatization might have encouraged a debate on specific plans, put forward by their sitting president, for diverting Social Security taxes and cutting benefits in
order to fund private stock market accounts.

Did they? No. Consultants said they would suffer at the polls if they did. So GOP candidates everywhere dodged, flip-flopped and just plain lied to convince voters that they’re NOT for privatizing Social Security. "Conservative politicians with long and specific records of support for Social Security privatization suddenly decided to denounce the whole idea," write Roger Hickey,

http://www.icrsurvey.com/ICRInTheNews/ABC_BigCorps.html

60-70% think corporations have too much power

http://www.aflcio.org/yourjobeconomy/minimumwage/americanssupport.cfm

70-80% think minimum wage should be increased.

http://www.americans-world.org/digest/global_issues/intertrade/lowsupport.cfm

When NBC News/Wall Street Journal asked the same question in October 1997, 35% supported the idea and 56% opposed it. In August 1998, Market Strategies found 36% in favor of fast track, with 58% opposed. That same month, in a poll by President Clinton's pollsters, Penn and Schoen, 38% said the president "should be given fast track negotiating authority," but 53% opposed the idea.

In addition, poll questions that ask specifically about incorporating environmental standards find very strong support. In a June 2002 CCFR poll, an overwhelming majority of 94% said that countries that are part of international trade agreements should be “required to maintain minimum standards for protection of the environment.” <1a>

In November 2000, a poll by the Tarrance Group and Greenberg Quinlan Research presented respondents with two statements on the issue. More than 3 in 5 (62%) chose the one that said, "Future trade agreements should contain safeguards that require the US (United States) and other countries to enforce strong environmental protections, even if it limits trade."


http://www.pipa.org/whatsnew/html/new_1_15_04.html#1

Steven Kull, director of PIPA, comments, "Clearly, US policy on farm subsidies is far out of step with the preferences of the American public. The vast majority of US subsidies go to large farming businesses on a regular annual basis, while only 1 in 10 Americans approves of this."

http://www.americans-world.org/digest/global_issues/biotechnology/biotech3.cfm

In recent surveys an overwhelming majority has held that GM foods should be labeled as genetically modified. Most recently, a June 2001 ABC News survey found that a near-unanimous 93% felt that "the federal government should...require labels on food saying whether or not it has been genetically modified or bio-engineered."

http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=4420

A solid majority of the American public now agree with NORML that responsible marijuana smokers should not be treated like criminals. Eight out of ten Americans support the medical use of marijuana, and nearly 3 out of 4 Americans support a fine-only (no jail) for recreational smokers. And while a majority of Americans continue to oppose the legalization of marijuana, 40% now support legalizing small amounts. Overall, this is the highest level of public support we have ever experienced, and our challenge now is to convert this public support into public policy.

[leyton]

13. Yet losing the center means... losing the election.

That's what happened to Barry Goldwater in 64, Mondale in 84...

We can't afford to ignore the center, because that creates votes for Bush. If it comes down to abandoning the center and the far far left, abandon the far far left, because at least that doesn't create votes for Bush.

Sorry, but if the party moves left, you'll lose a lot of Gore voters.

[JCMach1]

22. Can PROGRESSIVISM span the middle and the left???

I am thinking of Dean here who is more moderate than Kerry. Please, just look at their voting records with the exception of Iraq. Dean also is a bit of a progressive.

I am also thinking of Edwards who also has a very PROGRESSIVE message.

You might include Clark in that batch of candidates as well... although for me he is still a bit of an unknown factor (in terms of policy).

Kerry, to me, has a very traditional liberal message... i.e. the Ted Kennedy, Michael Dukkakis and Walter Mondale wing of the party.

[Rich Hunt]

36. I think populism can

A 'populist' approach can attract people who are more 'progressive' than they think they are.

[Justice]

14. To Make An Analogy From Dean's Statements

Dean says the health care system is broken, but that before we fix the system - we have to get everyone into the system.

I say, Washington is broken, but before we can fix Washington, we have to get a Democrat in the White House. Vote for a democrat.

[retread]

15. What is a "far-LEFT liberal"????

*

[JCMach1]

20. In the study I am thinking of they are self-identified as such.

My thoughts are based on a study I saw at the Reuben Askew institute (Univeristy of Florida) during a Summer workshop.

[Rich Hunt]

37. good question

People who describe themselves as "far-left" or even "left" absolutely hate the word "liberal".

[imhotep]

17. liberals are not wanted

in the democratic party anymore.
They would rather pander to ignorant swing voters and ex-repubs.

[NNN0LHI]

21. There is not going to be a close election in November

When the presidential candidates have their debates for the general election the differences between the two will be so stark Chimpy will lose by a bunch. Even the media and the Supreme Court will not be able to help the Crackhead in Chief this time. That is a fact.

Don

[JCMach1]

24. I worry though, because that's what we thought in Florida

against JEB. Granted it is 2004, not 2002.

Lowered expectations for Bush RAISE expectations for ANY Democratic candidate.

I also believe that IF Bush debates it will be ONCE only.

[NNN0LHI]

29. I think you may be comparing apples and oranges here?

Jeb didn't start a war getting over 500 American soldiers killed to only have an ayatollah running Iraq. Know what I mean?

The Dem nominee will smash Bush in November. Just watch and see.

Don

[JCMach1]

30. That's my hope anyway...

Just call me a bit fatalistic.

[Rich Hunt]

38. yes, we should not lose sight of the goal

We should not get so caught up in the primaries that we forget to work toward discrediting Bush. This is the easiest way to defeat him.

[Hep]

28. Yep, score one for the status quo. Even if we win, we lose.

n/t

[tinanator]

34. Kucinich will win Republican voters

If only because he is truly honest and forthright, and opposed to NAFTA, GATT and WTO hegemony. Its the "centrist" dems who will choke hardest having to vote for him. Id rather put my faith in a Republican.

[copithorne]

39. Liberals like Michael and me?

Wesley Clark is the guy. He can speak clearly and forthrightly against this stupid war. He can unite liberals and moderates and change politics in this country.

You've checked out Michael Moore's endorsement, haven't you?

http://michaelmoore.com/

http://www.clark04.com/moore/

[tinanator]

47. oh yeah, him

that lowlife POS Michael Moore? Fuck him. He is boot scrapings. Sorry.
WWW.MichaelMoorekilledOfficerFaulkner.com

[John_H]

41. Is the left that easily fooled?

Does "the left", whatever that means, actually believe Howard Dean is anything other than the insider centrist his record proves him to be? The guy who, throughout his governorship, pledged to and bragged about his ability to court and get GOP votes? The guy who raised and spent money from Phillip Morris and Pfizer? The guy who was endorsed by the NRA?

If so than any of the candidates can do what you say is needed to win, since their records, with the exception of Lieberman, are to the left of Dean's. That's just unspinnable fact.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

44. no, we aren't, and no, we don't

simple.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

56. not me

TWL

[minkyboodle]

59. not I

Couldn't agree more with your post john_H.
GO Dennis Go
Scott

[CWebster]

42. If Insider Dems believe that winning is by alienating the Left

They can lose it all by themselves.

[sangha]

50. The left is NOT alienated

They came out to vote last night, and they voted for Dems.

[On the Road]

43. The Dems Need Both the Left and the Center

Al Gore mananged to get most of both of the wings of the party, which is why he won.

I was hoping that Dean was the one candidate who could generate enthusiastic support from both. Now I'm not sure.

If Dean loses, I am afraid of the effects of a wholesale rejection of Dean. If the eventual nominee paints Dean as a madman, he will estrange Dean's base at the risk of losing the election. It must be someone above the fray who can unite Dean supporters and the rest of the party.

[West Coast Democrat]

48. I've never understood why some consider Dean more liberal

than any of the other candidates.

[mitchum]

53. They're misinformed...

or have an odd understanding of "liberal" But this is the era of diminished expectations

[fabius]

58. I'm not confused about that...

I know Dean is pretty moderate in most policies and his history. The only liberal thing about him is that he owes his success NOT to big business or interest groups, but to US, his supporters.

To some of us "lefties" supporting Dean, this is about breaking the stranglehold of corporate money on our politics. No policy position is more important than that.

It's also about that "spine transplant" to the Democratic Party (Kucinich, Braun and Sharpton excepted).

Dean has caught a big wave that surprised even him.

[sangha]

49. I'm not worried

but I do wonder how anyone could miss the fact that the left went out and voted for Democrats.

[mitchum]

52. I'm far left...and that's not synonymous with stupid

I'll go with the Democratic nominee ABB

[fabius]

57. Calling all lefties. Vote ABB! At least Vote D,K,E, or C!!!

Anybody but Lieberman is fine for me. I'm a real lefty, OK? I read Chomsky faithfully.

Taken for granted or not, this train (the US) is going full speed in reverse. Before we can go forward again we need to stop the runaway train. We won't stop it unless we stop Bush. After that we can talk about going forward.