Reply
Thu 9 Dec, 2004 11:32 am
What can one say to that.
Well, okay, but you can't say you don't know what he stands for.
Roger - ABSOLUTLEY CORRECT. He would have made a better candidate than Kerry. Not saying he would win, but at least you had a way to measure him.
A lot of us thought Dean was going to be the candidate, and he was doing pretty good until he got press assassinated...
Cycloptichorn
I don't see anything wrong with what he said. What's the prob?
woiyo and Cyc seem to me pretty much to say, as FD actually said,
Quote:I don't see anything wrong with what he said. What's the prob?
Or do I have that wrong?
I support Michael Moore when he said to Barbara Walters that Tom Hanks should run.
Really, who wouldn't vote for Forrest...I mean, Tom!
This has to do, I think, with the idea that Clinton was successful because he adopted policies of the right. In fact, he was not at all successful as a president, and his election victories had more to do with R. Perot than his abilities as a candidate.
The democrats merely need a good candidate. Kerry stunk. Dean was so antiwar that anyone attempting to thoughtfully agree that the Middle East could stand one less dictator was left in the cold. Lieberman was too pro Israel, and effectively pro war. Gephardt was my choice, tho he has so often gone ballistic in the past that there are a hundred soundbites of him sounding like Goebbels and Lenin wrapped together, with a crimson visage to boot.
Dennis and Al were a hoot.
to change 2 million voters minds isn't that hard. Perhaps telling the MSM to put a sock in it and not so obviously campaign for the Democrat, NO MATTER WHO HE IS, would be a good start.
The basic reality is that the dem party is beyond redemption. What we have at present on ballots is a legitimate left-centrist party (republicans) which nobody is totally happy with, versus a crime syndicate. The only happy ending I can see anywhere in the picture would be to somehow eliminate the dem party and have the choice on ballots be republicans vs libertarians, i.e. a legitimate left-centrist party vs a laissez-faire party.
The present system will not allow that to happen. What is needed are at least two changes, possibly involving a constitutional ammendment. We need runoff elections, so that nobody need ever fear to vote his or her first choice, at least on a first ballot, and nobody ever holds any office with less than 50% of the vote. We also need a law stating that "none of the above" will be on all ballots for public office and, if that choice ever wins, the other candidates are barred for life from running for any public office and the parties which sponsored them are barred from running candidates for that particular office for twenty years. The penalty for running dead wood for public office should be horrific.
gungasnake wrote:The basic reality is that the dem party is beyond redemption.
You wish. If the Republican Party keeps pandering further and further to the lunatic religious fringe, it is they who will find themselves no longer a viable party, this will take awhile but we shall overcome. Hate, bigotry and intolerance will lose out to fairness, compassion and equality in the long run.
gungasnake wrote:The basic reality is that the dem party is beyond redemption.
You wish. If the Republican Party keeps pandering further and further to the lunatic religious fringe, it is they who will find themselves no longer a viable party, this will take awhile but we shall overcome. Hate, bigotry and intolerance will lose out to fairness, compassion and equality in the long run.
DimestoreDiva wrote:gungasnake wrote:The basic reality is that the dem party is beyond redemption.
You wish. If the Republican Party keeps pandering further and further to the lunatic religious fringe, it is they who will find themselves no longer a viable party, this will take awhile but we shall overcome. Hate, bigotry and intolerance will lose out to fairness, compassion and equality in the long run.
Do you mean the Republican party that just made tremendous gains in the House and Senate while retaing the White House? Sure looks like they have lost their viability...
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=548&u=/ap/20041209/ap_on_el_ge/democrats_critics&printer=1
The Dems have not only lost viability, they may be "hi-jacked" by their own so-called supporters.
Excerpt--"DNC spokesman Jano Cabrera declined to engage in a tit-for-tat with MoveOn, but praised McAuliffe's efforts.
"Call me crazy, but I think the fact that for the first time in party history we outraised the Republicans, and did so primarily through grass-roots fund raising is something to be proud of," Cabrera said.
Among those vying for the party chairmanship is former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (news - web sites), an early darling of MoveOn's cybernetwork of activists when he ran for the Democratic presidential nomination. "
And they STILL lost!!
McGentrix wrote:DimestoreDiva wrote:gungasnake wrote:The basic reality is that the dem party is beyond redemption.
You wish. If the Republican Party keeps pandering further and further to the lunatic religious fringe, it is they who will find themselves no longer a viable party, this will take awhile but we shall overcome. Hate, bigotry and intolerance will lose out to fairness, compassion and equality in the long run.
Do you mean the Republican party that just made tremendous gains in the House and Senate while retaing the White House? Sure looks like they have lost their viability...
What part of the future tense don't you understand? Fairness, justice, compassion
will trump prejudice, intolerance and ignorance in the long term.
Of course the Dems will be back.
Just not in this century LOL.
I wouldn't count the dems out. This is just like the Reagan era (No, I am not comparing Bush to Reagan), eventually people will forget what a democrat in office is like and we will elect one. Then after a few years, the light comes back on and we will go back to a republican administration.
It's all cyclical.
"What part of the future tense don't you understand? Fairness, justice, compassion will trump prejudice, intolerance and ignorance in the long term. "
Can't argue with that. Which is why the electorate is moving away frrom the far from tolearant and not too politically smart Dem party.
Quote:"What part of the future tense don't you understand? Fairness, justice, compassion will trump prejudice, intolerance and ignorance in the long term. "
Of course. Let's start a party with those goals.
McGentrix wrote:I wouldn't count the dems out. This is just like the Reagan era (No, I am not comparing Bush to Reagan), eventually people will forget what a democrat in office is like and we will elect one. Then after a few years, the light comes back on and we will go back to a republican administration.
It's all cyclical.
McG - I don't underestimate them either, that is, until I see stuff like
THIS:
Quote:MoveOn to Democratic Party: 'We Own It'
Thu Dec 9, 6:37 PM ET
By SAM HANANEL, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Liberal powerhouse MoveOn has a message for the "professional election losers" who run the Democratic Party: "We bought it, we own it, we're going to take it back."
Howard Dean for DNC!!!
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace