Im sick of fair weather Dems. Reasoned thoughts from a Moderate.

[Machiavelli05]

Do not blame Kerry anymore than you blame yourself for the election defeat.

Everyone on this board was very energetic about Kerry. No speculation after the convention about Skull and Bones. No talk of him possibly throwing the election. Once WE lose though, people are spouting conspiracy theories left and right.

Was there election fraud, voter suppression and fishy acts leading up to and on Nov 2? Yes, of course.
Was it mostly perpetrated by the GOP? Probably
Did Rove, GWB and the RNC have direct involvement? Possibly
Did the illuminati, Skull and Bones, or the New World Order have anything to do with it? No.
Does the illuminati exist? no.
Is S&B anymore than a bunch college boys playing fort? no.
Did Kerry throw the election? OF COURSE NOT

I understand the rage. I understand the shock. However, to turn on the Kerry/Edwards campaign because they lost is irrational. Is it their fault that we lost 5 senate seats and I believe 5 house seats?
NO. Bush/Cheney got the vote out. Yes, maybe they were underhanded and yes maybe they were shrewd.... but thats politics.

Am I saying fraud shouldnt be exposed? No, it definitely should be - but not at the price of losing any furhter national support.


Anyone who believes that a national campaign can just be "thrown" on a whim really doesnt understand campaigns. Kerry couldnt have thrown this campaign if he wanted to.

The Democratic party has a recent history of being splintered - the GOP has been able to stick together... that should be your BIGGEST conspiracy theory relating to why WE lost.

I dont want anyone of you to leave the Dem party. However, if youre just going to bitch and complain and blame the leaders of the party of criminal acts and conspiracy. Then leave. If you can channel your anger and your passion into doing good for the party, as we all saw before Nov 2nd then by all means stay. Your extremism only hurts the image of the DNC.

Yes, I like the DLC. Yes, I am a moderate. No, I do not hate Liberals, but I wish that contemporary mainstream liberalism didnt have to be so riddled with irrational thoughts and theories.

[Larkspur]

1. I was never a fan of Machiavelli

nor of Kerry or Edwards. Kerry's and Edward's support of the Iraq war was a major blunder on his part and helped to blur the lines between Bush and Kerry. Kerry, if he was elected, was going to be in the same predicament over Iraq that Bush is now. The only good news about a Kerry loss is that Bush will either have to return the Draft in some form, pull our troops out of Iraq, or just let the military we have get reduced one car bomber at a time, and Bush, not a Democrat, will get the blame.

[razoroccam]

5. machiavelli

Right on!

[m.standridge]

91. Hit the nail on the head--Kerry ONLY won in the Electoral College

NOT in the Popular vote--and for the precise reasons you've just stated. He was unpopular with the anti-Iraq voters, relatively speaking. He left a gray area as to what he'd do to end the Iraq War, at the same time, with his own 'Nam record, having weakened credibility.
Meanwhile, Bush rallied his base by getting the Red states to see him as the same as the vote against gay marriage that the Evangelicals were drumming up there.

So, what is this thing that "moderates" have about "feeling very strongly both ways"?

That picks up votes, in a way. But Democrats, especially, need to be more conscious ahout the Electoral College. All this play among the various potential candidates each time, has to be factored in, but we also need to look at how the GOP can't win in the Electoral College unless they fudge things.

[Racenut20]

2. I think the loss of Senate seats was a direct result of a

lack of coattails from the National ticket. It was more like they expected the Senate/House candidates to carry the state for Kerry/Edwards.

[FogerRox]

87. Bush lost so no coat tails--LOl- just kidding--no Im not yes no AHHHHHHh

My Mission: TARGET CBS

Join the protest @ CBS in NYC or protest in DC--If enough Peeps show @ CBS I will extend the efforts to other outlets, Like ABC & NBC.

Power to the People ! !! ! ! RIght On Brother KIP ! !! !

http://www.51capitalmarch.com /
[e-mail] /

[sandnsea]

3. You see

Not everybody here was ever for Kerry to begin with. They have never been Democrats and most of them never claimed to be. But it does confuse things and the Democratic Party does get labeled with their views and behavior. That's why I've taken to calling them leftists, we have to take our party back in more ways than one.

[Withywindle]

10. I don't think it's always accurate, though...

Leftists is a pretty big word that means a lot of different things to different people. And it's relative.

[LittleClarkie]

12. I'm all for inclusiveness and the big tent

So liberalism per se is not an issue. I welcome conservative, moderate and liberal voices to our party.

It is the faction who calls out "Purge the Moderates" or "The DLC is evil" or Moveon's "We bought you, you're ours now" that give me pause. It's so... anti-democracy.

It's the part of the left that mirrors the far right that scares me, not liberalism. You can be a liberal and still have room for the discussion of ideas and different ways of accomplishing things. I'm not interested in being bogarted by a vocal minority.

Thanks Mach. Well said. And I still say that part of the reason we were defeated is because some people thought it was enough to bash Bush without giving a reason to vote for Kerry. Some had the misguided idea that all they had to do was present someone, anyone but Bush and people would flock to that someone, anyone. Well not everyone sees what we see. Some honestly believe Bush is a good president, frightening though that may be for us to ponder.

I say to the ABBers, take a page from Donald Trump. While watching "The Apprentice" I was struck with Donald's explanation for why one group didn't prevail over another. They'd tried to sell a product they neither understood nor liked. You have to believe in the product. Otherwise folks with just stick with the same old thing they already have. The devil you know...

Of course, if it turns out we won, all this navel-gazing is null and void.

[sandnsea]

62. We agree

There's a specific group, "that mirrors the far right", that I refer to as leftists. They don't even claim to be Democrats. Not liberals, not progressives, who can look at all sides of an issue and are willing to look at mistakes as opportunities to change and make progress. But leftists, who would sacrifice progress to stay true to some notion of idealism that the world will never live up to. Who would crucify anybody with a good idea if it didn't live up to their ideology. Who are less than 10% of the population and are as delusional about their mandate as George Bush is. These people would have found fault with any Democratic candidate and it's sad that so many liberal and progressive Democrats get cowed by them.

I've said it before, John Kerry was the most liberal candidate we could ever run and hope to win with. What I saw in this election was the right putting out propaganda, liberals and progressives getting shook by it, and the left opportunistically twisting everything into examples of Democratic sell-outs. They're already doing it with Howard Dean as well.

Liberals and progressives need to know where they stand and what they're fighting for and get focused like a laser. But they've also got to stop letting leftists throw them off track with false crises every time a Democrat tries to discuss a new idea. For example, it really doesn't matter what the hell John Kerry is doing with this election. The ultimate goal is getting paper ballots with any election machine to circumvent fraud in the future. In the scheme of things, this battle for the Presidency isn't worth it if we lose the war of the election machines in the future. Allowing leftists to confuse the issue by launching yet another attack on Democrats diverts liberals and progressives from the problem in front of our face, the election process and the machines. Tough to get somebody's help on one thing when they know you'd burn them at the stake over something else.

[Amaya]

4. Agreed

Good luck. :)

[papau]

6. Well said! :-)

:-)

[RaulVB]

7. You don't even represent yourself...

BTW, Machiavelli was wrong.

[xchrom]

8. love it or leave it! bow down to the democratic party leaders

the high priests of our salvation!
amen.

please -- give me a break -- xenophobia and party loyalty -- are you going to propose oaths?

they made mistakes -- they've been making mistakes -- you'd better talk about it if you want it to change.

political parties depend on ''little'' people more than a lot of institutions -- remember they need folk at city, county, state, and national levels -- and their corporate donors can't pay for professionals at all levels.

if you want to keep on the track of misguided attempts at tackling a vicious and driven foe then fine -- you moderates go ahead -- and when party activists aren't there to carry your water -- you can wear your own shoe leather out -- and you will STILL LOSE!

[LittleClarkie]

13. Moderates have feet too

Moderate doesn't mean you sit on your butt watching the activists. Moderate does mean that you are willing to listen to more than one voice, and go with a good idea that doesn't necessarily with business as usual. If some Republican somewhere has a good idea, I will listen. To me, Moderate = independant, common sense, big tent, looking for the truth (truth is not partisan -- it should not matter whether it supports your side. Truth is truth.)

It also appears that being considered a Moderate depends on the company one is keeping. Here, I am a Moderate. At the local red state pub, I am a raging liberal.

[Machiavelli05]

15. Here?

Well here Im a fascist - in a red state pub Im a commie...

Interesting how the extremists cant accept someone in the middle, but they all tell the oppossite extreme they need to have a more open mind...

[NVMojo]

28. good point, machiavelli05!

[LittleClarkie]

38. I've been called a Commie

I've also been told Dems like me can't serve for public office because we're unconstitutional. Got told that by a pro-life gun guy. Figure that one out.

[ClassWarrior]

22. So, self-proclaimed "little person" - what have you done to reclaim...

...your party?? Have you joined your county party? Run for office? What?... What's your solution?

NGU.

[AntiFascist]

48. I would go further and propose that....

since Democratic moderates know so well what is best for the rest of us, that they join together with moderates from the Republican party and form a Roman Imperium. And, who needs to bother with the precise outcome of elections anyway? Elections are only necessary to guage the extent of extreme public dissatisfaction, and whether or not riots may ensue if one or the other candidate takes office.

Oh, and did Rome eventually fall? You bet your sweet bippy!

[Amaryllis]

9. For the most part I agree. But I am really bothered by all the Dems

who keep analysing why we lost and how we need to reinvent the party and change our message etc etc etc and don't get that we lost because of voter suppression and fraud!!! And who aren't standing up and insisting that it is not okay to disinfranchise thousands of voters and that this IS fraud, not to mention the whole issue with voting and tabulating machine fraud and all the violations in the OH recount that have made any accurate recount impossible because it's been so tainted. I have to say it's very hard to support leadership that remains quiet about all this. THere should be massive outrage about this, such as we are seeing from Conyers and crew, from ALL our senators and reps. And I think it is an outrage that they are remaining silent. And I cannot support this silence.

[demwing]

66. We can't simply blame the other guys

that's irresponsible.

Nor do we have to CHANGE our core message.

What we must do is figure out what that core message is, then package it in such a way that the benefits are clear to a majority of the voters.

That may mean that we have to start addressing the more conservative members of the party, or the religious members, or the radical members, or the too-lazy-to-get-their-asses-up-to-vote members.

It also means that we have to unearth ALL evidence of fraud and corruption in the voting process, address the fact that we--and the American people--were cheated, and reform that process so that fair elections are a basic right in our constitution.

What we CAN NOT do is blame some one else for where we are today. If we fall into that trap, we will always lose, because we will never try to do anything different. The fact that we let them get close enough to cheat us--AGAIN--speaks volumes.

Are we listening?

[Joe Chi Minh]

11. What do you mean

"Am I saying fraud shouldnt be exposed? No, it definitely should be - but not at the price of losing any further national support".

Make up your mind. If, "definitely", why the nonsense about losing
"further national support"! If that's what you're worried about, why "definitely".

The only way Kerry can lose any of his already *overwhelming national support* is by *throwing* this election, as you are evidently implying he should. He's only ever gained national support. You people with your mixed messages, are as cunning as sh*thouse rats.

Probably
Probably
Possibly
Probably
What have you got between your ears?

Splintering? There was no splintering. Even Republicans came on board. Give DU's regards to Mr Lieberman, won't you. And mind the door on your way out.

[Machiavelli05]

17. Im surprised you didnt vote for Bush

With all your nitpicking to expose the dreaded *gasp* flipflopper.

[Joe Chi Minh]

53. If I understood

your drivelling, it would be helpful. But I can only imagine that you equate my exposing of your puerile, muddled thinking to public ridicule with nit-picking.

[Machiavelli05]

78. Many other people understood.. perhaps try reading it again

Also, where in Edinburgh do you live? I lived there for a while last year on Guthrie street down off the cowgate. Worked in teh Scottish Parliament for a bit.

[NVMojo]

29. so, like, um ...did you vote for Bush? Stand in the place where you live..

[Machiavelli05]

30. Did I vote for Bush?

Take a wild guess....?

[Joe Chi Minh]

52. No. And why

should I stand - I presume you mean for government anywhere? I don't have the tenth of the skills necessary for that. Contributing to policy-making could be another matter; that is everyone's duty.

Anyone who says that there *probably* was fraud and voter suppression, is not just in bad faith, but in execrable faith, and has no place in a forum for grown-ups. To presume people with just a smattering of the facts that have come out are so stupid as to be unaware of the massive fraud, etc, shows a degree of arrant presumption that simply beggars belief. Indeed, it is, itself, the height of stupidity.

[Machiavelli05]

79. you and your friends are the ones being presumptious

I agree there is a lot of evidence of fraud - but it is not concrete. I refuse to jump on a bandwagon until I can prove to myself and others that this is case. I do not have knee jerk reactions at gut instincts, circumstantial and speculative evidence.

[creeksneakers2]

14. It would be better for all to change the party

rather than split it. I think the far left has some great ideas and some kooky ones. I wish everybody would agree to fight this out and then get together on the results. If we split, we lose forever.

I agree that the far left comes out with some kooky stuff that makes us all look crazy. The other day, I saw Internet chatters who were happy Putin is getting missiles that SDI can't stop, just because that would hurt Bush. That kind of thing has got to go.

[ginnyinWI]

16. Zogby on Charlie Rose last night

said that the trouble with this country is that it has no "middle" anymore--everyone is extreme right or extreme left--and he holds the leadership responsible.

I hold Bushie boy and the neocons responsible--they have divided the country by being so far right that the left is pulling harder left--and the people in the middle have to choose one or the other.

[Machiavelli05]

18. I certainly agree with this!

b/c our leadership havent done anything at all to pull us one way or the other.

The GOP leadership control their party and their activists.

The Dems dont try to control their activists and aim them - they try to pander to them and prevnet them from splintering... which just causes splintering b/c htey never take a concrete stand.

[anaxarchos]

21. Ask Arlen Specter if that is true...

The GOP has been totally taken over by "activists". The purge of Republican "moderates" has been on for years now. Only a handful like McCain survive by bending over on command. ...and they may not survive for long.

But, hey, feel free to stop pandering and tell us the facts of life anyway.

[Freddie Stubbs]

23. Zogby didn't say anything about the election being stolen?

:shrug:

[ginnyinWI]

95. kinda sorta

They talked about the exit polls, and he stood by his polling numbers, and so Rose said why were they off then? And he said he wants Mitofsky to release his raw exit poll numbers--that those numbers should belong to the public now. So they reached no conclusions.

[insane_cratic_gal]

19. My issue with moderates

Is where they stand in issues regarding choice. And a lot of social issues.

The lean is too right. Do you believe a moderate can be claim to be pro-life but capture the democratic woman on the issues of pro-choice?

Female republicans are not going to make up the difference. I can promise you that.

I don't mean to divide the argument right down to that one issue. But it's a deciding one, when you see that 54 percent of women went for Kerry. If your a moderate and pro-life you just alienated 54 percent of the vote, who will go to a "liberal" candidate.

That is a bit of a dilemma it is for me anyway. I'm not comfortable backing a candidate that is willing to impose his beliefs upon my body!

If your going to run a moderate, he has to have a backbone. (not a zell miller rep in sheep clothing) He or she has to have most of the agenda of the democratic party on social issues.

Gay marriage, and choice seem to be topics on the platter. You can't just avert them by tip toeing around the issues?

Just curious on your opinion is all

[Machiavelli05]

25. Being moderate is not synonymous with being Anti-Choice

And Im surprised you even think it is.

I believe as Clinton has said and Kerry reiterated "Abortions should be safe, legal and rare"

Do I think theyre morally right? I dont know - I'll let God decide. If I'm ever faced with that choice I'll look to God, myself and the woman for guidance.

Having a member of my family (and many of that family member's associates/friends) placed on the nuremburg list by the "Army of God" keeps my perspective somewhat skewed...
Not only have i been indoctrinated from a young age with the Pro-Choice mindset, I can NEVER associate my political beliefs with a group that wanted to harm family and friends.
However, my case is not unique - many moderates are strongly pro-choice.


As for gay marriage - I want gay marriage out of the constitution, and out of Congress. Put it in the Church's hands where it belongs!
Federal law should recognize civil unions of a man and a woman, woman-woman and man-man all the same. States should decide what to do on their own about it at the state level.

I think most moderates also agree with this statement. So whats your beef w/ moderates again?

[insane_cratic_gal]

31. here are a few things

Clips mainly I wanted to put out there for you:

We're very encouraged," Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life, told the Boston Globe. "I think people are starting to wake up and say we can't alienate this whole wing of our party."

For years Democrats simply assumed that a stridently pro-choice stance was a popular, winning issue. As everyone knew, it was the Republicans who lost votes on abortion because of the grip the religious right had on the party.


A survey by Democrat Stan Greenberg found that only 17% of voters cited John Kerry's stance on abortion as a reason to vote for him while 19% cited it as a reason to vote against him, for a net loss of 2%.

They installed Nev. Sen. Harry Reid, who has voted pro-life in the past, as their new Senate leader. (Reid is reportedly also supporting Roemer for DNC chief.)

Democrats are also straining to sound moderate when discussing abortion.


When you start to deteriorate your stance on issues that important to your party (and those that vote for you ) you end up dividing it anyway. This is one of those issues that could cut the party. Place this on top of all of the voting problems from 2000-2004. Houston we've got a problem.

Moderates tend to fall away from the staunch stance that designed the democratic party. If you meld the party line, you have the same argument many have presented. Not my words. Kerry's stance on Iraq didn't differ from Bush. So what happens when to moderate the party line to become more like your counter part? You loose your identity do you not?

I would like to see the far right form their own party, They Christian party they way they are running things is more like a cult anyway. Dems do not need to jump through hoops, you need a set of balls to challenge why the Reps are freaking whacked out.

[Machiavelli05]

32. As a moderate I think that its good to have a diverse set of beliefs...

...in a political party. Everyone falling lock step behind a single rigid set of beliefs is called a cult (as you call Christians).
That brings me to your contempt for Christianity... thats only going to shoot the DNC in the head. We have to understand that a majority of Americans believe they are Christian - whether they act like it or not.

Abortion wont be outlawed - once it is, Republicans dont have anything left to bitch about so loudly. They cant lose their most mobilizing factor.

The "religious right" has been successful at defining themselves not as "right wing" but as all encompassing Christian.... I know this is bullshit - but I stand in a VAST majority of Christians.. and Methodists to be exact.


However, in summation - some moderates are anti-choice some are pro-choice. Moderate isnt a consistant ideology... its not meant to be.

[insane_cratic_gal]

68. Rigid

Perhaps I better mark it up not as Christians per say. I friends who are Christians and voted for Kerry. From their perspective and my own, religion and God is a personal thing.
I should expressed my contempt to label people like Pat Robertson, Bill Frist, Christian Collation.


You see choice is only the small nail in the constitution. I brought it up for the reasons the Dems seem to be squirming over it these days. What will we compromise to get votes? Who will they risk alienating? That for me is the big warning bell.

I'm not trying to be insulting to you, but it is among my frustrations, when DLC seems to want to abandon the party line and mix it up into the present Bush co. office.

It's my opinion that once you start climbing the slippery slope, such as a woman's right to choose. What comes down next? The walls of separation of Church and state?

We need to find ways to win the war" Karl Rove, President Bush's political director told a gathering of the Family Research Council in March, 2002. The Family Research Council is one of the most powerful lobbying organizations of the Religious Right today. Rove wasn't talking about the war on terrorism. He was talking about the war on secular society.

When you have a minute: http://www.theocracywatch.org/index.html

That is my fear that moderates will play to a crowd and loose their present support by doing so. Scary thing religion can be when a zealot is released.

[Lexingtonian]

20. Right on.

It bugs me that most of these people still arguing the election- and I do have sympathy for them- just can't seem to get their minds around a lot of the more obvious political facts.

I just don't see the accounting for all the things Kerry and Edwards did right, got right, the few that slipped a bit, and the things they had no chance of getting ahead of. There's very little of a clear hard look at the electorate for what it is and why.

Whatever the truth of the voting shenanigans, in the end The People is willing to wait another four years to put a Democrat, or maybe it's the Democratic Party, into the Oval Office. Maybe the problem wasn't Kerry, it was certain kinds of Democrats who the swing voters didn't trust enough. It's worth considering- of the many things considered on this forum, it seems to be one people don't dare contemplate: that it might be the frantic, power-obsessed (even if only in the nicest way) folks like themselves that may have been the decisive factor on Election Day.

[kitp]

24. I disagree strongly

I disagree strongly with your entire message.

I can't quite decifer where you stand on most of the important issues surrounding the election and our reactions to the results.

However, one thing comes through clearly. Calm down, don't yell too loudly, don't want to hurt our image.

Well, screw that.

Do not blame Kerry anymore than you blame yourself for the election defeat.

I don't blame Kerry for the election results, I blame the theives who stole it.

Everyone on this board was very energetic about Kerry. No speculation after the convention about Skull and Bones. No talk of him possibly throwing the election. Once WE lose though, people are spouting conspiracy theories left and right.

Not everyone on this board was very energetic about Kerry. Many were energetic against Bush.

The questions about S&B and throwing the election come about from one very important fact that you do not address. Kerry said he would not concede until every vote was counted. He did concede before every vote was counted. Ensuing investigations show that the entire election was rigged yet Kerry is silent and invisible.

I don't believe the S&B stuff, myself, but Kerry owes me an explanation. He broke a promise to me, the only promise I was concerned about in this election, and until he tells me why I will continue to try and figure it out on my own. If you don't like some of the possible explanations as to why Kerry broke this promise then don't visit.

Was there election fraud, voter suppression and fishy acts leading up to and on Nov 2? Yes, of course.

Of course? Of course? So, there was fraud, there was suppression and "fishy" acts (I guess that would be those crimes of destroying Democratic registrations or sending out false information about where to vote or when to vote)?
How do you square this statement with your earlier statment 'WE lost'. How can you have a fraudulent election and yet state that we lost?

Was it mostly perpetrated by the GOP? Probably

This is straight right-wing propaganda. Oh, heck, I guess it's just politics as usual. Every side engages in a little hanky-panky.
List here for me the examples of fraud, suppression and fishiness perpetrated by the Democrats. Or any that even benefitted Kerry. Please.
This entire election was dirty tricks, legal chicanery, outright fraud and suppression and it was ALL done by the Republicans and it ALL benefitted Bush.

Did Rove, GWB and the RNC have direct involvement? Possibly

Still being wishy-washy here but this is irrelevant. It doesn't matter who rigged the election, the fact is that it was rigged for Bush. If the hadn't been rigged, by whoever, Bush would not be President.

Did the illuminati, Skull and Bones, or the New World Order have anything to do with it? No.
Does the illuminati exist? no.
Is S&B anymore than a bunch college boys playing fort? no.
Did Kerry throw the election? OF COURSE NOT

Until I know who did "have anything to do with it" I'm not ruling out anyone, you included. Until Kerry explains why he acted the way he acted, I'm not ruling out the possibility that he did throw the election.

I understand the rage. I understand the shock. However, to turn on the Kerry/Edwards campaign because they lost is irrational. Is it their fault that we lost 5 senate seats and I believe 5 house seats?
NO. Bush/Cheney got the vote out. Yes, maybe they were underhanded and yes maybe they were shrewd.... but thats politics.

I don't believe you do understand my rage. I have no shock, I expected it and am unsurprised. However, I am beyond rage, far beyond rage.
Again, I am not turning on Kerry/Edwards "because they lost" but because they broke their promise. This also implies, again, that they lost. I don't believe it. The election was stolen from us.
As to the lost seats, stolen as was the presidency and, once again, until Kerry explains to me his actions he remains a suspect in the crime.

And you can go back to redland or wherever the hell you come from with the Bush/Cheney got the vote out. This is one more example of straight right-wing propaganda. All the evidence shows that it was the Democrats who got out the vote, in far far larger numbers than the Republicans.
Maybe they were underhanded? Oh, there it is..."Oh, heck, I guess it's just politics as usual."
Well, screw that. Fascists have taken over the country and are destroying the United States and your comment is "thats politics"?

Am I saying fraud shouldnt be exposed? No, it definitely should be - but not at the price of losing any furhter national support.

What the hell is this supposed to mean? If the election was fraudulent every American should be shouting it as loudly as they can. If the elections are being stolen, what difference does 'national support' make? It is my belief that most of the people in the country voted for Kerry. We have the national support. The only reason we don't have the White House is because of that fraud you don't want us to speak too loudly about.

Anyone who believes that a national campaign can just be "thrown" on a whim really doesnt understand campaigns. Kerry couldnt have thrown this campaign if he wanted to.

No one is using the word "whim". This fits, though, with your continuing dismissive attitude. Those who believe Kerry threw the race believe that he intended to from the beginning. Not just 'on a whim'. And, yes, you can fairly easily throw a campaign. In today's media, one line like "pass a global test" is enough to lose you a LOT of votes. You could easily insert enough of those kinds of things into your campaign to guarantee a loss.
I personally don't believe Kerry did that, but until he tells me just what he did on Nov. 3 and what he is doing now, I ain't dismissing the possibility.

The Democratic party has a recent history of being splintered - the GOP has been able to stick together... that should be your BIGGEST conspiracy theory relating to why WE lost.

Man, I am just amazed at the amount of right-wing propaganda you managed to fit into this message. This is totally RWP crap.
The "recent" history of the Dems would be two successful presidencies followed by a victory in 2000, a victory in 2002 and a victory in 2004 after unbelievable unification among the diverse members of this party. Of course, the last three elections were stolen from us, but that doesn't make us splintered, it makes us raped. Very different.

I dont want anyone of you to leave the Dem party. However, if youre just going to bitch and complain and blame the leaders of the party of criminal acts and conspiracy. Then leave. If you can channel your anger and your passion into doing good for the party, as we all saw before Nov 2nd then by all means stay. Your extremism only hurts the image of the DNC.

I am already gone. We sweat blood to win this election and we were promised no concession. If Kerry and the Democratic party are not going to stand and fight this fraud they do not deserve my vote ever again, period. Of course, a Repug like you - sorry, Moderate like you - would love for me to stay in the Democratic party. A strong third-party contention would whittle away at your support.
Tough. The Dems have one chance with me and only one. They stand up on Jan 6 and contest this election, or I am gone gone gone, forever.
This country is being dismantled by totalitarians and for me it is not business as usual.
The party only receives my support when I receive theirs and, so far, I haven't gotten it.

Yes, I like the DLC. Yes, I am a moderate. No, I do not hate Liberals, but I wish that contemporary mainstream liberalism didnt have to be so riddled with irrational thoughts and theories.

So, we now see your definition of moderates and liberals. Contemporary mainstream liberalism isn't riddled with irrational thoughts and theories. Mainstream "liberalism" is telling me that Bush won fair and square. It's telling me, gosh, we just didn't get our message out. Guess we'll have to work harder next time. From the concentration camp, I guess, because that's where we'll be next election.
Those espousing these theories are NOT mainstream liberals. We are the true liberals who feel abandoned by the party, a party which keeps moving to the right to please people like you.
If we scale it from 1 to 10, 1 being very liberal and 10 being very conservative, I rank about a 3. The mainstream liberals rank about a 6 or 7. You are about an 8. Bush is 1000.

So, your attempt to palm off as rational thought the typical right-wing propaganda just didn't fly with me.
Kerry won the election if the machines weren't rigged.
Kerry won the election if there were no dirty tricks and character assassinations.
Had the truth about Bushco been covered in the media, Bush would have gotten maybe 20%.
Had Kerry NOT conceded but stated he was going to fight to make sure every vote counted, as he promised, there wouldn't be ANY consipiracy theories floating around.

Oh, I really wouldn't call those of us who feel, justifiably, abandoned by the Democratic party we have fought for "fair weather Democrats" because the last four years have not been fair weather at all.
Also, I wouldn't use the word 'reasoned' to describe your thoughts. Copied from the Rove book, more likely.

[Machiavelli05]

27. Thank you for being the first one to label me "right-wing" and Rovian...

Thereby proving my points.

I do not feel compelled to answer even one of your counter points b/c your labeling is so out of control that nothing I can say would ever get through your dense head. You've made up your mind.
If, as you claimed, you've left the party after Nov 3, why did you sign up on this board on NOVEMBER 11th? You are aware it is called DEMOCRATICunderground.com

This isnt FARLEFTISTunderground.com

[anaxarchos]

33. Thereby proving nothing...

How do you dismiss a brilliant rant like that, full of reason and fire with "I do not feel compelled to answer even one of your counterpoints..."? Let me get this straight - you want to purge the democratic party but it is beneath you to defend your position. You need a William F. Buckley lisp to pull that off.

And, oh yeah, let's bait him on the way out: "Are you now or have you ever been..."

[Machiavelli05]

34. I think that...

If you think I said anythign about "purging" the Democratic party you need to step back and soak in a few tips on reading comprehension.

[anaxarchos]

39. Oh, I'm sorry...

You want only to "control and channel"...
You want only those who "oppose" Kerry to leave...
...and oh yeah, "those who can't agree to having a big umbrella need to get the hell out"

And kitp should not only leave the party, he shouldn't even be on DU because he is a "FAR LEFTIST".

My mistake. No purges here.

You still haven't properly answered kitp.

[Machiavelli05]

42. youre telling me about proper responses?

When you havent even read what Ive written?

Get a life.

[anaxarchos]

45. My, my, my...

You don't sound like no kind of "moderate" to me, let alone "reasoned".

Yes, I do dare (as in "buck", "challenge", "defy", "hazard", "rise above my station") to tell YOU about proper responses <YSA deleted>.

And repeat, you still owe kitp a moderate answer.

As far as getting a life goes, I'll resist the temptation of saying "OK, I'll take yours...".

[Tinoire]

44. What on earth attracted you to this site?

One would think the establishment dems are getting nervous about something.

a huge snort to all these transparent "concerned" middle-of-the-night messages.

:snort:

We're taking our party back. Get over it.

[Machiavelli05]

74. well..

you and your cohort are doing your best to tell me to leave. Perhaps you can suggest a place with people who I would find like minded. Until then you should be gracious and remember that anything Democratic or Democrat encompasses a lot of people whether you like it or not. Your seething criticism and attempted ostracization of anyone who is different really makes you look like a republican.

[Tinoire]

84. Graciousness? After that tone-setting introductory post? LMAO!

To quote to great Democrats, Sly and the venerable Senator Wellstone

I'm not a moderate, sir. And screw your delusional visage of "national support".

I'm from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. The left wing. The liberal, progressive wing. I'm a L-I-B-E-R-A-L with a capital L. I'm pro-labor, pro-women, pro-minorities, pro-jobs, pro-environment, pro-science, pro-education and pro-civil rights.

And I'll never stop bitching or whining or complaining. I'll never stop questioning authority. I'll never stop being extreme. I'll never stop pestering our elected officials and I'll never stop trying to change someone's mind. I'll never stop dreaming and I'll never stop wanting -- wanting what's right for my kids and my family and my friends and my neighbor and my neighbor's neighbor. I'll never stop wanting what's right for our world.

So there.

Sly

[m.standridge]

92. OK--so now go win in the Electoral College, where you CAN win--

you CAN win THERE, even if you CAN'T win in the Popular vote. So many are so emotional and so ignorant.
It's ok, but go after the realistic goal, for you. Win in the Electoral College. They (the conservatives) have made the rules: "you have to win in the Electoral College."
So don't try to educate/change millions of people, just win where you have to, to get the door open to change.
I believe there's a possibility for Kerry to do that, yet.

[The Gigmeister]

50. Yes it is.

[kitp]

99. hello again mach

Greetings all.

Well, first off, I joined DU on the 11th as I didn't know it existed prior to the 6th and didn't have anything to say until the 11th.

In reality, I didn't leave the party after Nov. 3, the party left me. It began leaving me back in the 80's and has been moving further away ever since.

DU is not the Democratic Party.

Regardless, parties are of no importance, the issues are what matters. I will support whoever supports the issues that are important to me. If the Dems keep becoming more "moderate" (to me they are already a bit right of center), they will have left me completely.

So, it would be better to describe this phenom in terms of issues rather than parties. I am opposed to the war on terrorism, it's a bogey-man and we'd be helping ourselves just as much by returning to the practice of burning witches.
I am opposed to the war in Afghanistan. I am opposed to the war in Iraq. I am opposed to the looming wars in Syria and Iran. I am opposed to corporate ownership of the media. I am opposed to privatization of Social Security and Medicare. I am opposed to corporations being granted constitutional rights. I am opposed to deficit spending. I am opposed to tax cuts that favor wealth.

I am in favor of full enfranchisement. I am in favor of equal rights for all citizens. I am in favor of legal abortions. I am in favor of gay marriage. I am in favor of paper ballots and hand-counting. I am in favor of direct elections. I am in favor of protecting the environment. I am in favor helping people attend college. I am in favor of veteran benefits. I am in favor of unions. I am in favor of public education.


Please tell me, did the Dem party of 2004 speak to my issues and stances? Some they did but most they did not. They are way far right of me. However, I will vote for them because they are not as far away as is Bush.

But it is futile if the election was stolen. If "voting" is meaningless then why talk about issues or public support or big umbrellas or what we did wrong? This is the key issue.

I know the 2000 election was stolen. Flat out, no denial, Bush did not win. He never should have been in the White House except on tours, with an adult to supervise him and make sure he didn't steal anything.

So, either we fight this or the country dies. I don't see any other issue to discuss. Kerry said, very clearly, I will not concede until every vote is counted. Why? Because if every vote had been counted in 2000 Al Gore would be the president.

I support Kerry, I support the Dems. Everything points to another Democratic victory. And Bush "wins". So, of course, the election was stolen. I have absolutely no doubts about it whatsoever. More people voted for Kerry than voted for Bush. Not only that, had everyone who wanted to vote been allowed to vote, Kerry's victory would have been convincing. Of this I also have no doubt.

So, any talk about why WE lost is just plain stupid. It's not because we are too extreme. It's not because we offend the Moderates. It's not because of whatever lame reasons offered. WE DID NOT LOSE! Get it? We did not lose in 2000. We did not lose in the mid-terms and we did not lose this time.

The fact that the electors are going to meet and make it all "official" is irrelevant. It is a fraud and a crime. If we engage in this drivel of how we should modify our message to REALLY beat the Repubs next time, we might as well just give up right now.

If we cannot win by WINNING how the hell do you think we are going to win by losing? Don't go all moderate on me, don't fling tinfoil hats at me. Get mad that the brownshirts are wiping their asses on the constitution and laughing at people like you who are reasonable and want to talk. Yes, spend all of your energy calming the upset Dems down. We need to become more likable, that'll get us elected. God forbid we offend that majority of people who vote the Dems in and who we have abandoned for another four years.

So, I do not worship the Democratic party. As I said, they have one chance to rescue themselves. Only one chance. That is to stand up and refuse to let Bush take the oath again.

If they don't, if they say "hey we lost fair and square", if they talk to me about national unity, I swear I'm gonna start throwing tea in the harbor and the Dem party can go and die.

Anyway, I feel better.

"Never give up! Never surrender!"

[Machiavelli05]

36. One important clarification

I use the phrases "Bush won/Kerry lost" not as whether more people voted for Bush than Kerry... this really will not be proven. I am strongly confident there was fraud and other "fishy acts". I am somewhat confident that these acts in Ohio accounted for at least 62,000 votes for Bush or 124k votes NOT happening for Kerry or against Kerry... (or WHATEVER the exact nnumbers are). However, I am hesitant to conclude that the 3.2 million deficit that Kerry had was due to fraud. Therefore, while Kerry, b/c of fraud may have lost the electoral college (may or may not have), the possibility he would have had a clear and convincing win is less plausible. To compound that, the election results show every indication of being certified on Jan 6th. Thereby being an OFFICIAL loss. I hope as much as anyone that it is overturned. I hope that everything is exposed and that enough of Congress stands up and objects on Jan 6th. I hope that the law suits are successful. I hope Bush is kicked out of America. I hope for Dem domination of Congress and the WH for the next 200 years. However, I am not optimistic and I do know that its going to be a long hard fight - and its a fight we can win if we're willing to have a big umbrella.

However, those who cant agree to having a big umbrella need to get the hell out. That means we will have more anti-choice people than before, more pro-gloabalists, more anti-gay rights, etc etc etc. However, the Democratic Party has to be the party that is the legitimate voice of the American people. A people who wont put up with election fraud, suppression, intimidating, fear mongering, illegitimate and illegal wars - but still has many different view points and come from a multitude of different backgrounds.

[saracat]

46. I guess you have just told me to get out of the Party.

I would like to know who made you the arbitraitor of what the Democratic Party should stand for? I am a state officer and a District Chair. I am a true liberal. I will NEVER accept anti choice Democrats. Period. I will do everything in my power to move this party left.And I want you to know the majority of the people in my district feel the same way. And our state went red. We went red because Kerry was held back by the antiquated DLC elements within the Party and wasn't allowed to be the liberal that he is and offer people a choice.Once again the voters didn't see a difference and that is thanks to the DLC and the Clintonistas. If the middle was such a damn effective place to be the Republicans would be there .But its not so they went right. We must go left to counter. You are arguing for Repug lite and I say over my dead body.
And BTW, I think we won anyway .It is just the DLC led DNC tactics that prevented a wide enough margin that would make it impossible to steal!

[mattclearing]

59. A DLC supporter's true colors.

The DLC can't stop us from having our party back. People talk about "purging" like it's some horrible thing, but the DLC is at odds with everything the Democratic Party has stood for for the past 60 years, has dubious origins, and has been extremely successful in taking the teeth out of what had been an effective populist opposition to the Republican Party.

These people don't need to be purged. They need to be ignored and left to rot on the sidelines of Democracy. Or better yet, allowed to go back to the other side of the aisle where they belong.

And I say that with all due respect to the many DLC-backed candidates who proved themselves again and again when it counted, most important among them Clinton and Gore.

[gassed]

80. I wouldn't normally comment on a rant...

but that was beautiful. Man, it...sung.

These are the things that I hear myself saying to most of the folks that I know when they start their hand wringing and spouting...What did we do wrong?...I'm looking ahead to 2006...We just need to work harder...be better organized...donate more money.

They just don't get it, and at this point I suspect that they never will.

[Tinoire]

83. Welcome to DU Kitp! What a pleasure to read your well-reasoned thoughts

:toast:

Thank you for speaking out! Thank you for joining our struggle to yank the reins of our party back into the hands of the people!

And again... Welcome to DU!

[NVMojo]

26. they stole our election, our country and now take out our candidate ...

I've posted this before ...in bushworld, if you served in a war and choose to run against the smirking chimp or his pals, your war service becomes the dagger they kill you with ...this is sick. So quit turning against Kerry like whining babies. This was against us all, not just us alone. Kerry paid an even bigger price for trying to take the country back from these evil bastards.

edited for spelling...

[LittleClarkie]

35. That's one thing that really kills me

How can they say they support the troops when I haven't seen them treat a veteran properly yet?

This daughter of a Navy veteran will not forget what they did to John Kerry.

[Machiavelli05]

37. the hypocrisy is worse than that!

Not only does our current administration not support our former troops...

They dont support our current troops

"fight with the army you have, not the army you wish you had"
"bring it on"
I guess theyre expendable, huh? Those comments just show the contempt the Bush administration has for the military.

[malatesta1137]

40. brilliant! KKKarl Rove should hire you

moderates like you are responsible for the Right's rise to power. Moderates, wih all due respect, STINK.

[Machiavelli05]

41. no.

The left's uncanny ability to alienate conservatives AND moderates alike allowed the Right to gain power. Dont forget, poll after poll place a majority of Americans as moderate leaning right or conservative.

Im still on your side as a moderate leaning left. I refuse to let your attempts to alienate me make any progress. However, the more you try the more people you'll alienate... keep up the good work!

[malatesta1137]

43. with people like you on my side

I don't need enemies. Boy has the corporate media brainwashing machine done a wonderful job on you!!

[Machiavelli05]

72. Anyone who doesnt believe everything you believe is brainwashed

youre just as bad a republicans. you need to get a reality check quick

[malatesta1137]

98. everyone who more or less thinks like Bill O'Reilly

is either brainwashed or the brainwasher.

[mattclearing]

60. Yeah, and exit poll after exit poll has John Kerry in the White House.

eom

[insane_cratic_gal]

69. Wait wait

Has everyone forgotten the brilliance of Marketing?

This isn't about divide among Liberal or Moderate Dems. This was Rove's targeting votes. Yes I believe their was a huge deception there in regards to the outcome or authenticity of that success. IE Fraud, or voting companies in someone's pocket.

Does everyone forget that Bush Jr. pleaded with his father to capture the Christian audience to win reelection against Clinton? Not because he loved that community but because he saw an untapped source of votes. Play to their tune and try and win them.

Christians are being used under the guise that their agenda and domination over the world and society will be fulfilled. (those who want it anyway) Pat Roberson crowd. Not all Christians voted for Bush.

Politics, kissing babies, shaking hands now attending the local church gathering to win support. *shudder* It's wrong on some many levels.

So the left didn't alienate anything. 57 million people voted for that left. More then any other president, If you believe the exit polls in regards to the popular vote. Kerry would of won it. 98.7 percent of the time. I hope that stinks as much for you as it does me.

You can blanket the left and push the idea that Right is in power because of us Liberals. That is just untrue and unfounded.
The right is in power because (yes my tinfoil hat)voting system in America is privatized. Without scrutiny, with out a watch dog, they tally 80 percent of the votes in this country! And then report it to the SOS.

Your doing just as much alienating has the rest of us. Accusing those who believe there was fraud, their radical. You speak of Liberal like it's dirt rolling on your tongue.
There is a meeting of halfway, but if we liberals have failed to define ourselves then so have moderates.

[Sly]

47. To paraphrase the venerable Senator Wellstone...

I'm not a moderate, sir. And screw your delusional visage of "national support".

I'm from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. The left wing. The liberal, progressive wing. I'm a L-I-B-E-R-A-L with a capital L. I'm pro-labor, pro-women, pro-minorities, pro-jobs, pro-environment, pro-science, pro-education and pro-civil rights.

And I'll never stop bitching or whining or complaining. I'll never stop questioning authority. I'll never stop being extreme. I'll never stop pestering our elected officials and I'll never stop trying to change someone's mind. I'll never stop dreaming and I'll never stop wanting -- wanting what's right for my kids and my family and my friends and my neighbor and my neighbor's neighbor. I'll never stop wanting what's right for our world.

So there.

[Helga Scow Stern]

51. Well said! And I am sick and f*ng tired of pretending to be moderate

and nice when I have to lie to do it.

[Joe Chi Minh]

54. A man largely among

pygmies.

[Tinoire]

77. Thank you. Excellent post! You spoke for me there!

:loveya:

I'm not a moderate, sir. And screw your delusional visage of "national support".

I'm from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. The left wing. The liberal, progressive wing. I'm a L-I-B-E-R-A-L with a capital L. I'm pro-labor, pro-women, pro-minorities, pro-jobs, pro-environment, pro-science, pro-education and pro-civil rights.

And I'll never stop bitching or whining or complaining. I'll never stop questioning authority. I'll never stop being extreme. I'll never stop pestering our elected officials and I'll never stop trying to change someone's mind. I'll never stop dreaming and I'll never stop wanting -- wanting what's right for my kids and my family and my friends and my neighbor and my neighbor's neighbor. I'll never stop wanting what's right for our world.

So there.

:loveya:

[The Gigmeister]

49. Agree 100%!!!

What pisses me off the most are the whimps who run around screaming...

"WE'RE NEVER GOING TO WIN AGAIN!! THE BOOGIE MAN (Karl Rove) HAS RIGGED EVERYTHING!!"

Well guess what? The Boogie Man NEVER dies!!! SO STOP USING ROVE AS AN EXCUSE!!!

Politics is a rough game, a game that NEVER ends! We'll most certainly win again and guess what? We'll LOSE again! DEAL WITH IT!

Some people just aren't cut-out for politics. And those people are the ones you've described here.

[Joe Chi Minh]

55. What do you mean,

*lose again*, you nut! The Republicans have now lost the last 4 elections on the trot! Only, degenerates would sneer at the Democrats that the last two were stolen from them. As for claiming that they lost them...!

[The Gigmeister]

56. Ugh...

...Like I said, those who see the Boogie Man (Who will NEVER die!!) around every political corner, just aren't cut-out for politics.

[mattclearing]

61. What are you talking about?

No one is blaming Rove for anything. The main problem with the DLC, and the "moderates" that they supposedly represent is that it is a ruse.

Moderates are people who don't believe in certain issues, or aren't convinced of either side's point of view. DLC moderates tend to agree with Bush on EVERYTHING of any importance. Think Joe Lieberman. What is moderate about him?

The DLC is so similar to the Republican Party that people can't see the difference. Why vote for Republican-Lite if you can have the real thing?

As soon as the national Democratic Party recognizes that progressives and liberals are the real thing, we can start showing that to the rest of the country, and let REAL moderates who haven't picked sides see what we're made of.

As long as we keep giving them Bushbots and calling them "moderate Democrats," we will continue to lose. And it won't be Karl Rove's fault, but the fault of people who supported this "moderate" DLC.

Stop the madness.

[The Gigmeister]

63. Ever seen some of the freaks on HARD Right boards?

There is one called Liberty Forum I went too not long ago...

These guys HATE Bush and Rove...HATE THEM!! Because they're too "Liberal" or "Moderate" or whatever.

Yet here, the Idiot and Rove are EXTREME Right Wingers.


Extremism is in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I'll side with the likes of James Carville over people here who bash the Democratic Party. I trust him due to his experience and absolutely good intentions for the Democratic Party.

[mattclearing]

65. I'm aware of Liberty Forum.

It's an interesting place. Anyone interested in truth has a problem with the Bush Administration. Liberty Forum is full of 9/11 skeptics.

Bush/Rove ARE extreme right wingers, but not libertarians, which I think is the bent of Liberty forum. There is a lot to like about libertarianism for the average liberal who is a fiscal conservative. They, like us, don't like government interference in our private lives. Social liberalism and libertarianism aren't too far off from one another in that regard.

They just hate gun control and social programs, and pretty much anything else that isn't explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, which I think is where the similarities end.

:)

[The Gigmeister]

70. Libertarians are cool!

But the people I saw on that forum were a bunch of freaks and kooks!

Scary stuff!!

Course they hate the Idiot and that's cool!! ;)

[anaxarchos]

96. More than just the eye of the beholder...

It changes with time and place. Tom Paine was a radical leftist after the end of the American Revolution. He went to France and got elected to the Assembly. There he voted with the Gironde and was considered so reactionary by the Montagne that he almost lost his head (literally). I think Jefferson had to intervene personally to get him on a boat back to the U.S.

Funny thing is that the Montagne was pretty conservative by today's standards.

[mattclearing]

57. There is nothing moderate about the DLC.

The DLC is little different than the Republican Party at its core. Their main goal is to aid corporations at the expense of people.

To say one is a moderate and a DLC supporter is self-contradictory. It's like saying you are a moderate and a Bush supporter.

[Joe Chi Minh]

71. Right on.

[cmkramer]

58. I agree with you

Politically, I'm liberal on most issues, but the "anyone who takes less than the most extremist leftwing position on 100% of the issues" attitude of many people here is extremely off-putting.

For instance, if the only information I got about the DLC was from this message board, I would assume that they support Bush and rightwing causes 100%. Yet whenever I read what's on their website,it's almost always anti-Bush and anti-right wing. And even when they do agree with Bush's goals -- war on terror, faith-based charities, they never agree with how he goes about implementing those goals.

Another thing is you know how people talk about "yellow dog Democrats"? Personally, I know many more Republicans who will always vote for a Republican no matter if they agree with the candidate or not than Democrats who will vote for a Democratic candidate no matter what.

[Walt Starr]

64. Fair weather Dems???????

There hasn't been any fair weather in the Democratic Party since 1994!!!!!!!!!!!

Tjhe only "fair weather Dems" are the moderates who've been voting for Republicans for a decade!

[Darkhawk32]

73. Winner!!! n/t

[Tinoire]

85. Well said Walt!

The only "fair weather Dems" are the moderates who've been voting for Republicans for a decade! and who try to dictate to the Left how we should be more like Republicans to get their vote.

Screw votes those votes. They're not worth the price of giving up civil liberties, reproductive rights, disenfranchisement of the working class and poor, and war-mongering.

:snort: to the politics of appeasement.

[steelyboo]

67. Do you REALLY think they went to their "moderates?"

Are the ones in power now for the Republicans, would you call those "moderates?" They are the EXTREME right, have been since the 1970's, when the party sold its soul for a new powerbase. The rich had cannibalized itself so much getting richer, that they had lost numbers. So they HAD to go to their EXTREME right. It was pretty obvious for years because it was new. Now, they seem moderate, only because of familiarity.

Now, you want the Dems to go more 'moderate', i.e. go to the right more. Hey, thats great, hope you are happy in a society where the left actually starts in the middle.

Personally, I have voted Dem since Clinton I, the first election I could vote in. However, I will consider a switch to Green, as they seem to be the last bastion of the New Left. Let the Dems go the way of the Populist, the last 'major' party that tried to ride the fence politically; they had a few years of firebrands, but ultimately faded away, with no victories.

If thats where you (and I mean the all inclusive "you" that refers to the Dems, as you are not the only one I have seen in the last 2 months coming on here preaching moderation) want to take this party, into the abyss, go for it. Just don't count on us leftists anymore... oh yeah, count out minorities too, you are pissing on the black vote by not fighting tooth and nail in OH. You lost the Hispanic vote, because you failed to address being poor, and instead let the Bushyman invoke fear and religion with a culture thats traditionally archconservative. Gays? HAH!!! if I were gay, I would be ashamed to vote Dems after the way the party just laid down and allowed those amendments to pass. Eviromentalists? Shit, whats the point, they have been ignored for so long now, that their best hope in years is actually the Rethug Governor in CA. And last but not least, you got broke-ass white people like me, one's that KNOW that what these 2 parties have represented, the haves and have-nots.

I will finish with this: The 'middle' is a myth. If you continue to let the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, you will incite revolution in this country. If you do not keep the poor out of the cellar, even if the rich have to give up a little, then all the "fringe" issues you say are making a difference (believe me, ask a homeless guy how he feels about abortion, or a poor kid in the inner city how he feels about gay marriage.. If they don't punch you for being ignorant, they might rob you so they can eat that night) won't mean shit.

[Tinoire]

86. DLC Centrism assumes that if Democrats move to the right...

DLC Centrism assumes that if Democrats move to the right the Republicans are going to stand still.

[The Judged]

75. A lexicon dialect does not make Machiavelli or anyone else moderate.

As usual, I ask for definition and limitation of terms, which now defy their lexicography.

[Vinnie From Indy]

76. What a Dipstick!

Do not blame Kerry anymore than you blame yourself for the election defeat.

I don't blame Kerry or my mechanic, or my Grandmother or the kid who sat next to me in third grade, I blame those people that engaged in suppressing the vote, hacking the vote and intimidating/misinforming voters.

Everyone on this board was very energetic about Kerry. No speculation after the convention about Skull and Bones. No talk of him possibly throwing the election. Once WE lose though, people are spouting conspiracy theories left and right.

One of the joyous things about being and adult is the ability to reason and that skill helps when separating the wheat from the chaff, the significant from the insignificant and the improbable from the impossible. I have yet to find the rule on the DU site that requires one to believe and support every theory posted on the boards.

Was there election fraud, voter suppression and fishy acts leading up to and on Nov 2? Yes, of course.
Was it mostly perpetrated by the GOP? Probably
Did Rove, GWB and the RNC have direct involvement? Possibly
Did the illuminati, Skull and Bones, or the New World Order have anything to do with it? No.
Does the illuminati exist? no.
Is S&B anymore than a bunch college boys playing fort? no.
Did Kerry throw the election? OF COURSE NOT

Is there going to be test? Is this a cheat sheet? Are you really John Kerry writing under a nom de plume?


I understand the rage. I understand the shock. However, to turn on the Kerry/Edwards campaign because they lost is irrational. Is it their fault that we lost 5 senate seats and I believe 5 house seats?

In regard to placing blame, please see first response.

Bush/Cheney got the vote out. Yes, maybe they were underhanded and yes maybe they were shrewd.... but thats politics.

(sound of mouse buttons) Clickety-click click, click, clickety-click.
There, I just got the vote out and boy am I tired. Hey! As long as were playing the "maybe" game how about "Maybe they stole the election and padded their national vote totals using a variety of techniques including vote fraud, suppression and disenfranchisement". Seriously though, does anyone really believe that Bush was able to find NINE Million NEW Christian gay hatin', French bashin' Toby Keith listening jerkwads and get them to leave their caves for the first time to vote? Anybody? Bueller?

The Democratic party has a recent history of being splintered - the GOP has been able to stick together... that should be your BIGGEST conspiracy theory relating to why WE lost.

Democrats have been a conglomeration of disparate interests for decades if not longer. I will grant you that Rove was successful in cultivating the extremists in the Catholic church.

I dont want anyone of you to leave the Dem party. However, if youre just going to bitch and complain and blame the leaders of the party of criminal acts and conspiracy. Then leave. If you can channel your anger and your passion into doing good for the party, as we all saw before Nov 2nd then by all means stay. Your extremism only hurts the image of the DNC.

Do you validate parking? Who made you the big toe on this foot? Fuck the DNC and the DLC! In regard to their image, how much worse can it get? In case you hadn't noticed, the DNC got it's ass kicked on Nov. 2nd. and their strategy in this fight was a factor. It seems they believed that we could win this fight by catching punches rather than throwing punches. I vote that we try fighting and see how that works.

Yes, I like the DLC. Yes, I am a moderate. No, I do not hate Liberals, but I wish that contemporary mainstream liberalism didnt have to be so riddled with irrational thoughts and theories.

Wishing and hand wringing are not effective strategies. The DLC is under the delusion that becoming GOP lite is the future of our party. It isn't! Their vision is a suckers bet and it will lead the Democrats further into the wilderness. The DLC reminds me of Charlie Brown and the GOP is Lucy holding the football promising not to pull it away.

Lastly, Spell Check is a terrible thing to waste!

[Machiavelli05]

81. Spell check? too bad your computer doesnt have a consistancy check..

First you say "We lost b/c of the massive voter fraud" and scoff at the idea about message and strategy being a factor.... then you go on to say the DNC got its ass kicked b/c of its strategy.

[Vinnie From Indy]

82. My Views

I believe that the election was stolen and I am not ashamed or shy about expressing that opinion. I also believe that the DNC failed miserably. The two thoughts are not in conflict. There was fraud and the DNC leadership failed. What about validating parking for all of us you want to leave the party?

[nashville_brook]

88. so, if we don't agree with you, we are bad Dems?

come on -- if you love your party, you will do whatever it takes to make sure it represents the people and fights for fair elections.

if you are wanting to walk away from the biggest fraud since watergate, then maybe you should examine your own relationship to the party.

there is obviously a crisis of democracy in this country at a time when our "leader" are waging a very serious war of empire. these are radicals with a frightening eschatology -- get with the program -- critque is very much called for. outsider politics is very much called for. these are approppriate responses to a government out of control.

as an aside -- where the heck do you get this about the Illuminati? whast a straw man! no one is putting forth that the Elders of Zion or the UFOs or the Gnomes of Zurich stole our election -- it was Rove and ES&S, Diebold and Blackwell. No need to ghost-hunt! this is obvious, rational and very down-to-earth.

The GOP has NOT stuck together!
Read Thomas Frank's book What's the Matter With Kansas -- "Kansas is ready to lead us singing into the apocalypse. It invites us all to join in, to lay down our lives so that other might cash out t the top; to renounce forever our middle-American prosperity in pursuit of a crimson fantasy of middle-American righteousness."

They are splintering the country and if we had an accurate election, we would see that not so many people have drank the kool-aid.

[Darkhawk32]

89. Sorry, but being "Republican-Lite" doesn't appeal to me...n/t

[m.standridge]

90. What's so frustrating is that a true story on the Internet

is like the occasional true story in the _National Enquirer_.

Right now, almost all we have is the Internet, for the smae reason they had to practically arrest Nixon before the media started covering Watergate.
It's dollars and cents.
It's advertising dollars.
Sometimes, it's Boards of Directors and, yes, major shareholders.

As far as conspiracy theories, I don't know of any that I'd present right now, except this one:
There's a great deal of evidence that Kerry won in the Electoral College, but not in the Popular vote.

Bush just had to fudge a little bit, in just a handful of states where it was already close, to beat Kerry.
But it was fudging nonetheless, and it was probably illegal.
It was done to put Bush over in the Electoral College.
Bush did several things right, and Kerry was in the awkward position of attempting to defend his actions in Vietnam, a war that was even more unpopular with those who oppposed Iraq, than Iraq itself was. That hurt him in the area of turnout.
Meanwhile, Bush was able to identify the anti-gay marriage sentiment in the Red states, with him, while simultaneously drawing on the flag-waving quality of 9/11, war on terror, and the latest bin Laden video. He was able to increase his vote in his base.
But his base--and this is Bush's dirty little secret which can only be guarded because of GOP control of the US Supreme Court--is not a base that can put him over in the Electoral College. They had to stop the vote counting in Florida and have deadlines set where New Hampshire's uncounted votes weren't looked at, last time, to make it appear he'd carried the Electoral College then. This time, they broke into a Democratic office in Toledo, and rigged the Triad computers going into the recount, and blocked non-GOP observers in Warren County for a few minutes. They were just trying to make sure.
Some might call all that a conspiracy theory.
I think it's just common sense. The cheating went on in Ohio, Florida and New Hampshire, because Bush needed those to win in the Electoral College. It was effective in two of the three. Whether it was essential in New Mexico, Iowa and Nevada this time, I'm not sure. But there are indications it occurred in Nevada.

[LittleClarkie]

93. I dispute the "slight" fudging

When Karen Hughes reportedly told Bush he was losing by an electoral landslide, I think that was the actual truth of the matter before the "fudging" began. If so, they did more than tweek the vote. Kennedy/Nixon was a tweek. This was Oceans 11.

And what did Kennedy/Nixon and Kerry/Bush have in common? A Texas politician, that's what. I don't buy Buchanan's "We got ours stolen too in 1960 but we didn't cry" rationale. If Nixon got robbed, that wasn't right either. So you'd think the Repubs would agree that the vote needs to be fixed, lest Dems regain power and take a page from their playbook.

[NewsGuyOne]

94. Kerry is the definition of a fairweather dem

Fraud shouldn't be exposed at the price of losing support.

Vote Fraud is less important than support???

Are you bloody insane?

[HeyManThatsCool]

97. Skull & Bones

I heard the Skull & Bones thing from people who aren't even interested in politics AT LEAST 100 times before the election.
People who were into politics dismissed it but DID discuss it.
Do I think the Skull & Bones Conspiracy is true? NO. But, I did hear alot about it before, during and after the election.


OF COURSE everyone was excited about Kerry. He isn't a monster.
We were all banding together to elect a man with new ideas- and we wanted Bush out.

I feel like Kerry let ME down. (I think he let alot of people down But I'll just speak for myself). I'll end with Jessie Jacksons quote in Newsweek, which accurately describes how I feel.

"Kerry pulled out too early. The scrutiny pulled out with him."




--snip--

"Everyone on this board was very energetic about Kerry. No speculation after the convention about Skull and Bones. No talk of him possibly throwing the election. Once WE lose though, people are spouting conspiracy theories left and right."