How will Dean's remarks turn red states blue?

[LoZoccolo]

I hear this and that about how this whole flap is a demonstration that we need spine, we don't have spine, we lose because we don't have spine, senators X and Y don't have spine, senators X and Y are in the pocket of corporations, yadda yadda.

Personally, I care fuck-all about token displays of spine unless it gets me what I want. And guess what? Neither do most of the elected Republicans! Show me the last time that Bush* got on television and called all the women who had abortions "babykillers". Show me the last time Dick Cheney said directly that Democrats hate America. Show me the last time that the former or current Republican Party chair accused feminists of turning children into lesbians. They seem to be using their spine tactfully, and when I say tactfully, I mean in such a manner as to get what they want. They let certain people hit with the hard stuff, and other people know not to. And it works.

So tell me what I'm missing here. Describe the chain of events wherein the remarks leave Dean's mouth to the point where a red state turns blue...and name the state if you can. I've already seen a couple reasoned and articulate posts to the contrary...but scarce little besides rah-rah fests and thin apologetics ("he's technically right": so what?) on this side.

And no accusations please. I am trying to get an answer to a question.

[jmaier]

1. I think I'll sit here and wait with you ...

on edit: though, outside of the rhetoric Gov Dean's focus on rebuilding party infrastructure in these states seems like the right first step.

[LoZoccolo]

3. Hey, you're from Evanston...do you know about Illinois Dem Net?

Click the link in my signature...plenty of stuff to do to get involved in the area! My friend Leo runs that site; he's a real live wire as far as getting involved goes!

[theboss]

65. We need to rebuild the party structure

That's the best plan Dean has had so far. As a native West Virginian, it drives me crazy to know that Bush won it easily the last two times.

But being a native West Virginian, I can't think of anyone who thinks that being a "White Christian Party" is a bad thing. Most people in the state would like to belong to such a party.

[jmaier]

72. That is sort of my concern

Dean's actions to rebuild party infrastructure in red states is dead on important. His base-rallying rhetoric though is probably counterproductive in those "markets."

[theboss]

76. To me, that's the Dean conundrum

I've always felt that he had a lot of great ideas. It's just that I think he might be the worst person to implement those ideas.

[Sooner75]

129. Dean conundrum

I agree.

Howard Dean is dead on about getting more organized in red states and he understands the issues. But, I'm getting worried about his political instincts. He should be able to anticipate how his statements and actions are going to play out. If he can't do that, he's in over his head.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[forgethell]

2. How?

They won't. Insulting people is the one sure way to make certain that your arguments will never be heard by them. But Democrats have trouble learning from experience, at least such has been my observation.

[Teaser]

7. Except that

it's not an insult to be Christian. I'm tired of people saying it is in an attempt to attack Dean. I don't call your religion an insult, don't call mine one.

[forgethell]

28. ?? Dean is your religion??

Damn! People will worship anything.

But seriously, Dean meant it as "white bigots", did he not?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

121. The point isn't that calling someone a Christian,

or white, for that matter, is an insult - obviously it isn't.

The worry is that Dean was using "white" and "Christian" in ways that made it look as though he thought that they were - he described the Republicans as them, and given that they're the enemy he probably wouldn't have done than unless he regarded it as an attack on them.

Obviously, what he *meant* was that it's a bad thing for a political party to be *homogenously* white and christian, not that it's bad for an individual to be either, but nevertheless I think it was a spectacularly badly thought through thing to say, that will alienate many white christian undecided voters, who are by far the largest undecided demographic in America.

[losdiablosgato]

Dean is a loose canon

He needs to shut up. His loud mouth is hurting us a lot. You get more with sugar then vinegar.

[Arkana]

138. Yes, because 5 years of "sugar" just won the Dems SO much.

Get real. Dean may be a bit fiery for some, but he is spot on 90% of the time. We can't afford the high road anymore--time to hit these fuckers where it hurts.

[losdiablosgato]

95. Dean is a loose canon

He needs to shut up. His loud mouth is hurting us a lot. You get more with sugar then vinegar.

[Teaser]

4. It will oxidize them

thus turning them blue.

[smartvoter]

73. ROTFLMAO!!!!! nt

[aden_nak]

5. I don't think there are remarks that can or will do that.

I don't see red states turning blue, or blue states turning red. It hasn't happend on any significant level in the past century and a half.



The largest block of untapped voters the Democrats can reach are just that. Untapped voters. Non-voters. The only real chance the Democrats have is to reel in the 1/3 to 1/2 of the nation that doesn't show up at the polls. Now, whether Dean's comments will help them do that or not, that's another question that I don't have an answer to. But as for red or blue states shifting hues. . . ain't gonna happen in my lifetime or yours.

[LuPeRcALiO]

16. great maps! very instructive.

But didn't FDR reel in the South with the New Deal? Also aren't there lots of Southerners who aren't necessarily white Christians?

Nevada, CO, Florida... it's conceivable

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

24. Okay, but seriously, you have to account for major historical occurances

Great Depression, Iran hostages, major third party candidates... outside of that, there is a historical trend dating pre-Civil War in which the South hardly ever votes along with the North.

[LuPeRcALiO]

32. true enough, but you're leaving one out:

Latino immigration, which is changing the demographic bigtime. Add NM to the list for that reason. They'd already BE a blue state if they counted their votes right.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

38. Part of the reason we need to focus on the Midwest and West.

The South is simply NOT going to turn. They simply have a contempt for all things "Yankee" that will not fade. The Midwest and West CAN be turned, as long as we focus our message on the right things (fiscal responsibility, toss in references to states' rights).

[LuPeRcALiO]

43. sure, but there's no reason to write off the South entirely

Plenty of Southern states will turn if we keep on top of the changes and come up with messages that appeal to them.

We have to get them to the polls and count their votes, too.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

68. New Mexico

The problem here in NM as I see it is that we don't have a huge immigrant population like the other border states. We have many Hispanics but they have been in this country for a long time and tend to be pretty socially conservative This year, many voted Republicanfor the first time and I fear this trnd will continue. A strong, economically liberal candidate in the next election would probably make New Mexico blue again.

[AntiCoup2K4]

87. Who does New Mexico have?

Dean bashing DLC loving self proclaiming "friends of Sean Hannity" are not eligible.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

90. Do you mean Congress people?

Our Senators are Pete Domenici and Jeff Bingaman and Our representatives are Heather Wilson (:puke: ), Steve Pearce (:puke: ), and Tom Udall. Udall and Bingaman have pretty good records but the other three are typical bush licking repukes.

[Clark2008]

36. What rock have you been under?

Most of the South voted for Clinton in 1992 and 1996 and for Carter in 1976.

[aden_nak]

42. Our two Southern Democrats.

Look, I love Jimmy Carter, I really do. I think he's done as much good for others in his life as any President in living memory. But this country would have elected him under almost any circumstances, as a backlash for Watergate. And Clinton, as much as I love him, wouldn't have beaten Bush Sr. without the Perot factor (who, though he won no electoral votes, swayed a large chunk of the popular vote in southern states). He beat Dole handily, because once people got past the bullshit they found out that Democratic leadership leads to a better economy. But those were unusual circumstances.

What this Republican "leadership" has done is throw us back in time about 100 years, when corruption is just part of the game and knee-jerk reactions to things like race and god are the defining characteristics of an election. Welcome to the new America. Same as the old America.

[Awsi Dooger]

84. That's just nonsense about Clinton losing to Bush minus Perot

Don't fall for that GOP talking point mush. Clinton's margin was a robust 5.56%. Among Perot's roughly 19%, that would have required a split of 12.3% to 6.7% in Bush's favor if Perot had not been in the race. No chance in this world or any other that the type of voter Perot attracted would have defaulted to a bland, unpopular incumbent in that percentage. Bush Sr.'s approval rating was very low, in the 40% range. He was certified toast.

Plenty of DUers made the mistake last fall of equating 2004 to 1992, although GW's approval numbers were generally in the high 40s most of the year, uncharted territory for an incumbent in modern times. There are indications Bush received a late approval uptick for some inane reason, assuring his election.

[liberalpragmatist]

128. Also, wasn't Clinton handily beating Bush when Perot left the race?

Wasn't Perot gone for awhile, during which time Clinton was crushing Bush in the polls?

And yeah, GHW Bush's approval ratings were in the 30s. Whether or not you believe he only won by fraud, George W. Bush's approval rating on Nov. 3 was measured to be 50-51%, and Presidential numbers almost always resemble their final approval ratings.

[Awsi Dooger]

135. I believe you are right

Our convention was first as the out party and Clinton soared to a huge lead over Bush. Then Perot re-entered the race but never restored his previous poll numbers and Clinton held a comfortable lead thru election day. I was in Europe that summer for the Barcelona Olympics and don't want to make definitive statements about the status of the race before Perot dropped out, or if he had remained in the race throughout. But I severely doubt a third party candidate could have held a number in the 30% range. Bush Sr.'s approval numbers were already low and dropping, envigorating a throw-out-the-bum mentality with Perot the beneficiary, IMO. Clinton was largely an unknown quantity until the convention and bus tour that followed.

[liberalpragmatist]

136. Cool, in Barcelona? Were you an athlete?

Or just a spectator? Must have been a fun experience.

And thanks for your insight on the race. To be honest, I'm only 19 and was too young to know all the details, but I've read about some recent political campaigns, including '92, so I'm going by what I know off of that.

[Awsi Dooger]

139. Ha! No, but I was mistaken for one my first day in Barcelona

This was several days before the Games. Damn was it hot. I was touring the Olympic sites and needed a break, stumbling into the first open door that featured air conditioning. You've got to realize not every European shop or cafe or business has air conditioning, particularly in the milder climates.

Anyway, I sat in a chair then was directed to move up one row. There were dozens of people there. I thought everyone was just taking a break from the heat. Then I got a bit uncomfortable when they asked us to move up one more row. I guess I must have looked awkward while moving up another row because suddenly a young woman came up to me and asked if I had my papers ready. Only then did I see the paperwork in everyone else's lap. I was unknowingly in line with athletes to be accredited! Living accomodations and badges and everything else. I laughed out loud and explained I was in the wrong place.

Actually, it worked out great for me. A woman in the room heard my tale and said it was too hot for her also. She was the wife of a US Olympic official. She had a full pass to the swimming events and asked if I wanted it. The swimming venue was outdoors and no way she could take the heat. So I got a pass worth several hundreds for nothing and enjoyed the swimming events the entire first week.

Frankly, I made it to Barcelona via wagering on athletes. I live in Las Vegas and that year I had a freak string of luck playing baseball "middles," betting one team to win but taking the other team + 1 1/2 runs. The first 7 games I tried in '92 ended perfectly, with the favorite winning by precisely one run. In fact, only the first game had the right score going into the 9th inning. The other six each manuevered themselves to my favor and not one went into extra innings. I immediately booked a flight to Spain to take advantage and not just blow the profit. Partially it was due to my younger sister, who was an exchange student in Madrid during '91-'92. I picked her up and we toured the country in a rental car before the Olympics. But she was homesick and didn't want to stay for the Games. "I'm sick of Spain." Now she regrets it.

[liberalpragmatist]

141. Cool story

Sounds like a nice adventure. I do have to visit Spain someday.

And I know what you mean about the heat. I was in Greece last summer (though not for or around the time of the Olympics) and dear God was it hot. And you're completely right about the lack of air-conditioning.

[Awsi Dooger]

143. I'm very envious; never been to Greece

I took a Transatlantic cruise that was supposed to visit Greece but literally detoured in the middle of the night when the company operating the cruise had a dispute with the Grecian government. There was screaming on every deck. Many of the people on the cruise were Greek and going home.

Then last summer I took advantage of the Stardust sportsbook screwup listing Roger Federer at 5/1 to win Wimbledon. It was supposed to be 5/4 but the idiots who work there didn't understand a British-type number like that and put up 5/1. Federer won and that clinched my finances to go to Athens. I even posted that on DU. But then my friend bailed out and I ended up spending August fending off hurricanes in Florida.

[elperromagico]

142. Look at this collection of Gallup polls from 1992:

Check the period after Perot's dropout. Clinton's numbers skyrocketed; he'd been third behind both Bush and Perot:



Now look at the period after Perot reentered. Clinton's numbers seem to drop and rise in almost direct proportion to Perot's numbers. Bush's numbers remain almost constant, save for a slight rise near the end.



People often forget that, in 1992, Perot was as much an anti-Bush candidate as Clinton was. He hammered Bush mercilessly on the bad economy. It was only after '92 that Perot (and his successors as Reform Party standard bearers) became much more clearly a conservative candidate.

[formernaderite]

92. I agree....

stop bothering with redstaters who already vote repub. Let's galvanize the other half of the country that doesn't bother to vote.

[Arugula Latte]

98. New England used to be Republican, and the South Democratic

That's a switch, I'd say.

California used to be reliably Republican (in presidential races).

[Ravenseye]

6. Ok I'll try

Deans Remarks
to
Grassroots Ears
to
Grassroots Organizational Strength
to
Grassroots Action
to
Converting Red Voters to Blue Voters
to
Turning Red State into Blue

I think he needs to tone down the rhetoric and get the grassroots fired up without giving the republicans any more ammunition, but the gist is the same. He's preaching to the choir, to get the choir excited, to get them out there getting others excited and maybe, just maybe, getting neighbor to change neighbor's mind.

Nobody is going to 'listen' to Dean who doesn't either already love or hate him. The point is that he's talking to people who are going to go out thre and pass out flyers, and hold events, and talk to neighbors, and get lawn signs, and so on...

Those are the people who will make a difference.

[jmaier]

12. Good overall strategy

but you want the folks being called on to open the door and not slam it in the face of the caller.

Being called a privileged, wingnut racist is hardly a reception warming message.

I KNOW GOV DEAN didn't say that but it's how it will be emotionally parsed by many.

[Ravenseye]

14. Nobody who CAN be changed will do that

The people who hear that and get angry probably are too far gone right now. They already hate him, or think he's crazy from the so called 'scream'. They're the 30% who would vote for Bush if he put on a black robe and declared America an Empire.

We need to get to the 20% of Americans who voted for Bush, but aren't nuts. Really, we need to get to 1 or 2% of americans. Who pay attention, but not so much, and who bought into the rhetoric of the last election because nobody was there to counter it. That'll be done by the grass roots.

[TheFarseer]

56. Too many people voted for bush eventhough

they don't like him. "Kerry would be even worse" and when you ask what he would do that would be so bad, they can't articulate an answer.

I was out on a date last night with a girl that said she absolutely hates bush but didn't vote in the election. "Why not?" "Because I never vote." ARGH!!!

[Ravenseye]

57. Those are the people to win over

The ones who don't like bush but don't vote. Get them to vote. Educate them. Loan them a book. Rent F911. Get them to go to a rally. Get them involved. Something.

The ones who are there in the middle. Educate them. That's what we need to do . Grassroots it baby.

[LoZoccolo]

37. I like your strategy in the abstract...

...and yet I think it can be accomplished without the sort of risk involved in saying things that have to be qualified the next day after they're said. Just the fact that he's said things that require that sort of maintenance should tell you that a few things need to be learned about handling the media. He most likely could have said the same things without having to explain them over again. Any time you spread it out like that, you risk people hearing the first and not the second, and you have this protracted period of time where people can do anything they want with it. I'm not saying Dean is incapable of learning this sort of thing, but I won't be in denial of it.

Personally, I get more fired up in a grassroots capacity by the sort of positivity displayed by Barack Obama, who people are trashing over this flap, but who I think resonated with people all over much greater after his Democratic National Convention speech than Dean ever did.

[Ravenseye]

45. That's why...

...I said

"I think he needs to tone down the rhetoric and get the grassroots fired up without giving the republicans any more ammunition"

[LoZoccolo]

50. True.

Sorry I overlooked that.

[Ravenseye]

53. Hey, We're equally brilliant.

What can I say. Great minds...

[meow2u3]

115. It doesn't matter what Dean says or does

The Rethugs will find something on him to demonize him....and if they can't find something, they'll make something up.

Look at what the demoncons did to Gore in 2000; to Cleland in 2002; and to Kerry and Daschle in 2004; and to the Clintons before them. They're so shameless and devoid of common decency that they'll stop at nothing to turn every Democrat into a criminal with one stroke of the pen and won't rest until their opponents are utterly destroyed.

Dean knows what he's up against; devils in human form. Too bad the rest of the Democratic leadership hasn't caught on.

[enough already]

47. Correct

And for just that reason he shouldn't tone down anything. He's telling the truth about these bastards. Look who is asking him to "moderate"...the same losers who managed to lose the WH, Congress and governorships by being nice. Their track record is a freakin' joke. Give 'em hell, Dr. Dean, and screw anyone on their side or ours who has a problem with it.

[Ravenseye]

54. Tone down? No. Tell the Truth? Yes.

and he's not doing that. He's not telling the truth. The stuff he's saying gets into the MSM only when it's something absolutely ridiculous and guarnateed to reinforce people's negative stereotypes.

The Republican Party is not the White Christian Party. It's the Corporate Billionare Party. Republicans aren't all white christians, but they should know that if they vote Republican they're not voting for strong national defense or fiscal responsibility.

When you vote Republican you're voting for the party that is fiscally irresponsible. Increasing spending while reducing how much the government brings in. Deficits soaring, economy stagnating, wars based on lies, insulting our allies and friends.

That's what you're voting for. A Radical adgenda yes, but spell it out as it is, not as something that will just insult people and be easily refuted.

[enough already]

59. "The Party of Corporate Billionaires"....

Wow, that's an original approach. You're free to keep trying to sell that failed line. I'll keep supporting Dean telling the truth about these racist, religious nuts.

[Ravenseye]

61. I never claimed to be original

but claiming that the party is one of racist religous nuts is even more idiotic.

Why?

Ok so the corporate billionare claim never caught on, but it was never really sold. The Democratic leadership never really got behind it.

The racist religious party is DETERMINED to be a failure. Why?

Well the racist/religous aspect of the republican party won't be turned to vote for anyone else no matter WHAT you say. So no harm no foul, nothing we can do.

The ones who are part of the party and don't really fully accept what has happened to the party though will just hear you calling them racist and religious nuts and they'll turn off. I know a bunch of conservatives and none of them are racist, and while some of them go to church they're not religoius nuts. YOu call them that though and they shake their heads and think about how liberals are insane and silly. Which apparently many are.

We need to win over the rational people who vote republican and educate them and make them realize the republican party isn't what they think it is. Saying it's the white christian party, or the party of racism, or of religious nuts, or whatever...just isn't going to work.

Do racists vote Republican? Yes.
Do religious nuts vote Republican? Yes.
Do corporate billionares vote Republican? Yes.
Do normal people with normal lives vote Republican? Yes.

We need to point out who they're in bed with without making it sound like a consipracy or a lunatic indictment. We need to win them over by making them think, not makign them stop listening to us.

[enough already]

79. The "Corporate Billionaire" claim is doomed to fail

You know why? Because too many in our party are part of that crowd. We've been trying to sell that line for years to no avail. It will not work, ever.

Rational people don't vote for racist, religious nuts. This is easy to sell. Don't stop, Dr. Dean.

[bunkerbuster1]

48. no, I want my red state blue now now NOW!

seriously, of course it happens through organizational efforts, and I have some faith that Dr. Dean means it when he says we're through with 18-state national campaigns.

[Ravenseye]

58. Good Luck

I'm currently in a blue state fighting to stay blue. I hope you are successfull with your state.

[Capn Sunshine]

8. It's a little early for that

first we have to get the poison out of our own party. Then after taking a look at what the Democratic Party REALLY stands for, people might think we're more than a once every four years phenomena that is different, but not too different,from the republicans, and realize we actually DO care about the people and the country.

And the process will start.

It isn't Howard Dean attacking the corporate funded insiders in our Party. Howard Dean is attacking the republicans with truth.

The corporate funded insiders are attacking Howard Dean, no matter what party affiliation they have.

[Cha]

104. That's right...First things first..

And when they attack Howard Dean they attack us..We The People..

"LET DEAN BE MEAN"

"Thursday, June 9, 2005
Let Dean Be Mean

Leading Democrats, including John Edwards, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and Dianne Feinstein, have felt it necessary in the last week to distance themselves from Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean. True, Dean has spoken bluntly, as is his wont, about Republicans, particularly the Republican party leadership. One wonders though where these upright Democrats find the time and energy to publicly criticize one of their own during such trying times.

Further evidence, as if any more was needed, has emerged establishing that the war in Iraq was sold under false pretenses, but Democrats are speaking out against Dean.

A major news magazine has been discredited to divert attention from confirmed instances of Koran desecration in Guantanamo Bay prison, but Democrats are speaking out against Dean.

Bush has nominated for our new U.N. Ambassador an individual who virulently opposes the very existence of the United Nations, but Democrats are speaking out against Dean.

Osama bin Laden is still at large, but Democrats are speaking out against Dean."

http://10000birds.com/

[LaurenG]

9. He will restore faith

In honesty and integrity in Gov. He will show along the way what liars the repukes are and how the democrats will work for the people. He's an EXCELLENT spokesperson for the truth.

[fertilizeonarbusto]

10. How about

exciting enough of the folks that never vote there because they figure all politicians are Rethugs or Rethugs-lite and no one speaks for them. I'm sure there are people in red states that are tired of fundy tyranny but that think there is no alternative. Who speaks for them? For that matter, who has been speaking for us?

[AntiCoup2K4]

60. Exactly.

I'd rather reach some of the 50% who think everything is too hopeless to bother than the "10% in the middle" who don't have enough mental capacity to realize that the current occupant of the White House is a lying criminal shitbag.

[KingOfLostSouls]

11. Most red states WILL shift blue

because of dean's 50 state message and campaign

and by attacking republican hypocrisy is needed, instead of sitting back and letting the RNC CHAIRMAN'S accuse US of consorting with terrorists. accusing US of not having morals, orhow to balance a budget

when dean said, "we don't need moral lessons from tom delay" he was damn right and its about time someone said that.

we can pull up all the memos and proof we want, but unless we're willing to take the ball and run with it we'll never win

winning is OFFENSE AND DEFENSE, not just sitting around going, "please ken mehlman, don't hurt us. please james dobson, don't hurt us."

and since none of the other democrats want to stand up to talk radio busholvism, its about time someone on a national level did. I think if Bill Clinton long ago had told douche windbag, "hey, I'm the president, and if you got something to say to me, say it, but leave my kid out of it," I think a DAMN lot of people would have appreciated his candor and willingness to DEFEND his beliefs and family.

[paulk]

13. millions of voters who have never voted before in their lives

(and who aren't white Christians), will suddenly come to realize that since the Republicans that they hate have never made an honest living, they'll decide to not only register to vote, but vote for a Democrat.

[jmaier]

15. I'd like some of the dreams you've been having.

I'd like to see one election outcome in U.S. that has been predicated on such a scenario. Cynic or not, politics is not an exercise in utopian construction. It's down and dirty, interest versus interest, with all the manipulation and corruption that it entails.

The goal is to make sure that power ends up in the hands where it will do the most good and least harm -- not the perfect good. That is destined to always be a disappointment.

[paulk]

19. sorry

forgot the sarcasm icon

[jmaier]

35. I thought you might have been

teasing but I responded out of reflex!

[ClassWarrior]

17. Read "Don't Think of an Elephant."

Lakoff makes a powerful case that in today's political climate, you can only win by appealing strongly to your base.

NGU.

[LoZoccolo]

22. I didn't get that at all from that book.

Admittedly, I haven't finished it, but I would at least think that Dean is lending an assist to the frame that Republicans have worked hard to establish, and that allowing they to fight according to a plan they initiated is almost never wise. I can't see Lakoff approving Dean saying something in line with their frame.

[ClassWarrior]

27. You haven't even finished one book by the guy...

...and his skinniest one at that, yet you feel comfortable bandying about words like "their frame?" Read the book, son.

NGU.

[LoZoccolo]

29. Yes, I do.

I read the chapter about framing.

So tell me if I'm right: the Republicans have not tried to establish themselves as a white Christian party?

[DrGonzoLives]

23. Yes, but

part of that is presenting a positive image. This is not a positive image, and we all know how the corporate media loves to assassinate Dean. Ed Schultz made a good point yesterday afternoon, that Dean is getting too far off message. Our message simply can't be REPUBLICANS R EVIL!!11! There has to be some method of applying our views to values everyone shares.

[ClassWarrior]

31. The Corporate Media would assassinate Dean if he said he likes...

...sunshine and bunnies. Or any other outspoken Dem for that matter. So why on earth would YOU trust the Corporate Media when they try to make "our message" "republicans r evil??" I refuse to give them that much power over my life.

NGU.

[DrGonzoLives]

33. Why make it easier for them?

If they're going to assassinate the man, then let's make it a challenge, instead of loading their sniper rifles ourselves.

[ClassWarrior]

39. So he needs to be bold and decisive - but also ultra-cautious and ginger??

<LOL> Another bear trap manufactured by Roveco.

NGU.

[DrGonzoLives]

80. Jesus, you'd think I was talking to freepers here

Everything is black and white, isn't it? If I don't agree with you I MUST BE THE ENEMY!!1!!11

[paulk]

25. I would agree with you if I thought Dean represented the base

of the Democratic Party.

He doesn't and his supporters surely don't. Otherwise he would have been our candidate in 2004.

[ClassWarrior]

34. I didn't say represent it. I said appeal to it.

NGU.

[paulk]

44. his rhetoric may appeal to a certain segment

but, overall I feel his recent statements would tend to drive people away. IMHO. The base was pretty damn fired up in 2004 - Kerry got more votes than any Democrat before him. Supposedly Bush fired up his base even more and won. I have my doubts about that.

I still haven't seen anyone answer Lo Zocollo's question. How is Dean going to turn red states blue by insulting the very people we need to bring over to our side? We don't need more votes in liberal strongholds. We don't need more votes in Mass. or California - we need them in the swing states and in the borderline red states. We need to expand the base, not fire it up.

[ClassWarrior]

51. Read the book, son.

If you want to win anything, the first thing that has to go is that red/blue Radical RW frame.

NGU.

[paulk]

82. that's not an answer,

son.

[CTLawGuy]

101. assuming the base voted for the person they thought represented them

versus the person they thought was "electable".

[paulk]

111. more deaniac spin

results matter in politics

not fantasy

[CTLawGuy]

114. haha

yes, no one was thinking about who could beat Bush, what a preposterous thing to say :eyes:

People were juuust concerned about who could represent them :eyes:

give me a break.

[paulk]

117. I'm sick of the constant spin from people like you

that the only reason Kerry won the nomination was that people thought he could win. That they weren't voting for him because he best represented their politics. That if people had voted for the person that had best represented them, Howard Dean would have been the nominee.

It's bullshit.

It's fantasy.

[CTLawGuy]

118. I don't know that people would have voted for dean if that were the case

but I DO know that Kerry's big strategy was to say that he was electable, that he could beat bush (and that Dean couldnt') Dean never effectively responded to that.

or maybe you were asleep during the ABB movement? Perhaps, in your world, people weren't really obsessed with beating Bush and were looking for the candidate who looked like a sure bet with the independents.

[CTLawGuy]

119. also

oh yes, kerry sure represented us.

We dems are sure for keeping part of the Bush tax cuts.

We were sure for the Iraq War. We definitely did not fax and call our reps en masse to beg them to vote against the war. :eyes:

And we sure love that Patriot Act, and we were so thrilled when everyone voted for it without reading it...

[Igel]

18. I don't think Dean will make a difference. His rhetoric

will inspire some articles, and some counter-rhetoric.

He may be less successful in attacting large donations to the central party; he may not be. There may well be some very wealthy dems that will support his rhetoric.

The most Dean will do will cause the "dem wing of the dem party" to be enthused, and rile up the "repub wing of the repub party". In other words, those mostly easily enthused and riled up. The people that matter in the elections are currently sleeping until a barrage of mail and ads rouses them from their slumber.

What's important will be the candidates and what they do and say.

[mtnsnake]

20. Before they turn blue, they need to get THE message

and Dean has gotten so much attention lately for our message, one way or the other, that it's a fantastic start.

You might not like HOW he's getting the message across, but he's opened a can of worms that's not about to close anytime too soon. When's the last time the moveable middle has heard so much negative rhetoric about the Republican Party? Dean might've said the words, blunt as they are, but it's the MSM who's been repeating them day after day. I love what Dean's doing. He's making himself a catalyst to get discussion going on among mainstream Americans about the truth about Republicans.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

21. Pardon me, but don't you fight against using "red" and "blue" states?

Aren't you the one who argues it's a bullshit line used by the right wing? :shrug:

On edit: Here's your own words: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=685036&mesg_id=685271

LoZoccolo Sat Aug-28-04 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. I'm saying the whole concept of red and blue states is stupid...



...for anything other than counting electoral votes. For the purposes of dividing the country into warring terroritories it's stupid, dangerous, and unfair to at least 30% of the population of those states.

And Barack Obama is not the President of the United States, true, but that's only the second most-coveted job in the world. He was President of the Harvard Law Review.

[LoZoccolo]

26. You could call mine a nuanced position.

Do I think we should do anything to further divide the country by putting an impractically oversimplified construct over how we think about how to pursue politics and deal with people? No.

Do I think the electoral votes of certain states went to Bush* in the 2004 election? Yes.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

30. So you'll use the label when it's convenient for you.

And you'll argue against it otherwise?

Is that what the criteria are? Vote for it before you vote against it, right?

[LoZoccolo]

46. No.

You don't understand. I'm incorporating a description how the electoral process works. If we are to win the next election, we have to take one of the states where the electoral votes went to Bush*, and make it go to the Democratic candidate, right? That process is unlikely to change before the 2008 election. I want to know how Dean's remarks will make that happen. I am not calling anyone a redneck uneducated hick or writing a book that says I'm so cool because I've divided people into "metro" and "retro" categories and I'm not one of them, or making up wild tales about what I've seen fit to say goes on in their minds, or any other similiar mean-spirited arrogant condescending* activity. I am simply asking how this will get us what we want, and the last mile of that is getting a greater number of electoral votes than we did last time, and electoral votes are given on a state-by-state basis. I hope I have made this clearer. Again, a nuanced position, but I think there's a difference in degree of what I argued against and what I'm doing here.

_{* This description is borrowed from a chant FReepers use when confronted with liberals at their rallies. No I'm not a FReeper.}

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LoZoccolo]

132. I find your stances to be insular, fanatical, masturbatory, and naive.

And my stance does not include "sucking Rethug dick". Try to figure out what it is. That you fabricated it indicates that you need to study it a bit more. It's not the topic of this thread anyways.

You should show a bit more respect for your elders.

[JDPriestly]

40. By getting blue voters out to vote

By challenging the idea that the Republicans are the only ones who know how to be down-to-earth absolutely honest about their resentments.

By doing away with the stereotype that Democrats are nice guys who -- finish last.

By telling the truth about the Republicans and what they stand for.

By giving courage to the many people who are intimidated into voting Republican because they think that only Republicans stand up for themselves and can stand up for others.

That's just the start of the list.

[Norquist Nemesis]

41. Food for thought

Dean's comments were made at an event targeted for Democrats. Red (oops! strike that...) Raw meat for the attendees that turned into red meat for the media and Republicans. Let's imagine this had not been widely reported, hashed, re-hashed, discussed, debated, and dissembled *wink wink* over the past few days.

The base is energized to keep working. These are the foot soldiers that do the door knocking, talking, inviting, one on ones getting others involved. It is vital to keep them motivated.

Day after day, we are spoonfed the spin and it's easy to become disillusioned...feel hopeless. Just look at the dynamic mood here on DU on a daily basis. Dean offers the hope and provides the leadership to get it done.

Now, let's add the fact that his comments have been widely reported, hashed, re-hashed, discussed, debated, and dissembled *wink wink* over the past few days. Same effect without actual attendees. The difference is with the larger audience, there's a few protestors with banners crying foul about a National Democratic Party event.

Now, take us up to today. The media is at the door with cameras and microphones at the ready to report on (an expected??) bloody and bruised Dean after a conversation with establishment Democrats. What does Dean have to say? He speaks on the issues. What Democrats are about and what we are fighting for.

Everyone watching is expecting him to be 'reserved' and 'handle himself'. The protesters are standing in the shadows waiting to pounce...but wait! Dean's not regretful or reticent about the past few days. He talks about the issues.

I just hope the establishment Democrats recognize this opportunity and learn a little bit about how to handle the corporate manipulation they face. On the one hand, they'll cry that they never get asked to speak about the issues that are important, then they screw up the chance when they do!

Bravo, Dr. Dean!!!

[zanne]

49. Bush will do that.

We have three and a half more years to wait, but he has three and a half more years to screw up. And with the way things are going, there'll be a draft before 2008.

[TheFarseer]

52. Answer: They don't say that. They don't have to

they have their attack dogs in the media to do that for them. I think some of Howard's comments were uncalled for to be perfectly honest. He should not say, "I hate republicans" He should say what he hates about their agenda, but saying you hate certain people is unconstructive. Some of his other comments are just polarizing. Overall I really like Howard, but I think he goes about things the wrong way sometimes. He needs to focus on what repubs are doing wrong and what would be right, not trying to stereotype them and saying he hates them. LIke I said, I love Howard, but he should consider adjusting his tactics.

[Neshanic]

55. So official the party apologist job is still open. Send your resume.

[NoPasaran]

62. Dean's remarks won't, but his actions will

Since becoming party chair, Dean has implemented a program that is funding state parties so they can remain organized year-round and put trained organizers on the ground.

As for his remarks... well, that's just our Howard, giving 'em hell.

[jonnyblitz]

63. and how will business as usual change the blue states red?

seriously.

[LoZoccolo]

64. I'm assuming you meant to say "red states blue".

And where do I advocate business as usual? People speak as if either one is for Dean, or for Lieberman, and there's no other anything, and if you're not interested in doing things their way, you're not interested in doing things. I have no idea why that is.

[jonnyblitz]

71. oops. my mistake about the red blue thing..

but fair enough on your other comment. i am just not so sure yet Dean is fucking things up , that is all. I always appreciate your articulate points of view even if i dont always agree with them .

[LoZoccolo]

75. Thank you.

I appreciate that.

[markus]

66. The party chair is one of the people who's supposed to deliver these blows

and not the candidates.

Until AA and other channels of info have the same market penetration as RWR, people like Dean are going to have to go out there.

To borrow the sig I have on my work email:

"Why not go out on a limb. Isn't that where the fruit it?"

[LoZoccolo]

Dupe, self delete.

[LoZoccolo]

69. OK, you've delineated a role...

...but the question still remains, what is the usefulness of fulfilling it in real terms?

[markus]

70. First, there aren't many Red states in play

I don't see a Democratic candidate I could vote for carrying North Dakota, unless he was Huey Long reincarnate (and the people of this state can be convinced to rediscover their own populist, NPL roots, which is a task we carry here).

In a state that is in play, a comment essentially attacking the people who breezed in and out of their polling places last November is certainly going to make a difference in motivating the people who waited hours to vote.

Remember, the swing voter is a statistic myth. The so called "swing voters" have an increasing tendency to vote one way, but to refuse to self-identify one way or the other. We need to be motivating our base to vote, vote, vote, and picking up votes at the margin.

I think that even some of the people who voted against gay marriage because some Limgaugh listening idiot at their church told them otherwise the activist judges would force their minister to perform marriage would be appalled at the open homophobia of the core GOP.

The GOP has been confrontational for two decades now, since the early days of Limbaugh the Gingrich. Remember the latter's
bloodless civil war"? We're in the middle of it, and civil wars are not pretty.

I think it is important to demonize the enemy in time of war. Don't you? If it didn't work, why has everyone been doing it from the Old Testament and the Illiad until the wars of today?

[LoZoccolo]

74. Yes there are.

Look at Clinton's maps versus Kerry's.

In a state that is in play, a comment essentially attacking the people who breezed in and out of their polling places last November is certainly going to make a difference in motivating the people who waited hours to vote.

Perhaps. But one could have been made that risks little or nothing from us. Personally, I think a Barack Obama-style positive motivation works even better, and I found a lot of people demoralized by the emphasis on ABB and not on a positive agenda, even with Kerry.

21% of white evangelicals voted for Kerry in the last election. At best, they will do nothing as a result of this statement. At worst, some will get insulted and vote Republican. People think this demographic is statically Republican, but in 1987 it was 34% Republican and 31% Democratic - much more even than now.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=757

We need to be motivating our base to vote, vote, vote, and picking up votes at the margin.

I have a lot of trouble believing they did not vote in the 2004 election. If they did not, then I do not expect them to do so in 2008.

I think it is important to demonize the enemy in time of war. Don't you? If it didn't work, why has everyone been doing it from the Old Testament and the Illiad until the wars of today?

You're trying to compare wars where you dominate, injure, and kill your enemy to one where you must persuade them. In any event, in any war you must choose a strategy that works in the given situation, I'm just asking people to elaborate on how this strategy works for this battle.

If you like war metaphors, think about this one: the idea that the Republican Party is a white, Christian party is one that at least certain of their number has worked hard to establish. Why allow them to fight according to a plan that they've picked as one that they think will allow them to win? Why let them define the roles, and then step into the one they want for us?

[theboss]

77. Also, in a war, you want numbers on your side

If the US is 60-65 percent White Christian, why state that one party is their home?

My biggest concern is that Dean's statement will say to White Christians not in the Republican tent, "That's where we should be."

That's the main problem I have with the Christian bashing on this site. Politcally, it's suicide. You don't insult 75 percent of the electorate.

[Awsi Dooger]

85. I wish more DUers would study those Pew Research links from 2004

They are extremely enlightening. And hardly backfitting to explain Bush's win, since they preceded the election. I discovered those tables and analysis several days before the election but didn't accept the ominous significance.

Regarding Howard Dean's influence, the only way he helps us win in the South is if he inspires a young potential JFK or Bill Clinton to enter politics, when otherwise he would not. Wooing voters or regions who would normally reject your message is candidate driven, not ideology based. DUers never seem to get that. A superior charismatic candidate can overcome obstacles, mediocre unlikeable nominees forfeit every built-in advantage.

[markus]

93. I have read the Pew poll closley

Outside of homophobia, it merely indicates that many Americans believes this is a "Christian" nation, in the sense that it is a English-speaking nation or a northern-hemisphere nation.

I don't see anything outside of the gay marriage issue to indicate that there is any basis for allegiance to the currently constitued GOP except fear of the unknow.

What I do see is an opportunity to win on economicly populist issues, as I tirelessly argue here and elsewhere.

I don't see anything outside of gay marriage that would given any support to the GOP's exclusionary, homogonized-American world view. It indicates the direct opposite, a lot of tolerance for diversity, and even for immigration.

The people in the middle need to understand that the GOP isn't talking about keeping gay marriages out of your chuches. It's about making gay people effectivley 3/5's of a citizen. I don't think that sort of intolerance is rampant.

The GOP isn't about making us a more pious and moral nation. It is about making a narrow interpretation of Judeo-Xian scripture the only acceptalce interpretation. I don't see support for that in the Pew mumbers.

The right-wing Xians must be marginalized for the new-cross burners they are in their hearts. And they need to be shown up for the dupes of large corporations and corporate owners who are busilly holding them up by the ankles and shaking all the change out while they say the Rosary in front of a women's clinic.

[Awsi Dooger]

105. I'm talking about ALL 9 OF THEM, not just link #8

Go back to post #74. That link is merely #8 among 9 different aspects PEW analyzed, impacting current voting trends. The first one deals with Party Affiliation changes after 9/11, and so on. Atop each segment there are links to the others. I found the studies fascinating as a block, even thugh I had problems with isolated segments, as you did with #8.

[markus]

125. I read the two main analytical docs

and looked briefly at some of the technical matter from the fall poll, and looked at every set of responses.


I still do not believe that people in the middle share the "values" of the religious wing nuts.

The other distrubing thing was the indication of a large plurality that thought creation ought to be allowed. Again, I think that's an indication of the middle being accomodating to people, and not wanting to give offense.

As long as we sit on our hands and be polite little Democrats, they win. When the middle sees that teaching Creationism is equally offensive to a large block of people, I think that support would evaporate pretty quickly.

[Awsi Dooger]

134. Evaluating the religious aspects is not a strength of mine

I was more interested in stuff like the Party ID switch since 9/11. The PEW analysis emphazies its breadth and highlights specific areas, like among hispanics. I think that explains the derailing, or at least slowdown, of the "Emerging Democratic Majority" aspects. I would have looked at last November's election much differently if I'd known the party ID would break 37-37. The PEW link basically predicted that months ahead of time but I was too stubborn and partisan to accept their findings.

[markus]

91. War and war metaphors

You're trying to compare wars where you dominate, injure, and kill your enemy to one where you must persuade them. In any event, in any war you must choose a strategy that works in the given situation, I'm just asking people to elaborate on how this strategy works for this battle.

Don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, much, do you. His rhetoric (and that of what other of that infratructure I occasionally listen into; Hannity for example) is clearly that of dehuminizing and demonizing anyone they do not agree with.

We are not real Americans. In fact, we are an enemy of real Americans. That is the basic message of Rush Limbaugh.

Yes, we need more candidates like Obama.

And we need more party leaders like Dean, who will help us create a work in which Evangelical will join Klan, Skinhead, and similar terms where it belongs.

Not all Evangelicals are religious skin heads. I've had discussions with this about people who belong to evangelical churches which are not politial. If we can find a better way to identify the cross burners from other evangelicals, find. That's a matter of lexical tactics.

But I look for and work for a world in which people look on the pompous display of false Xianity or it's over use in politics the way they look on cross burning.

[LoZoccolo]

96. I don't think it matters what they do.

Don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, much, do you. His rhetoric (and that of what other of that infratructure I occasionally listen into; Hannity for example) is clearly that of dehuminizing and demonizing anyone they do not agree with.

So? In their role, they are trying to prevent people who would benefit from our politics from going over to our side. Given the facts unobstructed from lies and emotional rhetoric, the natural tendency of their audience would probably be toward our side; the job of Limbaugh and Hannity is to reverse that. Our role is different, so we can be expected to use a different strategy.

Most of what I've been saying to you has to do with truly looking at what game we're playing and the roles in it. You seem to think just imitating the other side is what we should be doing; I'm saying the roles and dynamics are such that that won't work. The sides are not simply two mirror images of each other. We should at least be thinking through the effects of what we're doing before we decide that simple imitation is the best way to go.

[killbotfactory]

67. Moderates don't care about this shit

They are busy working and living their lives. They'll start to pay attention again around 2006. Right now rallying the base is important.

[mondo joe]

78. Motivate the base in red states, they turn blue.

That's the Rove strategy - get all your base out there and win.

[Jacobin]

81. We know who DIDN'T turn the red states blue, that's for sure

John (what me worry?) Kerry.

I guaranfuckingtee you Howard had/has a far better shot at that than Kerry.

Because he's not pusillanimous.

[alcuno]

83. Repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat.

Actually, I'm not convinced that Dean has a plan, however here's how I spin it. Dean could repeat outrageous, outlandish, and true things until they become "the truth." Also, you can't hit a moving target.

I'd like to see a thread on what outlandish things people think Dean should say. I'm too lazy to ask, however.

[election_2004]

86. How will nominating Hillary turn red states blue....???

I believe that's a more significant and pressing question.

Much more attention is placed on the presidential nominee than on the DNC Chair.

[dave29]

88. Do you have any idea how uncomfortable moderates are

with the conservative base of the Republican Party? Especially now that they are clearly running the show?

Dean can be the lightning rod, the moderates will not be voting for Dean. Dean is doing what he needs to do to get the base as strong as possible - and reinforce the truth about the Republican party for those moderates (many of whom are White Christians themselves)who are uncomfortable voting for a religious agenda.

This isn't rocket Science, it's just plain smart political strategy. I wish people understood the incredible job Dean is doing of framing the debate.

[LoZoccolo]

89. If he's framing the debate...

...how come he's doing it with the Republicans' frame?

[Democat]

94. His comments won't help our cause at all

But some people are so fed up with wimpy Democrats that they are just happy to see someone yelling at Republicans.

[LoZoccolo]

97. Well, people need to realize it's not about them.

As with many things, allowing a strategy to be clouded with emotional needs is an unnecessary risk...especially if people are aware of those emotional needs. Political strategy is not a place for self-gratification.

[Democat]

99. You want the Democratic Party to have a strategy?

Maybe we will again someday, but I haven't seen many signs of a decent "strategy" from this party in years!

[Writer]

100. LoZoccolo! The biscuit boy is nigh!

Nigh, I say! He cometh over the mountain. He breatheth fire!

Take cover!

[LoZoccolo]

106. The Biscuit Boy has been whispering in a lot of ears.

The Biscuit Boy would never go so far as to tell you 2+2=5...but he would tell you that the number of marbles in one box plus the number of marbles in another box adds up to five, and if someone else opened the boxes and counted the marbles and said there were four, they'd get accused of stealing a marble.

[rhett o rick]

102. The Dem's need a strategy badly. Are we trying to win some red states?

Or are we going to continue to hold our selves above all Republicans and lose again? A suggested strategy: State that supporting the IWAR resolution was a mistake and needs to be fixed immediately. Attack the Bush Administration as hard as possible. Sympathize with the victimized mainstream Repub's. Their Party has been high jacked. I know they have some responsibility, but we need to win them over, not polarize them away. Karl Rove must have written Dean's speech. It hurt the Party. We need a strategy instead of everyone on their own. That's my two-bits, and worth every cent.

[Guaranteed]

103. Yes, I think his leadership and conviction are extremely attractive

to red-staters. They have a lot of respect for him, whether they agree with him or not.

[RetroLounge]

107. You are correct.

We need to be nice to Republicans.

:eyes:

RL

[kohodog]

109. Yes, we must mind our manners.

They vilify Dems and tell totally outrageous lies and the echo machine makes it truth. Dean tells it like it is and the DLC condemns him more than the RW liars? Something is wrong with this picture.

[LoZoccolo]

110. Did I say that?

I didn't say that. Why do you think I said that?

You took a pass on the original question, as well.

[LSdemocrat]

112. Party chairs should motivate the base and organize. Candidates persuade.

Party chairs have never been instrumental in delivering reasoned arguments to persuade voters. Politicians and their campaigns are supposed to do that. The party chair's main jobs are to fire up the base and provide an infrastructure which our candidates can utilize to win. Dean's remarks certainly fire me up, and his smart spending (working to establish permanent offices in all 50 states) will help Democrats win.

[beyurslf]

116. Tell me why the Chairman of MY party has to please the Republicans.

He DOES NOT represent them.

[WildEyedLiberal]

120. Are you daring to question the wisdom of His Holiness?

FIE, HERETIC SCUM! HE SHALL SMITE THEE!

:sarcasm:

Actually, your point is very logical and valid, and will thus probably get ignored or flamed by some of the resident DU koolaid drinkers.

[DemGa]

122. People don't really remember remarks too much

They remember attitude. Dean's fighting back; that gets respect and support.

[spooky3]

123. Don't you think Rush and his ilk play an important role?

In your second paragraph, don't they do exactly what you say * and friends say more tactfully--and they do it with lies? Without a similar talk radio and TV operation, the Dems may well need one person getting publicity, speaking truth bluntly, to get media attention (and raise $ from the base and interest some Dem leaning bystanders to get involved). When was the last time the average American heard anyone other than Harry Reid or Hillary Clinton quoted on anything?

I think Nancy has it right:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1843523

[wyldwolf]

124. sure he does, which is why he said:

They let certain people hit with the hard stuff, and other people know not to. And it works.

[lojasmo]

126. Your premise is a red herring.....

Please point out where anybody postulated that "dean's remarks" would turn red states blue.

[LoZoccolo]

130. Well what good are they, then?

People have pointed out how they could hurt us...so now what are they for? Someone should at least be able to point out what good they are if they're gonna defend them so vigorously.

[lojasmo]

133. Posts number 40 and 41 sum it up pretty nicely.

If so many "good democrats" weren't more busy bashing dean than they are calling republicans on their bullshit, this wouldn't be such an issue.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

127. Dean's outbursts alone won't do it, but

in any organization, the person at the top sets the tone.

By being outspoken, Dean is giving tacit permission for other Dems to be outspoken, although hopefully in a more focused way.

In the red states, Dems need to take to heart the lessons of What is the Matter with Kansas and start speaking out on the real issues (not the fake wedge issues of the Republicanites or the DLC corporate mission statements or the yuppie left's quasi-libertarian concerns) that are facing Middle America today: health care, affordable housing, secure employment that pays a living wage, equal educational opportunity, support for small entrepreneurs, and other bread and butter issues that few in either party are talking about.

The Dems need to stand for something. That's what wins votes.

Al Gore and John Kerry both faced the worst candidate the Republicans have ever put up. Even with vote fraud (which undoubtedly occurred), they should have trounced him with a Johnson vs. Goldwater-like margin, a cheatproof margin. Instead, the election was close enough to steal in both cases.

The problem is that the Republicans created a clear, simple image for themselves and the Democrats did not, except as a reaction to the Republicanites. There was an all-out volunteer effort for Kerry, but it was made up more of people who were anti-Bush than people who were pro-Kerry.

In 2006, we need candidates who are not afraid to propose bold initiatives and who don't whimper about how they have to go along with the Republicanites because they're in the minority.

Dean is tacitly giving candidates farther down the food chain permission to do that and to throw away the "don't scare the Republicans or the corporate donors" approach that has prevailed for the past 25 years.

[OnionPatch]

131. Just an opinion here but

with so many swing voters, the voting factor boils down to backbone and guts and spunk. The issues are almost meaningless. The Republicans have been able to yell "baby-killer" louder and with more outrage and conviction than we have been able to yell "Republicans are killing the middle class" (or whatever message we want to get out there.) Go Howard.

Sure Bush doesn't say "babykiller" himself. The others in the party do it for him so he stays "clean." He doesn't come out and condemn the remarks, however, which is IMO where Biden, Obama, etc. are going wrong.

[sendero]

140. To amplify on that..

.... it is my opinion that Americans by and large do not care about policy issues. Sure, they care about the high-level stuff, but they have long since given up any hope of really understanding what is happening in Washington, because the media turns everything into a he-said/she-said recitation with no attempt to get at any objective truth of the matter.

So, realizing they have no chance of understanding what is going on and who is doing what, they go for the party that says things the loudest and the simplest and with conviction.

Never mind the republicans lie their asses off all the time, the average voter has no way to know this.

What they do know is that the Dems have been whimpering in the corner like an abused dog for a long time. Who'd vote for that?

[JHBowden]

137. Dean will build the machine.

Dean gets people energized and involved, and also is doing okay with the fundraising. Plus his comments give other Democrats a lot of press time and an opportunity to play "good cop bad cop." Dean isn't running for office, go he can go ahead and say the shit our candidates cannot.