Kos diary ignores Kerry online support while knocking Gore supporters

[beachmom]

Hey, interesting diary by Mydd's Chris Bowers chastising Gore supporters who don't give to Draft Gore PACS, but then by error of omission acts like we the online Kerry supporters don't exist (only his PAC which I suppose people will think is stuffed full of evil corporate money). Here's the diary:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/21/429/01552

Here is my comment:

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/4/21/429/01552/162#c162

It's mostly a Gore bash diary (doesn't his partner Jerome Armstrong work for Warner?), but I think there was a dig at Kerry acting like Hillary gets online activists while not mentioning Kerry.

[karynnj]

1. Someone earlier this week had the same agenda

He had a post that bashed Kerry and Hillary for raising 2008 money and praised the selflessness of Clark and Edwards for helping 2006 candidates and appearing with them. Several of us posted with articles on how much Kerry gave and how many appearances he made. The OP finally got mad - saying the post "once had value", but he was done with it. (It was funny though because he had to admit that neither Clark or Edwards had given money - their PACs let them travel to support others (in Iowa, NH ....) apparently. There also was an article yesterday in MSM that Hillary gave slightly over $100,000 on DU-P yesterday, but no one is near Kerry.

[beachmom]

2. Hey, some jerk over there just wrote a really snarky remark

against my comment -- the usual Kerry "didn't let every vote count" and "I want my money back". My response was from the more centrist view -- that he did, in fact, lose the election and had no real evidence to contest. Anyone else who thinks he DID win but was right to concede can comment, too. But I have to say, I'm with the Gore supporters on this diary. This Chris Bowers takes one piece of info and wholesale bashes Gore people, and I thought it was just mean spirited. I think I have sort of made a pledge to myself, that I'm not going to ever write snarky bashing comments about other '08 candidates, unless, of course, they say really mean things about Kerry (personally, not policy issues), then they're fair game. In the case of Gore, I still like him and really want to see that movie that just came out.

Hmmm . . . lately Gore has gotten good press (TAP, hell, even The Economist, WP), so this Mydd.com does this diary even though his partner is now working for Warner. I have to say that's really sleezy. And I'm not even for Gore for '08.

[sandnsea]

19. Now you see some of the primary stuff

So let's say it becomes internet conventional wisdom that Gore doesn't really have netroots support. And you start seeing Warner supporters say that. And then more and more people. You know how the whole thing got started, so when you see people repeating that lie 3 years later, grrrr. Lots of stuff gets said in a primary, but I would expect people to be able to separate spin from truth after the primary is over. Stunningly, not so. :crazy:

[sandnsea]

3. Oh man - that's a beaut!!

Oh yeah, they are really pushing this Al Gore movement. Markos originated Draft Clark too, then went to work for Dean. One of the people who took it over was professional too, it was never completely grassroots. Not mentioning Kerry is exactly what they did in 2003, you bet it's intentional. And just like Clark took supporters away from Kerry, I'm sure they see that Al Gore would take away supporters next year. So, we have a real push for Gore, but it might just as well be a stop Kerry movement. These people are master manipulators, that's for sure.

[JohnKleeb]

4. Markos organized Draft Clark?

Had no idea. I have a word to describe him though, it's Hack with a capital H.

[sandnsea]

6. Yup

And one of the Draft Clark groups in Little Rock was actually DC consultants, I think from the Clinton people, IIRC. Truth be told, Pamela was actually the ONLY true grassroots blogger to end up a direct volunteer with a campaign. The rest were all paid or professionals of some sort. Jerome and Markos had created their political consultant company and were on the prowl for a candidate, not the other way around. The whole netroots thing was a total snow job.

[beachmom]

7. So when they blast the DC consultants, it's really just a power grab.

They are no different than operatives who have long worked for the Party. How interesting. But you know, Kos hasn't been criticizing Kerry since he did his diary. The reason? Because it resulted in a ton more users and more hits. So two can play this game. He starts bashing Kerry, and without a word, a lot of us will stop visiting his site. So he has to play nice. I don't think that guy believes in anything OR anybody. True believers like us must look like complete fools to his cynical eye.

[jenndar]

12. True believers like us

don't worry how we look to people like Kos :)

But, yeah, your assessment of Kos is pretty much spot on, and there are lots of others like him.

[sandnsea]

15. Maybe that's it

I don't know for sure. I still think the strategy might be for none of them to ever mention him at all. Taking a page from the mainstream media. If it were purely about visitors, then negativity attracts as much as positive, sometimes more. I don't have a particular problem with people thinking they could do a better job, or that it's time for a changing of the guard; it's the manipulative way they go about it. That's not change at all.

[ProSense]

24. Bingo!

I read this tread earlier today. I believe you are 100% right. Imagine that strategy: ignoring Kerry and his many supporters in the hopes that no one else will notice them.

I agree, it's similar to the MSM tactic. I don't know, people sure are grasping at straws to try to discredit Kerry. Some of the arguments I spent today batting down border on silly. They're flawed to begin with, but some have literally deteriorated to nonsensical.

The reason I didn't comment here before is Kos. Sigh! That guy is a political hack. The largest liberal blog run by someone who is no better than the existing political hacks, but pretending to be a new breed. He may actually be a new breed: the same old hack able to convince everyone he's not. And it drives me nuts when he doesn't get the facts right.

What's crazy is I can actually see the value in all these blogs, but I also see the manipulative BS they're engaged in while they advocate truth and calling out the Republicans for hypocrisy.

[beachmom]

9. Drafting Clark

Just went back over there and the guy who started "Draft Clark" just put in a comment about what hard work it was. Then Chris Bowers complimented him. It's looking pretty contrived to me now, especially for what you just told me. "Henny penny the sky is falling" (from the Poet of the Pentagon) all of those netroots being manufactured. I thought everyone was just like us. But like everything else about John Kerry, we're the "real deal" net activists starting with Pamela all the way to our, what, 70 fairly active members. Not bad, not bad at all.

[sandnsea]

11. There were 2 groups

One group was consultants, the other might have been pure honest grassroots. I don't know who posted in the thread, but could be contrived. It's been a while since I put all the names together. Even Joe Trippi, he was a consultant going way back, Jerry Brown, started with Kennedy in Texas in 80. The whole thing is really annoying, and yeah, quite hypocritical.

[karynnj]

14. Which is funny because we really are just people

who came together in support of Kerry. There are some regular supporters of at least Clark and Edwards who are likely to be like us.

[sandnsea]

17. Absolutely there are

Lots of plain old people worked hard for candidates, absolutely, for all the candidates. I'm just talking about how the online "movements" were organized, not really people coming out of their daily jobs to take charge of a movement. Except Pamela, she really did take over the Unofficial Blog early in 2003, and then was pulled up to write entries for the campaign blog.

[FrenchieCat]

26. Do you have something to back this up?

one of the Draft Clark groups in Little Rock was actually DC consultants, I think from the Clinton people, IIRC. Truth be told, Pamela was actually the ONLY true grassroots blogger to end up a direct volunteer with a campaign. The rest were all paid or professionals of some sort.

Please.

As a Draft Clark organizer, I'd like to see your proof for your derogatory comments about something that I was involved in.

Thanks!

PS. Is this forum to attack others, or is it to support John Kerry? just asking!

[sandnsea]

23. Here's the run-down

Brent Blackaby, he worked on the Clinton campaign in 1996, and went to Little Rock to set up DraftClark2004, that was one group.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/09/17/MN87856.DTL


Markos started DraftClark.com, which was taken over by Stirling Newberry. The other group.
“Stirling Newberry is an internet business and strategy consultant, with experience in international telecom, consumer marketing, e-commerce and forensic database analysis. He has acted as an advisor to Democratic political campaigns and organizations and is the the co-founder, along with Christopher Lydon, Jay Rosen and Matt Stoller, of BopNews, as well as being the military affairs editor of The Agonist
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0508/S00047.htm

Matt Stoller also ran ClarkSphere.com and blogs at MyDD
http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2003/09/franke-ruta-g-09-25.html

[FrenchieCat]

27. All these folks still support Wes Clark....

Brent and Larry do. I have met them. They work for Wespac now. How does this translate to "washington DC operatives"? They lived in San Francisco until Wes Clark announced. They were hired by the campaign......as the campaign did hire some of those who were prominent in the Draft Clark effort.

How old would have 29 year old Brent been in 1996......working on the Clinton campaign?

Stirling was not a consultant when he got involved with the Clark campaign. IT is his draft efforts that made him a name. Your article is from August 2005.....

Matt Stoller was and is a strong Clark supporters.

This stuff being posted here is gossip....and is making innuendo based on stuff that doesn't even add up.

This is sad.

You guys need a private forum to do this rumormongering.

Too bad you all didn't talk like this when Clark and his supporters were supporting John Kerry!

[sandnsea]

29. One, Brent Blackaby

No, they did not live in San Francisco until Clark announced. They went to Little Rock weeks before his announcement, and after the announcement Clark hired even more Clinton advisors.

“Last month, Brent Blackaby and Larry Huynh left their Nob Hill apartment and moved halfway across the country to volunteer for a presidential campaign that didn't exist….

I've always been interested in politics," said Blackaby, who worked in the 1996 Clinton campaign. Since then, he said, "I had been looking for someone to believe in."

[FrenchieCat]

31. Yea....he was 21 years old and Larry was 20 in 1996!

DC operatives my booty! They looked at the 2004 field and didn't see anyone they felt could win a general election against Bush. That's why they started looking for someone else...and that someone was Wes Clark.

I joined the Draft Clark movement in June of 2003....so of course, the movement got started way before Clark announced. Even Michael Moore joined the movement. Is he a DC Consultant too? Or was he fooled like the rest of us?

This is ridiculous. This is just pure gossip.....

You need to support John Kerry, since this is what this forum is supposed to be for, and stop hating on Wes Clark.....!

Like I said, you should have been posting this stuff back when General Clark endorsed John Kerry, and Clarkies went to work supporting the nominee.

This is sad....really is!

[sandnsea]

35. Where did I say anything bad about Wes Clark???

I described how the draft clark movement got started, by Markos, which is true. I described others who had political ambitions, evidenced by their own involvement in past campaigns and their own quotes on the matter. And they have gone on with political careers. That isn't to say YOU or anybody else didn't genuinely support Clark and work your butt off for him. But it also isn't to say that the main drivers didn't have ulterior agendas and just continue on, because many of them obviously did. Which has NOTHING to do with Wes Clark as a person.

[FrenchieCat]

39. See post #36 (n/t)

[wisteria]

43. You didn't. Clark supporters seem to be on the attack lately.

You could state the obvious- Clark has grey hair- and they would pounce on it and suggest you are bashing Clark because he has grey hair.

The John Kerry supporters generally never attack Gen. Clark. I don't get it. Over sensitive I guess.

[FrenchieCat]

47. Yes, "we are oversensitive".....

that must be it.

Although, I dare say...I am only one Clark supporter...and don't appreciate being referred to as a unit.

I'm sure you want the same respect as well, I would hope.

[sandnsea]

40. And one more thing

Ya' know, I never even GO in Dean or Edwards or whatever other Democratic forums there are. I don't care what anybody is doing in those forums. It's their business, the forums are there for people to say any damned thing they want, as far as I'm concerned. If Kerry is such a has-been anyway, why can't certain supporters just leave us to our delusional fantasy world and get on about the business of advocating for their own candidate.

[FrenchieCat]

41. And so....I should do as you do?....Go back to my Clark forum and

do some rumor mongering over there?

Is that what you are telling me I should do?

You are suggesting that I go and gossip and backstab John Kerry and his supporters and sow "hating" among other Clark supporters....by dropping unsourced inuendos and such about John Kerry? You want me to act like I know "things" about the Kerry campaign....and talk like I'm an authority on the subject on a public forum?

I didn't say Kerry was a Has-been...so I don't know where you are getting that from.


Public forums are not the place for Delusional Fantasies. Y'all need to get a room....a private forum or such where you can fantasize and dog out anyone you think is any competition for the fun of it.

fuckingunbelievable! Wow!

[wisteria]

44. I am with you, they don't endear me to Clark with their crazy

accusations that we attack Clark.

[FrenchieCat]

46. Yeah right, Clark wasn't mentioned.....the "snow job" wasn't mentioned

Hell, I had something deleted in this forum by the moderators just last week that had appeared here.....remember Blue Iris' rumor on the deep dark secret about Clark, but she couldn't say what it was....but that it was something big.....and she knew it was true...but she couldn't say it?

But did I say that all Kerry supporters attacked Clark? No, didn't think so.

I already know that your personal devotion is to John Kerry, and everything else more or less stinks...for the most part. So endearing you to Wes Clark is not something that is in my power.

But I will say that there is more than just one Great, good looking, sexy, smart, articulate, thoughtful, intelligent, sincere, fighting, experienced, wonderful Democrat who exists out there.

Message from Du Admin pinned at the top...which should be read every now and then....

Welcome to the DU John Kerry Group
The mission of the DU John Kerry Supporters group is for members to discuss the highlights and history of his career and life, any impact he's had on our country, his accomplishments, his service and stance regarding the Vietnam war, and the strong emotional attachment that a lot of people seem to have developed toward him, especially since the 2004 Presidential Election. We will allow to support a grassroots communication with him so that he continues to speak for the 55 million who voted for him.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=273&topic_id=1&mesg_id=1

Additional message from DU Admin pinned to the top of this forum:

It has already become apparent that providing people with mini echo-chambers can have the opposite effect of what we intended. A few members have taken the candidate supporters' groups as an open invitation to fire up the old primary wars, and focus on the negative rather than the positive. It would be a real shame if these groups served as a catalyst to re-ignite the antagonism from the primary, and we hope everyone will make an effort to keep that from happening.

[sandnsea]

49. "re-ignite antagonism"

So what are you doing in a thread about the NETROOTS and Markos and Jerome and those who used the internet as a catalyst to advance their political careers. This thread IS NOT about Wes Clark and WAS NOT about Wes Clark until YOU showed up and made it one.

[FrenchieCat]

55. See, that's not the truth!

Wes Clark and his campaign and how it started was very much being discussed....way before I got here.....

I mean, come on! Cause we're in a kerry forum, black is white and white is black? Let's at least be real.

what happened is you forgot that this is a public forum, and you were just going at it...just typing what was on your mind....

Now, after the fact of getting a bit busted....you look around perplexed asking..."what did I say? I didn't say nothing about Wes Clark!" and then you have someone stand up for you, to make it seem like it's me that's kinda of kooky...just my magination...I'm making the whole thing up, blowing it way out of proportion and I'm the one with a "problem"....like I'm snooping or something.

Plueazzzze!

I understand what happened...and it can happen. But, Unlike the thread author who graciously apologized and moved on....you want to deny what you wrote...and act like you're the victim and I am the attacker.

How generous! :sarcasm:

See, I don't see you all as a "group" in that sense. There are damn fine upstanding and Kerry supporters, and there there are Kerry supporters....just like what one might find in any other group of people. Y'all are not one unit, and I don't "judge" y'all as so.

[FrenchieCat]

28. He set up a Clark website....not the same thing.....

he did not "organize" the Draft Clark effort.....

[beachmom]

30. Sorry, FrenchieCat -- I did start this diary which was about how

I felt Chris Bowers was bashing Gore supporters, which led to other talk. Why don't we let this thread die, and my apologies to any Clark supporters who felt they were being gossiped about unfairly.

You're right -- we should stay positive about John Kerry, and did indeed appreciate your help in 2004. Just for the record, I like Wes Clark and have heard good things about your group here on DU.

[FrenchieCat]

32. It's OK....I just get upset when I come here to find out what Kerry

is up to....not to go and report, but just to know (he was my 2nd choice).....

And I keep running into Clark's name in here....and most times it isn't very positive.

[beachmom]

33. The most important Kerry news is his speech tomorrow

Which will be live blogged at dKos. And him wanting to end this war. Everything else is trivial, really.

Once again, sorry, and please keep coming back.

[FrenchieCat]

42. Yes, I read about that upcoming event!

I will listen....

[wisteria]

45. I think you need to present some examples of our negative

posts about Clark. I don't recall any that attacked the character or questioned his valor. Honest discussion about knowledge and qualifications for the position of President do not amount to attacks IMO.

[FrenchieCat]

52. I wasn't talking to all kerry supporters......just one, really....

you want examples?

This poster was the first in the entire thread to bring up Clark's name. This was a Kerry thread....that I wasn't gonna post in, until....

Everything in that piece and that's what you pick out. He probably should have used Wes Clark as an example of someone he listened to on Iraq, except for Wes Clark is flat out lying about what he said at the time. Funny how the liars from all sides have consistently taken less heat on Iraq than the ones who tried to do the right thing and put their integrity on the line to do it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=889013&mesg_id=900717

As for the rest, yeah, I think Clark is a liar on his testimony to Congress and it's not the first time I've said it. John Kerry doesn't tell me what to say or think. I know what Clark's testified to and I know he supported a threat of force because he believed Saddam had WMD. I don't care how many times he and his supporters try to deny it. It's right there in the testimony, in black and white. He hasn't taken responsibility for those words and they most certainly had influence on people who had to decide what to do with Saddam. Those are facts.

On Iraq, now, Clark has yet to put ending the war as his priority; rather, his plans continues to focus on "affecting the outcome" and even deploying more troops to Iraq. Bringing troops home has never been the primary focus of his Iraq strategy, as it always has been with Kerry.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=889013&mesg_id=901680

think Clark lied
I have every right to say that and it isn't treating anybody's candidate like dirt. It certainly isn't anywhere near the innuendo in your comment about "dead soldiers and their families". YOU are the one who keeps changing the subject. I keep trying to focus on what politicians say and do, ALL of what they say and do.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=889013&mesg_id=909491

[sandnsea]

53. Yep, once in 3 years

Bravo Frenchie!! And yeah, I am getting tired of people who pretend they said something different at the time of the vote than what is written down in black and white. And I did finally call it what it is, lying. ONCE, and responded when other people referred to that ONE post. Which is NOTHING compared to the shit Clark and other supporters say about Kerry every single friggin' day.

[FrenchieCat]

56. Number one,

You din't just say it once.

Cause you said it again in a thread today. Want me to post that too?

number two....If you come to our Forum, we don't diss John Kerry in it....


number three....Clark supporters are not a unit. I don't know why you keep referring to us as if we are. I try not to make that mistake...which is what it is.

number four..... Wes Clark is no more a liar than is John Kerry...and the rationale that you use to call Wes Clark a liar is not sound, at all.


number five.....you just posted that Clark's campaign was really an orchestrated top down deal. It really wasn't. That's what I'm saying.

number six....stick to promoting John Kerry here, and stop dogging out Kos, and this and that. This is a public forum, and don't think that I am the only reading it that is not a "only devoted to John kerry" type of supporter.

My daughter lives in Cambridge, and will be voting there in the upcoming election. So I do have a vested interest in Mass!

[globalvillage]

50. Compared to what? THIS?

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/5376

There is more Kerry bashing in this discussion group than you'll EVER see on DU. It is incredibly rare to find any postings critical of other Dems in the JK group, and I don't think anyone has ever bashed the Gen. Clark. If you can point to one, please do. If it's mine, I'll retract it.
Personally, Wes would be my choice for JK's running mate in '08. I have posted that several times. I like him.
But there's some damn ugly discussion among his supporters about Kerry, Edwards, and others. Clark supporters might want to clean house there before pointing fingers.
Or maybe I'll just monitor the WesPac board for a while and wait for the next JK bash. They seem fairly frequent.

:grr:

[sandnsea]

51. I did, ONCE

A couple weeks ago, in response to some bash on Kerry. I said Clark is a liar when he pretends that his Sept testimony didn't line out a process that proposed the use of force, war as a last resort; and that that wasn't exactly what Democrats intended with the IWR. That's the only time I've ever said anything like that about Clark, after 3 years, and the shit-pile that goes on every day with Kerry.

On edit:

Just read that thread you posted. Stinky-poo. I don't remember any JK supporters posting that kind of stuff, especially not about Clark.

[globalvillage]

54. Look at what's posted about JK at the WesPac forum.

It'll turn your stomach. Edwards bashing, too.

I would post some of it here, but I can't bring myself to see it posted in this forum. It's ugly.

[FrenchieCat]

59. Be brave and call them out then.....

that's what I decided to do!

Although I never have gone on to a Kerry forum to see what was being said...this is DU, even if it's a sub forum within Du, it is still Democratic Underground...which has clear rules on these Candidate forums.

[FrenchieCat]

58. Here's the comment, before it was deleted at my request....

Yeah...I haven't checked out the freeper stories about Clark...
Posted by BlueIris
1. But, um, I've had this theory about him for a while. He has at least one BIG (possible, I've never met the good General) liability (no, not about war service) in my eyes. Not going to post what it is...except to say that in my opinion, if he runs, he'll lose. 'Cause that will come out and when it does? I don't see how anything could save him. Once again, NOT going to put up what I believe it to be, but that's my reason for not wanting to see him get it. It's one reason I'm extra glad he didn't get it last time. Maybe that makes me shallow and petty and evil.

[FrenchieCat]

57. I don't post there....nor do I read much of it.

But feel free to go there an comment if you want. that is your business.

[sandnsea]

34. Nobody said anything bad about Wes Clark

I said what happened in 2003 and how various "netroots" really came about. I said one of the Draft Clark groups were Clinton people, and that's true. The other was started by Markos, also true. It was taken over by Stirling Newberry and Matt Stoller, who also ran BOPNews.com. They parlayed that into political careers. Donnie Fowler was also involved in Draft Clark, and left when Clark announced and filled his campaign up with Clinton people. That's what happened.

That isn't to say Clark had NO supporters, but the "netroots" was largely contrived by people from the top. Just like Joe Trippi did.

[FrenchieCat]

36. What you were saying was that Clark support was "orchestrated"

and it was all a front for DC Consultants.

That Clark's root movement was not real.

Great positives for Wes Clark! :sarcasm:

"One of the people who took it over was professional too, it was never completely grassroots."

"one of the Draft Clark groups in Little Rock was actually DC consultants, I think from the Clinton people, IIRC. Truth be told, Pamela was actually the ONLY true grassroots blogger to end up a direct volunteer with a campaign. The rest were all paid or professionals of some sort. "

"The whole netroots thing was a total snow job.

[sandnsea]

37. The key people WEREN'T

Pamela was the only true plain old grassroots person who got pulled up to be a main blogger on a campaign. The key players for Dean & Clark either had past political experience and/or ulterior agendas. That's how it happened, like it or not. Obviously there were other supporters, good, honest supporters; every candidate has supporters.

That says NOTHING about Wes Clark.

[FrenchieCat]

38. There were so many people involved until it isn't funny.....

70,000 letters received by July of 2003!

Were the letters made up too?

Markos only designed the first Clark site. He started supporting Dean before Clark even announced.

Pamela was not the only grassrooter that ended up working for the Clark campaign.

Why are you such an authority on Wes Clark, what he said, who were his key people, who didn't and did work for him, and why they did it, how many there were, what they all did before and after? Like were do you get your Clark dirt?

This is gossip, pure and simple. 1/2 of what you are talking about, you can't even substantiate.

My point is that every chance you have, you diss Wes or his supporters, whichever happen to be most relevant to the conversation. What's up with that?

Jeeze...get a life or something! Support John Kerry! shit!

[sandnsea]

48. Blog-ger

Pulled up directly from the "netroots" to BLOG. No other political web sites, no consulting firms, no past political affiliations. A plain old grassroots person. That's what I said.

I didn't say anything about every single person who ever volunteered for or worked for a campaign. Gads.

And no, I don't dis Clark or his supporters every chance I get, I barely even pay attention to them. Like I already said, I NEVER go into the Clark forum and rarely go into Clark threads. If you think I dis him all the time, then maybe it's because of what YOU are doing on DU and what threads YOU are doing it in, not me.

[beachmom]

5. Gore = Stop Kerry movement

Well, I'll be damned. I never even thought of that. But here's the funny part. A lot of the arguments for Gore work for Kerry. So if Gore doesn't run (I actually don't think he wants to run but I could be wrong), maybe we can grab those supporters?

How is this thing going to splinter out?

Centrist group: Hillary, Warner, Bayh, Biden
Progressive group: Kerry, Feingold
Progressives like them but I'm not sure how progressive they are: Gore, Clark

So it's kind of 4 against 4. You know, obviously, I want Kerry, but I look at that list with pride. What an incredible field we have for '08, SO much better than the Republicans! Whoever comes out of that field the winner will have many honed skills to use in the general.

[sandnsea]

8. I didn't either, til that post

These guys are so freakin' manipulative, it's really sickening. I had no idea what all was going on in 2003 until last year actually. I just don't know how it'll all shake out, I think tomorrow's speech might be a turning point. But I also think there might be a real orchestrated effort to just not mention Kerry's name in the blogosphere AT ALL. We all need to be ready to take this story out there.

I really don't know how 2007 will shake out. You didn't add Edwards, who could take votes from centrists and Feingold people too. That's kind of how Kerry won in 2003, he had the progressive credentials that just couldn't be ignored, but appealed to mainstream voters too. He was everybody's second choice, so maybe that is the thing to look for. I don't know.

[beachmom]

10. Edwards -- I KNEW I was forgetting somebody

Yes, he'll definitely add to the conversation; hopefully, he'll talk a lot about poverty which Democrats need to talk more about.

The other day I was whining about Edwards, but no more. I see sometimes Edwards supporters come over here, and now I feel bad for what I wrote. He's a good guy, just not my cup of tea for prez.

[sandnsea]

13. He's a great guy

Same in 2003, just really had a tough time saying bad things about Edwards. We just hammered away at his lack of foreign policy and security experience, and how much we need it right now. Kind of a not his fault approach, we just need more than what he's got.

[karynnj]

18. I think Edwards may be an ok person, but I really

don't know his core beliefs. He really was a Senator for only 4 years, before he spent much of 2003 and 2004 campaigning. Looking at 1998-2002, he looks like a pretty conservative Democrat, pretty much DLC (where he was their darling) except on trade issues. He was pretty hawkish and from comments on record throughout 2003 believed in the war for reasons other than WMD. From comments, he clearly believed in some of the spreading democracy stuff. I know he said he now thinks the war in Iraq was wrong, but I really have no view of what his foreign policy views are.

I really question whether he is a liberal - some of his followers here are liberals so - this may be projection on their part. Also, if he wants to be a liberal won't that hurt him with the people who liked him as the most hawkish, conservative Democrat last time. (If they could say Kerry who has an extremely consistent (though not static over 22 years) record - Edwards is painting himself as different - the only thing the same is the poverty stuff.

I think my opinion of Edwards was fixed when I read that he "channeled" a baby who died in childbirth to play on the emotions of the jury. (He was lucky I wasn't on the case - my view would be you wouldn't do this if you had a decent case.)

[whometense]

16. Re: Markos

If you haven't seen it yet, I recommend reading this piece he wrote for the most recent American Prospect. http://www.prospect.org/web/view-print.ww?id=11410

It gives some background on him, and most of you won't be shocked to learn that he used to be a republican. He says being in the army made him a democrat. It gave me an Idea of the way he thinks, politically, and I actually do think Kerry is too liberal for him (aside from the whole Dean thing.)

[wisteria]

20. I agree, I think that is his big issue wirh Kerry- besides the personal

ones. Just take a look at who he promotes.Dean is actually a moderate. Personally,I think Markos is bad news for Dems- especially progressive and/or liberal ones.

[kerrygoddess]

21. He was

a green too.

[karynnj]

22. I never want to here him use the words "flip flop" then

The greens actually stike me as a non-aligned group of people estranged from the establishment. There's one part that is very left wing and has a consistent set of beliefs, but there are at least as many who don't seem to have much of an identity except they are angry.

[WildEyedLiberal]

25. I chipped in a couple of comments

Your original comment got pooped on in no time flat, I saw. :eyes:

[Moderator]

60. Locking

This thread has now gotten way off-topic.