Elections haven't even started and already I feel like my vote was stolen

[ecstatic]

I and millions of other Americans made the decision to support Governor/Doctor Howard Dean for President. Unfortunately, the media and the Democratic establishment had other plans.

Now that the damage against Dean is complete (i.e. the media painting Dean as a lunatic, a joke, etc.) I have no choice but to support another candidate, and that candidate will be Edwards. If by some miracle the media eases up on Dean and treats him with the respect that he deserves, then, of course, Dean will have my vote.

Gee, I thought this was America! :-(

[adamrsilva]

1. F*** Iowa and the caucus system.

It was obviously BS.

[Dookus]

4. Why is it BS?

Because you disagree with the outcome?

Dedicated Democrats came out in Iowa last night and voiced their opinions. I've seen a lot of people here claim that the voting was manipulated by republicans, the media, or that the Iowa voters are sheeple. None of that's true - the people who vote in caucuses are committed people who can make their own decisions.

You don't like their decision, but it doesn't invalidate what they did. That's democracy for ya.

[sangha]

6. If you don't trust your fellow Democrats

then why should they vote for your candidate?

[Dookus]

8. Huh?

I never said I don't trust my fellow Democrats. In fact, I was arguing the opposite.

[sangha]

19. The message was for Adam, not you

I was supporting your argument. Sorry for not being clear about that.

[aldian159]

30. If Dean hadn't lost, would the system still be BS?

n/t

[mlawson]

2. I think you hit it: the Democratic establishment.

Is the 'fix' in, yet??? I am sorry that this is going just as I predicted months ago.

BTW, I support Edwards, but have no problem with Dr Dean.

[bigwillq]

3. Stick with Dean

Yes the media has done some things to work against Dean but the Dr. still has tons of support and tons of money and Iowa was only 1 state.
Clinton finished third in Iowa and second in NH and went on to win the White House.

You gotta believe in the DR.

[Dookus]

5. Yes...

but keep in mind two things:

1) Clinton ran against Tom Harkin in Iowa - no way was ANYBODY else going to win.

2) Clinton was coming from behind. Dean fell back from the front - a very different dynamic.

[bigwillq]

12. That's true on both accounts

But a win in NH for Dean will put him back on top and give him momentum again. Let's be honest---The nod is not a done deal yet, Clark is just entering the race and we have to see how Kerry handles the front runner status.

[Dookus]

16. Agreed...

the problem for Dean, though, is he has very little upside. Clinton could claim a victory by coming in 2nd in NH, but anything less than a first place win for Dean will be seen as a failure.

That's the danger of being the early front-runner.

[bigwillq]

20. True again...

NH is a must win for Dean but I still love him and hope he's still strong by the time the primary in my state is. It's not unitl March.

[beaconess]

42. If Dean wins in New Hampshire

will the system no longer be corrupt?

[mmonk]

7. I wonder how the results would go

without today's media and the party establishment interference?

[ecstatic]

24. great question. They're going to do the same thing to Clark

If he becomes the frontrunner. Edwards is the only Republican-proof candidate. It seems as if Republicans genuinely like Edwards.

[mmonk]

34. Not in NC

Maybe on TV.

[bearfartinthewoods]

39. tell that to the jesse helms political machine which he BEAT

to take his seat in the senate.

[ShaneGR]

9. I had no idea Iowa voters were the Dem "Establishment"

And isn't Gore the Dem establishment? Isn't Harkin part of that? Jimmy Carter? All of the House members who endorsed? The unions? Aren't they all part of the establishment?

[Joe the Revelator]

10. I have never seen more sour grapes....

Democrats came out and democrats supported a canidate. I'm sorry it wasn't the one you had your heart set on, but to talk about stolen votes implying that Iowa was anything like florida is crazy talk.

[ecstatic]

17. its not sour grapes. if there was fair and BALANCED coverage

of all the candidates, then I would have no problem with what happened in Iowa. But I know, as well as you do, that Dean did not receive fair and balanced coverage. He was relentlessly attacked by EVERYBODY!

[Joe the Revelator]

22. Welcome

to the roll of front runner. The shits always thicker when there is no one at the top to run interference.

[returnable]

26. Gee, where were all the Dean supporters...

...asking for balanced coverage when their man was racking up the cover stories last summer & fall and Edwards was virtually ignored? :shrug:

Never forget that the media you now hate helped prop your man up in the first place :hi:

[ecstatic]

31. The media propped him up, but not in a positive way

All they said about Dean was that people didn't believe he could beat Bush. Not flattering at all.

[Joe the Revelator]

37. Do you really not remember

Deans coverage through the summer??

[ecstatic]

38. nope! thats ancient history :-) nt

[sangha]

32. If there was FAIR and BALANCED coverage

Kucinich would have been the antiwar candidate. He earned the title.

[RetroLounge]

43. Sell-out

eom

[jsw_81]

11. It's Dean's fault

His bizarre "speech" will go down in history and become a textbook example of how NOT to act when you're seeking the presidency.

[bhunt70]

13. It is america, and Iowans have spoken.

To discount their vote based on any of the issues you present opens you up for the same kind of questioning of why you like Dean.

Seriously, you have to respect peoples decisions. You aren't the only one who can see through the media bullshit and it's elitist to think you are. To denigrate people making decisions based on what ever criteria they use is ludicrous.

If people wanna vote for Dean because he wears a blue shirt, that is their prerogitive, if they wanna vote someone else that's also their prerogitive. Everyone, left and right, conservative and liberal cite the media as being the problem. I think the problem is thinking that just because people dont agree with you, they are "brainwashed" by the media. It doesn't present a very optimistic view of people.

[ecstatic]

23. I am not mad at the Iowans

I'm mad at the realization that we, Americans, do not have the power to elect our own officials. We think we have the power, but we really don't.

[bhunt70]

33. Well I agree with you up to a point.

I do think ultimately we are not always represented by the right candidate...look at the 2000 election.

BUT I do not think this really has any more to do with Dean than anyone else running for office.

Consider Sharpton and his supporters (or Kucinich and his supporters), do you think they feel the same way when compared to Dean, they got absolutely no coverage the likes of Dr Dean...virtually no press in comparison. Do you think they would rather be in his shoes?

Everyone CAN feel that way but they don't have to, you would be hard pressed to find someone who "won" feeling that way. Citing the media is truly just a scapegoat. In general many people who follow politics have a small margin of difference in their intelligence I would suspect. I know absolutely brilliant people who are republicans, does that make them more susceptible to the media or dumber. I doubt it.

[HFishbine]

14. You give the media

the power if you capitulate to what they manufacture.

[cindyw]

15. Those people in Iowa go and listen all to all the candidates.

I cannot imagine a situation where the media influenced those people. Since when has the media been pushing edwards or Kerry for that matter?

[mmonk]

18. they aren't in a vacuum

and they do face party officials trying to influence their votes into a switch (besides listening to the candidates themselves).

[Zomby Woof]

21. ah, blaming the media!

The last refuge of the benighted.

[ecstatic]

28. Its ironic that you, a Kucinich supporter, would say that

Why do you think Kucinich hasn't had stronger numbers in the polls? He's been completely shut out of the media, a fate which seems to be worse than that of Dean.

[emanymton]

25. Are You Supporting The Man, Or His Ideas?

The race is on. This is just the beginning of a long process called democracy.

Much of what you want to accomplish, will be accomplished by working within the structure of the democratic system. The democratic nominee (DN) wants the same things your personal candidate wants. You may find the DN's priorities are simply in a different order than your candidate's.

Which America do you want? Are you in this because of the man or the ideas?

Vent your frustrations - yes. Feel better?

Get back up and continue to fight the good fight.

[DjTj]

27. Welcome, but...

...don't write off Dean just yet. New Hampshire is a whole new battle and if your heart is with Dr. Dean, you should stick with him at least through next week.

Best of luck to you and your candidate!

[Toot]

29. Your post expresses a lot of what I'm feeling because...

I'm so tired of the media saying Dean is angry when they always take things out of context. Then I see Democratic leaders repeating what the media has put their spin on, really disgusts me more. I'm not done supporting Dean completely, unless he decides to withdraw, because I know Dean is not the angry crazy man he's being portrayed as.

[ecstatic]

36. Glad to know I'm not the only one who feels this way

I've decided to support Dean until I see what happens w/ NH.

[arewethereyet]

35. And Dr Dean had nothing to do with all this ?

Just because you thought that you could ignore all his antics and everyone else would too does not mean that it was going to happen.

Dr Dean made this bed all by himself.

And the same is true of all the others.

[adadem]

40. Nobody forced

Dr. Dean to say or do the things he has...it has all come out of his own mouth.

[One Taste]

41. thank you

for pointing that out.

[Alex146]

44. Stick with dean...

we can prove the media wrong!

He's right, we have not yet begun to fight!

[George_Bonanza]

45. I know, those IDIOT right-wing Iowans!

Democratic establishment? Hello, who had the endorsement of Mr. DLC Jr. Al Gore? Or Tom Harkin? Oh yes, blame the establishment yet again. Never mind that Dean's negative attacks, as well as Gephardt's, in that duel of theirs hurt them. Never mind that Saddam's capture took some steam out of Dean's anti-Iraq rhetoric. Never mind that Dean said some very dumb things such as referring to Russia as the Soviet Union (yeah, how is Gorbachev doing, by the way?). Or perhaps Kerry and Edwards simply, I don't know, APPEALED more to people who were impressed by Dean's outspokeness but wanted more on issues, electability, and presidential composure?

[onecitizen]

46. Why are you abandoning him?

Just when he needed you most.

[CalProf]

47. Folks, I have to say, it's waaay too early to give up

I'm not a Dean supporter at this point, but will be if he is nominated.

Let me just say, speaking as a long time Kerry campaign volunteer:

YOUR GUY IS STILL VERY MUCH ALIVE.

My guy was buried over and over and over by all the smug overpaid jerkoffs on t.v. And now, obviously, he's not in his grave anymore.

Dean had some bad airplay this morning, but this afternoon leads his supporters in a rousing rendition of the National Anthem to drown out some Freepers. That's some very fine television imagery, that will be all over New Hampshire by nightfall, and next thing you know it's your turn to be the comback kid.

I'm in this campaign for Kerry, but more to get rid of Bush. Let's all work for our candidates, fight like hell, and make each other's campaigns stronger so the winner can whip Bush's ass.

If Iowa proved anything, it's that the damn pundits don't mean a thing.

Here's to Dean and his supporters :toast:

[lurk_no_more]

48. You know, I think your right!

They couldn't take gore down this time, so they took down the guy gore endorsed....it all makes perfect sense now, :tinfoilhat: </sarcasm>


And then there were none!
” JAFO”