Democratic Primary Dissent is Patriotic

[RageAgainstTheirMachine]

Dean is currently the front runner because he, in my view, insidiously and malignantly attacked the previous front-runner John Kerry. He painted John Kerry, perhaps the most solidly liberal senator behind Teddy Kennedy, as a toy of the DLC, as pro-war, as not a true Democrat. I personally believe such criticisms were unwarranted and false, but that was Dean's strategy, and, for the most part, it worked.

Now, that Dean is at the top, he and his supporters want all the "mud-slinging" to stop. They want Dean anointed (by Gore) and proclaimed (by the media) as the winner before a single vote has been cast. Well, I'm sorry. Dean's attacks on Kerry, as wrong and misguided as I believed them to be, were part of the primary process. They still are part of the primary process, and this is a good thing. It is a good thing that we Democrats do not allow party bosses or big money to determine our nominee. Dissent and open discussion are what make the Democratic Party morally superior than the Republican Party.

Dean should be prepared for even more criticisms of his record and views to come, and his supporters, instead of trying to paint such criticism as supporting the enemy, should logically and factually support their candidate.

At the end of the process, we will have a nominee, and whoever it is will be a stronger challenger against George Bush because of a tough, patriotic Democratic primary.

Let the best man or woman win.

[mouse7]

1. Howard Dean controls the Rings of Power with the One Ring

Howard Dean gave rings of great power to all the important people. However, Howard Dean didn't tell all the important people he had a ring made that controls all the Rings of Power. Howard Dean insured One Ring controls them all!!

Vote Clark. Clark is against Howard Dean having the One Ring that controls them all!

[TeacherCreature]

2. read my sig line

[MidwestMomma]

6. And your point is?

What, that people attacking Dean are just crybabies? What a way to stimulate debate!

Oh wait, I forgot the latest meme: Must stifle all debate. Debate is now bad. Debate helps the GOP. Must not attack other candidates. Mudslinging is aiding and abetting the enemy. No more negativity. Negativity will be used by Bush stragetists. Did I miss any?

[mouse7]

7. Nope. You got it

You get an "A" on the pop quiz.

Debate is a discussion of the issues. Debate, don't irritate.

[DancingBear]

11. No, that's about it

<cough> - I am consumed with the overwhelming aroma of patchouli...

:)

[babzilla]

40. if I'm not mistaken...

dancingbears love the smell of patchouli.

[TLM]

23. Since when is crying about Dean winning... deabate?

I see no deabte at all... only sour grapes.

[lcordero]

3. mud-slinging????

Is that the new code word for truth-telling?

The truth is always ugly, that's a mandatory part of life.

[TLM]

25. Funny when Dean tells the truth about Kerry...

suporting IWR, no child left behind, the 350 billion tax cut amendment, the patriot act etc... you call that "insidiously and malignantly attacked the previous front-runner John Kerry."


Yet even Kerry agrees that he is to Dean's right.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-3555359,00.html

Kerry Warns Dean Has No Chance Vs. Bush

Saturday December 27, 2003 3:46 PM
By WILL LESTER
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - With a month to go before the New Hampshire primary, John Kerry says voters must choose between Democratic front-runner Howard Dean or a more centrist candidate like himself.

The Massachusetts senator said he would fare better than Dean against President Bush in November.

``Two roads have diverged in the New Hampshire woods,'' Kerry said in a speech prepared for delivery Saturday in Manchester. ``One of them takes us toward retreat from our responsibility in the world, our responsibility to working families, our responsibility to talk straight to the American people - and our obligation to win their confidence and their votes next November.''

[lcordero]

29. I'm not choosing either one

in the Primary or the general election.

[Terwilliger]

4. alright fine...the only person in the race truly in opposition is Dennis K

he's the only Democrat (outside of Sharpton) who truly offers up an alternative to the things represented by George Bush. Dennis can articulate the true differences and inspire those with even the slightest trepidation about Bush to follow him.

[Torrey Pines]

5. I could live with either Kerry or Dean as the nominee -

I think that it's one thing for the candidates to debate their differences on issues, but I think it's unfortunate when the criticisms extend to the issue of electability. I don't think any candidate should make criticisms that tend to create the impression among the electorate that one or more of the candidates has no hope of winning the general election. That, I think, is ultimately so self-destructive as to be too costly a tactic.

[RageAgainstTheirMachine]

9. what if sharpton were at the top

should "electability" be an issue then?

[mouse7]

13. You know why you just threw Sharpton out as an example

That's why the question doesn't need to be answered.

[RageAgainstTheirMachine]

15. the reason

I really like Al Sharpton. I think he is the funniest, most charismatic, best spoken candidate we have up there, and I would love to have in a debate with Bush, but I understand that his polarizing past and present (he called Dean anti-black recently) makes him totally unelectable. That is the reason. I hope you weren't trying to imply any other reason.

[mouse7]

22. "totally unelectable" IN YOUR OPINION

I imagine his supporters feel differently. Did you grab the DeLorean Time Machine from Back to the Future and grab a post-2004 election newspaper? Do you have those 2004 election results in hand?

Then you really don't know who is or isn't electable, do you?

[DancingBear]

17. Wow - even Ali never shuffled that good!

Tell us, mouse7, why Sharpton was used. We are in need of guidance.
We think it is because he is a bottom tier candidate, but I am sure there must be other reasons.

Take us out of the dark.

[mouse7]

19. Sharpton is outpolling Kerry and Lieberman put together in SC

Sharpton will have more delegates than Kerry, Lieberman and Edwards put together when all is said and done.

[floridaguy]

14. Isn't "electability" the number one priority?

If the number one goal of the Democratic Party is to nominate a candidate who will replace George Bush, deduction would show that the candidate must be "electable".

When someone claims that your candidate is not electable, because . . . That gives you the opportunity to argue the contrary.

If Dean supporters can't convince Democrats that their candidate is electable, but they insist on supporting him as the nominee, we're in for four more loooooooooong years.

Nominate the "electable" candidate - Wesley Clark

[mikehiggins]

32. I have to say I have a problem with that, Torrey

I'm a Clark supporter. I have very little to say against most of the candidates running (don't ask me about Al) but when I look at them through the prism of forty years of political activism I don't see a one of them who can beat Bush.

That's why I joined the draftClark movement, and go to the MeetUps and donate money (to Clark and MoveOn) and all the rest. I am a hard core ABB voter but I need someone to vote for that can win. Otherwise why bother?

In 2000, facing Al Gore and with a record of failure after failure after failure, Bush came within a half million votes of winning fair and square (I know, those aren't words we usually use describing the "Invisible Airman" but there it is). Gore had everything on his side and managed to even scratch out a defeat in Tennessee. IMHO, the voting public was saying something, and it wasn't "what a neat guy Ralph Nader is."

So now we're approaching 2004 and the "Invisible Airman" is an incumbent and inexplicably popular with the very same people that he screws on a daily basis. It is almost as if this entire nation was suffering from "battered woman syndrome". Be that as it may, even the disaster in Iraq isn't crippling him as much as we thought it would, and he will be anointed the GOP nominee on September 2nd (the day, by the way, that the Japanese surrendered in 1945 and my actual birthday) within a short, heavily guarded motorcade to Ground Zero.

Some of you may think it beyond even Bush to accept the nomination AT Ground Zero. I would ask the person next to you to slap your face until you wake up.

Our basic strategy for success will depend heavily on three debates held in an eight week period between September 2nd and November 4th.
That is when most of the people in this nation will be watching the two nominees face off against each other. That is when most of the viewing public will put a face to all the things they've heard and seen and read and been handed on the subway and read on the Internet.

On one side will be Bush. On the other,_________________.

Until Clark announced, none of the names I could type into that space gave me any sense that we could pull this off, and save this nation from four more years of the most radical, and radically wrong, administration we have any record of. Even with Clark we have damned little chance of pulling it off.

We Clark supporters really do feel that Clark is the only candidate who has a shot at beating Bush. We really do feel the future of this nation may well be decided over the next few months in primary votes taken in states most of us will never see. If Clark is not nominated we will swallow hard, cross our fingers, and jump into the fray with all the dedication and anger of anyone in the ABB movement. We will support the Democratic candidate to the best of our ability because ANYBODY will be better than the "Invisible Airman".

But until that point we will continue to say our candidate is our only chance to win in November. That is why we are supporting him in the first place. Otherwise, why would we even bother?

As to bashing, again, why bother? None of us have any real cause of disagreement with the other candidates beyond that one point: we don't believe any of them have a chance to prevail.

Dueling polls, breaking news quotes, its all academic now. Within a matter of weeks we'll see what the end result is going to be. Then we can join forces behind our one candidate and go out to try and wrest control of this nation out of the hands of the oligarchs and PNACers and establish a free and democratic regime here in the US.

I can hardly wait.

[Jerseycoa]

8. "Tough, patriotic Democratic primary"

As it should be. Thanks.

[poskonig]

10. Kerry is *proud* of his IWR support.

We caught Hussein, remember? We're safe now!!

Kerry also presents himself as a centrist and paints Howard Dean as a liberal, which is complete, total, absolute dumbassery in a party primary. Everyone knows presidential candidates run to the base in the primary and then run to the center in the general election.

[MidwestMomma]

12. Excellent post RageAgainstTheMachine

I've been saying the same things myself the last couple of days here on the board. But not half as well. GOOD JOB!

The rules of the board explicitly state that attacks on candidate during the primaries are allowed. So why the sudden distate for attacks? I think you nailed it in your post.

I am tired of some Dean supporters accusing others of aiding and abetting the GOP because they attack Dean. So please people, give a listen to what the poster is saying. It truly does make sense.

[poskonig]

16. attacks are healthy?

The idea is that since the attacks might help candidate 'x' against Dean, therefore the attacks are wholesome and nutritious. However, the GOP will clearly use the DLC crap like the "Dean depression," Dean being unfit to command, et cetera, in the general election. Bush won't even have to get his negatives up; the RNC will merely play footage of Kerry, Lieberman, and the gang. Given Dean's nomination is extremely probable, I can understand regular democrats' concern about this.

[RageAgainstTheirMachine]

18. so why is it ok for Dean to call Kerry, Lieberman, et al

Republican-lite, etc. ... Will not Bush use Dean attacks on the other candidates in the general election should one of them get the nomination?

[poskonig]

20. Dean doesn't single out people by name.

The Dean campaign has been very good about doing this. The worst you will hear is "we can't win by being Bushlite." Ooooooh, the horror, the horror........

The others, in constrast, have been busy making campaign ads for the RNC, an attitude like "if I can't win, no one can!" You'll realize I'm right when you see the RNC ads featuring Kerry and Lieberman against Dean next summer.

Are you guys this blind?

[RageAgainstTheirMachine]

24. So what is wrong with the general attacks

by other contending saying, "We need a candidate strong on national security." Those are obviously aimed at Dean. Are they ok in your view? Is any attack on Dean ok?

[poskonig]

28. The general attacks and innuendo are fine.

eom

[TLM]

26. So you think Bush will attack the dems for being

too much like Bush?

[RageAgainstTheirMachine]

27. Bush will use anything and everything

It doesn't matter what is or is not said in the primary. Bush and ther right wing machine will use anything and everything they can. The specific comments about Kerry, Dean, Clark and others are already out there and will be used regardless of who is the nominee. We need a candidate strong enough to rebuff the attacks. This primary will hopefully produce one.

[mouse7]

30. Dean revealed as Count Dracula!

Dean is for sucking blood out of people and having a personal account at the blood bank. Dean doesn't like mirrors, and will eliminate the US garlic industry!

Vote Clark! Clark likes daylight!

[RageAgainstTheirMachine]

31. that's appropriate

you people turn everything into a Dean v. Clark flame contest

[MidwestMomma]

45. That's because some people think if your are not for Dean...

then you must be for Clark. What's funny is that I didn't even say anything against Dean in my post. I did criticize some Dean supporters so I must be for Clark. I really don't think some people even read the posts.

Also, it's the new Dean supporter thing tonight. Go on threads not supportive of Dean and make nonsense posts like this to disrupt the discussion. Very appropriate!

[AWD]

47. That's funny.....

you people turn everything into a Dean v. Clark flame contest

Yeah, we do that all the time.

Just the other day, I took a break from my postition as Director of GWforClark.com and started a Stop Dean movement.

[MidwestMomma]

41. I like Dean better as Count Chocula

Yummy goodness on the outside, tooth-promoting decay on the inside.

Have a nice evening!

[KaraokeKarlton]

38. Show me some valid criticism instead of bogus flame bait

and I'll take it seriously. Most of the anti-Dean stuff posted on here is blatantly false. My favorite lie constantly being repeated here is that "Dean gave Enron a tax cut". The tax cut in question went into effect in 1993. Enron didn't even have a captive insurance company operating in Vermont until 1995. This has been pointed out repeatedly, but it doesn't stop those who dislike Dean from reposting it over and over and over again, knowing full well it's bullshit.

You can't debate false information because there's nothing to debate since it's false.

[MidwestMomma]

44. I realize it's exhausting to continue to defend your candidate

against these attacks but look at it as good practice. Believe or not, you do reach people when you respond to the outright lies about your candidate.

I feel that I have a pretty good handle on what is true and not true about the different candidates based on the threads started in this forum and the responses from the people who support them.

Is it exhausting for you? I imagine so. Will it be worth it in the end if Democrats decide that your candidate is the strongest, best candidate to defeat Bush? You know it is.

Part of what people are looking for in a candidate is real staying power. The best service you can do for your candidate is to show that no fight is too long, to hard or too dirty for you to take on.

So please, put up with the attacks for now. They really do serve a purpose. Like I said in another thread, if someone attacks your candidate, defend them. If you're tired of defending them, let someone else do it. There are plenty of people ready to hop in and take up the fight.

Hope this explains a little better what I mean. Keep on, keepin' on...

[TLM]

21. Funny Kerry does not agree with you... Kerry says Dean is to his left.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-3555359,00.html

Kerry Warns Dean Has No Chance Vs. Bush
Saturday December 27, 2003 3:46 PM


By WILL LESTER
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - With a month to go before the New Hampshire primary, John Kerry says voters must choose between Democratic front-runner Howard Dean or a more centrist candidate like himself.

The Massachusetts senator said he would fare better than Dean against President Bush in November.

``Two roads have diverged in the New Hampshire woods,'' Kerry said in a speech prepared for delivery Saturday in Manchester. ``One of them takes us toward retreat from our responsibility in the world, our responsibility to working families, our responsibility to talk straight to the American people - and our obligation to win their confidence and their votes next November.''

[Terwilliger]

35. wow...Dean has no chance against Bush and Kerry trails Dean

wonder what Kerry has to say about that?!?

[mouse7]

36. Kerry, "...mumble kill 'em n' eat em' mumble..." n/t

n/t

[mitchum]

46. Thanks to you, I now know how to spell duplicity with only three letters

Kerry never said that Dean is to his left. But you already know that.

[horsesense]

33. intelligent dissent

I'm all for constructive dissent now. One of the reasons I don't like the repugs is that they do not allow dissent.

Getting rid of bush is a top priority
Selecting a candidate that can beat bush is necessary
A debate on who that should be is healthy
Juvenile comments waste our energy

WE MUST BEAT BUSH
I'LL SUPPORT ANY DEMO OR EVEN A VEGETABLE IF IT WOULD REMOVE BUSH

THIS IS TOO IMPORTANT TO ACCEPT OR CONTRIBUTE TO DEFEAT

[mouse7]

34. Not having sound bytes come back to bite in GOP ads a priority

See how you'll feel about negative campaigning in the fall when the GOP starts running ads that featuring all the negative attacks made by their primary opponents in the previous winter.

[KaraokeKarlton]

37. Wrong. Dean is on top because he's worked harder than the others

And he has a much more clear message that people find it much easier to get behind.

Do tell us all what all these "attacks" on Kerry were that Dean made. I hate to break it to you, but calling votes in favor of Bush's agenda as being "Bush Lite" is not an attack. That comment didn't make any voter turn against Kerry. All that comment did was put a label on the votes Kerry cast. Kerry was the one who cast those votes. People were already mad about it. Kerry has been the one to attack Dean, not the other way around.

Seriously, I want to see quotes in full context and links to all these "attacks" Dean has made against the other candidates. As for Dean supporters speaking up against the "mud-slinging"...as a Vermonter I'll tell you that MOST of the criticism of Dean being posted on this forum is straight up FALSE. No Dean supporter has a problem with someone posting REAL and valid criticism. It's the fibs and misrepresentations we take issue with. Oh, and we don't take kindly to Benedict Arnold type Democrats, either.

[Duder]

39. At this stage...

According to research, dissent won't change the outcome of the primary one iota.

Now we've reached the point where candidates/supporters might wish to adjust their messages to positively affect the party platform.

[WillyT]

42. Hey, What About 'Why I like Howard Dean, but do not support his candidacy'

You said you liked him in that thread, when did he go all insidious on you?

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=24191

:shrug:

[stickdog]

43. Dean told the truth.

Kerry blew it with his cowardly, Bush-enabling response to the Iraq War, the Patriot Act and Bush's tax cuts for the rich.