Why losing remains a real possibility...

[billyf65]

...I want to preface this by saying that although I am not a Dean supporter in the primaries, I admire him, and will fiercely defend him should he be the nominee. I also believe that, just like the other candidates, most of his supporters are good-hearted people with the best interests of the country at heart.

That said, I have a real beef with something I heard on NPR this morning. A group of Dean supporters in Madison -largely UW students- were gathering at a meetup. Several were interviewed, and at least one said they'd support the nominee no matter who it was.

However, another said he would not be supporting the nominee if it is not Dean, commenting that "...if the country isn't ready for Dean, then we don't deserve him, and we'll wait until 2008."

I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but what an ass. This isn't about one person - it is about grasping our country from the icy clutches of perhaps the worst, most corrupt administration in modern history -and we CAN NOT afford to "wait until 2008."

But maybe I'm being an asshole.

[JuniorPlankton]

1. You are absolutely right!

Dean himself asked to support the nominee no matter who he is!

[ramapo]

2. There's a fair amount of that sentiment around....very troubling

You can find plenty of that in these forums. It's the old "if I don't win I'm going to take my ball and go home". When I read postings describing how Kerry would be just as bad as Bush, I could scream...

Didn't Nader teach us anything?

[Atlant]

7. The lesson that Nader taught us is that Dems ought to stand for something.

He also taught us that Democrats ignore the left at their own peril.

The Democrats have not yet learned this lesson. Therefore, it
may very well be repeated for them in 2004. And again and again
until they learn it or vanish.

Just in case you're wondering who would make such as outrageous
statement as "I won't automatically vote for the eventual Democratic
nominee", I'll make the statement:

The Democrat have almost certainly lost my vote in 2004.

Atlant

[Odallas]

14. Nader stands for what the Dems used to

If Nader runs I will vote for him...AGAIN!

[redqueen]

20. Hi Odallas

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[Semi_subversive]

3. I think you're right on the money

The bottom line is supporting the Democratic candidate, be it Dean, Kerry, Clark, Edwards, Kucinich or Sharpton. Losing is not an option. There is too much at stake.

[Doctor_J]

4. Howard is a trooper

If someone else is nominated, HE will make sure his supporters do the, er, right thing this year. His passion will be felt during the campaign and at the polls in November regardless of who we're running.

Unfortunately, after we win the WH in November, Terry Mac will probably get to keep his job, where Dean would be MUCH better IMO.

[Atlant]

8. Howard Dean has my vote, but he certainly doesn't CONTROL my vote.

> If someone else is nominated, HE will make sure his supporters
> do the, er, right thing this year.

Howard Dean has my vote, but he certainly doesn't CONTROL my vote.
I will vote for whom I choose in the General Election. And right
now, the odds are looking pretty good that I won't be voting for
anyone from either of the Corporate parties.

Atlant

[Doctor_J]

13. This I don't get

sorry. If you are a big Dean fan (as I am, but just a bigger fan of Clark), and he believes in, say, Clark, why wouldn't you vote for Clark? You're in Atlanta, so the odds are that whoever is on our ticket will be resoundingly endorsed by Dean, Cynthia McKinney, and Max Cleland. IOW, those 3 people believe in our nominee and our cause. Shouldn't you?

[redqueen]

21. Did you just define 'groupthink'?

Or was that a demonstration of herd mentality?

[Mairead]

25. Elect Kucinich, get rid of McAuliffe

Unlike any of the other candidates excepting Sharpton, DK is talking about some real change. Shifting the balance of power. It's why he was so vilified in Cleveland, too. He shifted resources from the wealthy elites to the working people.

Today he is the ONLY one who says clearly, simply, and without equivocation 'Enough! We've had enough.'

Ya basta--no mas!

[Greylady]

5. Try to understand

that many of us want the nomination to go to someone who has not voted for the IWR. I support Clark and will be deeply disappointed if he doesn't get the nomination but unlike the young man who spoke out, I will still support the nominee even if it is Kerry ~ just not as enthusiastically. Dr. Dean and General Clark (and really Dennis Kucinich but he was marginalized early) have been they ones who started the take down of this administration. Without them, Bush would still be riding high. We owe them for taking the bullet.

[fishbone]

6. I'll vote for whoever the Democratic candidate is...

This election is about one thing:

ANYONE BUT BUSH!

I'd vote for Santa Claus if I had to.

fishbone

[Atlant]

11. Anyone but Bush? Surely you can't really mean that.

> This election is about one thing:
>
> ANYONE BUT BUSH!

Anyone but Bush? Surely you can't really mean that. We could win
the Presidency, but see the Republicans strengthen their hold on
the House and Senate. Aside from the fact that NO ONE will get
nominated to the Supreme Court for four years, what good would
that do?

We need to transform the Democratic Party so that it once again
stands for something. Merely unseating Bush will do almost no
good at all and could do the Democrats tremendous long-term
harm. Unless the Democrats reform, they'll continue losing
almost every contested election that they face (even if they
do manage to win the Presidency once in a while).

Atlant

[newyawker99]

19. Hi fishbone!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[bunk76]

9. A-hole....

I for one think not.If or when your prime candidate leaves the race
the number one motivation should be getting these scurrlious miscreants out of the white house.I for one do not think we could survive another four years of this madness that is bush and his merry band of low lifes.

[beyurslf]

10. I agree.

I have a couple of friends who support various candidates who say they will not vote for so and so. One went so far as to say he would vote for Bush if Dean isn't the nominee. The others said they wouldn't vote at all.

Wrong wrong wrong. I think alot of people support their candidate so fervently right now though may change their minds as they get to know whoever we nominate.

[creativelcro]

12. I think he's right. And I'll do the same. The underground no-vote

for Kerry in the local Boston chapter is now at 137, and growing...

[MoonRiver]

15. Who will assume responsibility for the fascist take-over of this country

in 9 short months if * stays in? Sadly, if the worst case scenario becomes reality I won't be able to totally blame the * criminals. It's like picking up the proverbial rattlesnake and then being amazed when it bites you. After all, it is just doing what comes naturally, nothing personal. Good Dems are enabling the Puke rattlers to take a fatal chunk out of this democracy by demanding that our presidential nominee be pure as the driven snow, or else they'll take their marbles and go home.
:thumbsdown:

[billyf65]

16. A few things to remember...

1) Yes, Kerry and Edwards did vote for the IWR. And that doesn't sit well with me - BUT, if they had been president, we would not have gone, and that is a very important distinction.

2) Those of you waiting for 2008 should know that four years is a LIFETIME in politics - as well as a lifetime to be away from politics. Bradley supporters surely thought he'd be back. Same with Kemp-lovers (Dole being a bit aged). Dole ('76 and '96) and Gephardt ('88 and '04) did it because they remained in Congress.

[RetroLounge]

17. You get the candidate you deserve...

I'll be staying home...

[John_H]

18. I've said it from day one: Howard Dean did not help the Dems

Anyone can identify Dean Supporters--here, in the media, and in personal conversations--who plan to enable Chimp by denying his opponent a vote from a Dem.

Sadly, it's the way movements work. The movement--no matter what the movement is, is what matters most to some people. These sad, self-absorbed people invest so much of their self worth into the movement, that they are perfectly willing to throw a tantrum and, like any two year old near you, to lash out against their own self interests.

That's the way Trippi set up and marketed the campaign, and Chimp's media is going to make sure the Dems pay the price.

[creativelcro]

22. I KNOW what my self-interests are. I also know that PERSONALLY

i will be better off with Bush in power. Ahah! , now I'll be accused of voting against Kerry for self-interest (after you just accused me of being childish and voting against my self-interest). I'm willing to give up substantial financial benefits for a Dean presidency. It's the right thing to do. But not for Kerry. Sorry.

[bobbieinok]

23. don't you care about the people who are hurting???????

from what this regime has already done?????

you really think it's ok if we suffer thru 4 more years??????

I read a Green supporter said in 2000, 'We survived Nixon and Reagan; we'll survive W.'

My reaction then = and now - is "Who is We?" It does not include the majority of WE THE PEOPLE.

[Mairead]

26. If people really cared--REALLY cared--they'd be looking at

who's offering the most change, and voting for that person. And it wouldn't be any of the 'Top Four' because the Top Four are the Top Four because they're not demanding any real change. They're members of the Oligarchs Club, and what they offer is give-with-the-left-hand-take-back-with-the-right.

[Duder]

24. Since those voting in the primary...

...are voting based on "electable" according to the polls, then one has to assume that losing those voters which disagree with the nominee's issues and platform have already been a consideration. So the burden of ousting Bush rests on the nominee and not the supporters of different candidates.

[JasonDeter]

27. No, your right. We're going to find out who's a DINO .

Those who don't vote for the Democratic nominee are worse than Nader IMO.