This place looks like it did after Kerry lost in 2004

[WeDidIt]

I just can't do the emotional investment any more.

Fuck it.

[Maccagirl]

1. I understand completely

It hurts too much to care anymore.

[stevedeshazer]

2. Yes. And two years later, we kicked ass.

I feel badly, too. Tonight felt like a kick in the gut.

Take some time, recharge. The war never ends.

We'll be back.

:hi:

[ProSense]

3. Not even close. n/t

[wisteria]

7. You are right, when you compare candidates.

And, I have learned one thing, God doesn't give a hoot about politics. Prayer certainly hasn't worked.

[Blaukraut]

4. Nah. This isn't nearly as bad. Don't read too much into the loss

nationally speaking, anyway. Leave that to the brainless punditry and stay away from tv for a while. Things might, ironically, get better for us now, and I say this as a Mass. resident who has to put up with the future Sarah Palin cenerfold prom king for 3 years.

[wisteria]

6. Oh, how about a pictures of the centerfold along with the beauty queen. n/t

[fujiyama]

14. Well said

I have to say of all the races, this is probably the least emotionally invested election I've ever been in. I've just become numb - mainly to being disappointed by politicians of both stripes. I had a class tonight. I checked my phone once, noticed the AP called it. Put the phone away and went back to listening to the lecture.

I would have been more devastated if a really great health care bill was on the line. But this is no single payer. This doesn't have a public option.

I just don't care any more.

[treestar]

17. Then stay home and let the Republicans win

And you'll never see single payer in your lifetime.

If the Republicans get their way - and they are tenacious and don't stay home in "disappointment" at not getting all they want in one year - by the time you are old there will be no Medicare program.

[fujiyama]

31. I didn't stay anything about not voting

I'll continue to vote for Dems because the republicans are bat shit crazy. And I think voting is a duty of any citizen.

But it's the most I'll do at this point. Beyond that forget it. No money and wasting time campaigning for anyone though. That's what I meant by getting emotionally invested.

[wisteria]

5. I know, the lead up to this was similar to 2004 for me, but somehow this time it is a bit easier.

I know what to expect from the infentile Republican RW and RW talk radio.

And, Massachusetts still have one damn fine senator- Powerful Senior Senator Kerry. Brownie is going to find it difficult to get along and do well in Mass if he doesn't produce something. He has a big agenda to fulfill for the teabaggers and that is not necessarily going to jive with what the people of Massachusetts want.

[GoCubsGo]

20. And, he only has two years to produce.

The question is, will buyer's remorse set in before then?

[ObamaKerryDem]

21. +1 :)

[Sebastian Doyle]

8. A lot of things in common with that loss.

Weak candidate. Shitty campaign. No logical reason to have lost. Conceded before the votes were fucking counted.

And there remains the fraud factor as well. From the pre-printed ballots to the suspect machines... we may never know the real numbers, just like we'll never know what the vote count really was in Ohio (2004)

[auburnblu]

10. Ohio, maybe but Massachuesettes?

Of all places for the Republicans to steal an election with voter fraud, Massachusettes isn't exactly where I would think they could do it.

[Sebastian Doyle]

11. Depends on where the Diebold hacks come from.

If it's something built into the machines before they are even deployed, or if it's hacked remotely, then it doesn't matter who's running the election in the state.

[karynnj]

13. The candidate beat Howard Dean by 20 points in Iowa - so what does that say of Dean?

Kerry fought long and hard, with many appearances in each day, for months. He was incredibly well prepared and exceptionally good in the debates. With a less stacked against him playing field - where at least all the people who were supposedly on his side actually were, he would have won.

In fact, if Terry McAulliffe wouldn't have stupidly put the convention 5 weeks before Bush's - making Kerry stretch his money over 13 weeks, while Bush stretched his over 8 - Kerry might have won. Kerry saw this coming and suggested a novel solution - that at the convention he commit to accepting the nomination around the time of the Republican convention rather than accepting the nomination. (a real sacrifice, especially in his home town, but it would have really helped. The party was completely negative and rejected the idea.)

[ObamaKerryDem]

26. Exactly, plus the fact that he was hit by a multi-million dollar smear campaign..

..which faced little to no scrutiny from the so-called "liberal media". Not to mention the scare tactics and exploitation of 9/11 from the other side and a year after the war. These factors, combined with McAulliffe's lackluster(at BEST) DNC chairmanship and a "liberal media" who only too happily joined in with the Republicans in 'defining' him as an "out of touch elitist" and it's truly amazing he got as close as he did. A "weak" candidate might've been routed in a McCainesque way under those circumstances.

Plus it's not like Kerry just quit right away after Ohio came in. He held on until there wasn't really anything more he could've, realistically, done.


The eventual MSM fawning over Brown aside, Coakley had many more advantages (which were unfortunately squandered in many ways) in this race than Kerry did in his. So other than the fact that they are both from the same state and both losses were/are heartbreakers, it's not really a very fair comparison, I don't think.

But as much as tonight/today sucks, it's still nothing compared to how very dissapointing those days in 2004 were...if we could, as a party, survive that, we can certainly survive this. :)

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

9. Agreed

Buck up people.
:grouphug:

[karynnj]

12. This is hard, but nowhere near the same

We still have the Presidency, the House and 59 Senators, which was more than anyone even hoped in 2008. (In fact, it was undoable - we won every seat that was up and Specter crossed the aisle.)

In 2004, we lost the Presidency. For some of us, we lost the chance to see a man, whose integrity, calm and decent personality and brilliance we had come to admire as President. We did not have the House. We had about 44 Senators. In addition, we learned during the election, that the Republicans had a dtrong echo chamber and we didn't. The thing I remember most that shows what 2005 was like was watching CSPAN when Kennedy argued amendment after amendment to alter the awful bankrupcy bill - just to see them go down in flames. Or, the next year, to see Kerry and Kennedy fighting to keep Alito off the Supreme Court.

This is nothing like that. We can fight this.

[kayla9170]

15. The ONLY person I feel bad for in this mess.........

Is President Obama and his family. He wasted his time being elected President for a group of people only wanted to support him if he tapped to their music....on beat and on THEIR time. He has placed his life and his lovely family life at risk, for what? Nothing.....Trying to push for a Democratic Agenda when the Democrats turned their back on him no sooner than his first State of the Union speech when the so-called Public Option was off the table.

I think that in retrospect, he would have been better just staying as a Senator of the state of Illinois, not having to worry about the safety of his family and himself on a daily basis...trying to help people out that was NOT going to appreciate him, in the first place.

[LWolf]

16. No it doesn't. Not even close. nt

[robcon]

18. This isn't over. We've got work to do until November.

It's just one seat.

[treestar]

19. Republicans

They don't even let their emotions get invested.

That's why they win over the long run.

Their "base" never deserts them, either. Even when they've lost. Much less so when they've won. They let their winners have years and year to fuck up the country the way they want it.

The Democrats "base" is gone when they don't get what they want, even when there are still so many Republicans left.

Now that the Repukes have the filibuster to use, the "base" can be even more "disappointed."

[tekisui]

22. Still blaming the voters. Pathetic.

[treestar]

23. The voters are not responsible for anything?

Just helpless pawns?

Pathetic.

[tekisui]

24. The candidates and the party has to give a reason for voters to

trust them and support them. The fault is solely on the Democratic Party and Coakley.

It is ludicrous to blame the voters. You won't win any increase in support using that tactic.

[JI7]

25. of course i can, i'm a voter also and i learn about the candidates

and know the differences.

so i will blame voters who are stupid. you think those who voted for Bush, Palin are just innoncent little victims fooled into voting for them ?

[tekisui]

27. It is about building a winning coalition. A candidate is a fool if they

think voters are going to 'learn about the candidates'. It doesn't work that way. You have to reach the voters, build your coalition and keep it together. The Dems didn't do it in Mass. Period.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

28. Let's see --

you joined DU in 2008 but know what it was like here in 2004.

So, what was your old screenname? Just curious.

[Jennicut]

29. Yeah, we only were in the total minority then. We are being pathetic then. We still have a majority.

Our leaders just need to learn how to use it.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

30. It's always this doom-and-gloomy.

I don't really see a difference.