If a campaign has reached the point of blaming the media for its woes

[Northwind]

Then it has already lost. I do not care if it is Kerry, Clark, Kucinich, Braun, or the damn tooth fairy, once any campaign lays the blame for all its problems on an external source, it is in effect saying, "there is nothing we can do to stop this, it is all out of our hands." Once they start saying that, it is all over but the crying.

The whiner campaigns need to stop bleating about media bias or conspiracy, and start looking at what they have done wrong, and can do differently, if they want to get back into the race.

There is a reason Dean is out front. When something goes wrong, his campaign addresses the problem, looks for a solution, and applies. They do not blame the press or another candidate. They do not whine alleged lack of coverage. they deal with it and fix any problems they have.

[slinkerwink]

1. that's what I was thinking also.....

That's why the Clarkites, instead of complaining about media bias, should form a RR group like Dean's campaign volunteers did with Dean Rapid Respond Forces...

[mmonk]

3. If you say so

[7th_Sephiroth]

5. there was this freeper article about media bias

saying the media was against republicans because some repubs were stealing dem memos and the few sources who DID report on were being called bias because they diddent report on the contents of the memos

[SahaleArm]

103. Are you referring to DeanDefense?

Or this - http://sf4dean.com/rr/? Does it really matter when the media can spin whatever they want and people will listen; see next months Newsweek article on Dean.

[FrenchieCat]

2. Were you saying that....

when hundreds of thousands were marching against the war and were virtually ignored. Did you watch Powell give the presentation at the UN and wondered why the press didn't ask the right questions about his "evidence". Do you ask why the Valerie Plame story is no longer news? Do ask why is Michael Jackson being covered at a point of nauseum? Did you wonder why the media didn't see things the way you did during the recount/no count in the 2000 elections? Did you ever wonder why there was no outrage after the election that was really reflected on your tube? Do you wonder why the media was so gunho in percecuting Clinton?

If you answer yes to any of the above. Then why is the media now not to blame for anything?

Who should be blamed for us going to war? Bush? But did he have any accomplices? Do you think that the media helped or hinder Bush in his quest to war?

I know the media well. I don't forget my history and have quickly learned how to connect the dots.

Was Hillary lying when she spoke of a Right Wing Conspiracy?

Do you thing that corporate media reports fairly?

Or do you really really just don't get it, or you refuse to in this particular occasion.

Too bad....because that is exactly what they are relying on you to do. I would expected from the masses...yes.

But not from well informed DUers here on this forum.

[blm]

9. Yeah, somehow those who watched the media attack Gore repeatedly

while polishing Bush's teflon, now think they are being square this past year.

[dsc]

20. that isn't what the poster is saying

but you know that. They are saying that our candidate has to win despite the media bias.

[nomaco-10]

14. Here, here Frenchie, well put, well said....

You put the influence of the mass media in complete perspective. Now that we know of their duplicity, I wish we could put our heads together and turn this thread into a think tank of some of the saavy minds here and come up with a way to try to change the tide of media bias.

[Carolina]

99. Touche, F4C

keep up the great posting. I couldn't agree more. When the media spun the 2000 Bush-Gore debates into Bush wins, I lost it and turned off the tube. Media blackout except for the sanity-saving internet. I felt the handwriting was on the wall and sure enough, it was.

My dread this time is even greater since the thugs in office and their media mouthpieces are even more empowered. That's why I get that sinking feeling about Dean. If they could do what they did to an intelligent, experienced sitting VP, heaven only knows what they'll unleash against a governor of a small state (even my main man, Bill Clinton, would have a hard time against this crew at this point).

That's why we need a war-tested, 4-star general with experience on the world stage. Can you imagine Bush debating him about leadership in war?! About coalitions and strategies?

[asjr]

4. media

I feel each candidate has a very good reason to blame the media. That is what is wrong now. When they cannot get a message out to the people via the media, or have the media constantly bash them, it is legitimate to blame them. It is not all, but it is certainly out there. CNN is constantly making snide remarks about a candidate. Candy Crowley, Judy Woodruff, Bill Schneider (big asshole}, Jeff Greenfield, all are on GW's payroll. CNN is owned by Republicans and expect their "journalists" to fall in line. I will not even mention those at Fox News because we all know what they are. I am a Dean supporter and I like his out in front attitude, but that does not make him any less vulnerable to the right-wing media.

[La_Serpiente]

6. I know that Bush blames the media

but he doesn't have any credibility to blame them. However, I believe that Kucinich has a reason to blame the media. They barely cover him. Kerry? I don't think he should be blaming the media really. Dean? he has no need to blame them. Clark? I don't know, unless it is Faux News who is pushing the Waco crap. Gephardt? Well, they could cover his union endorsements more. Lieberman? He should be getting more negative press.

These are just my opinions.

[blm]

7. Dean solution: Deceive your audience into thinking you were against IWR.

Ignore your actual stand of support for Biden-Lugar which was not much different while pretending your opponent's support for IWR was evil incarnate.

Dean supporters: Make sure you continue to lie to new voters by telling them Kerry is a "corrupt Washington insider." Then laugh while they spread the meme further.

[nomaco-10]

11. You really hate Govenor Dean....

Has it never ocurred to you that you can support your candidate Kerry without trashing Govenor Dean at every turn? I don't hate Senator Kerry, my emotion towards him is more that of disapointment. Your constant bashing of a good dem candidate has gone over the edge of late, my advice to you is channel all that unbridled hatred for Dean into positive action for your candidate, trust me, it will put you in good stead with your candidate and a great many members hear at du as well, and on the upside, you just might find a less contentious audience when extolling the virtues of your candidate instead of constantly, mercilessly trashing Govenor Dean.

[blm]

18. Deanies spread the meme that Kerry was a "corrupt Washington insider"

and you never posted did you?

I saw Dean's deceptive rhetoric on IWR back in January. He attacked the other Democrats relentlessly on it and made himself a name. Did you complain when he attacked them? He wasn't doing it with kindness or honesty, he was doing it deceptively and viciously for his own gain.


Do you think it was honest for Dean to accuse them of giving Bush a blank check when his own ACTUAL position was almost the same? DECEPTION. And the media was either too lazy to examine the truth about the issue Dean was using as a wedge issue for Dems or they were complicit.

Try reading the archives. I didn't start out with so much loathing, but the buildup of lies and hits became too much. I am reciprocating, and still doing so more civilly than most. I keep it in the political arena and his political actions.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Scott Lee]

87. Insider? Yes. Corrupt? Nah, just clueless.

And running a horrible, losing campaign.

[JNelson6563]

66. natural progression for supporters of "corrupt

Washington insiders." ;-)

Just pulling your chain blm. So tempting due to the ease of it...

Julie

[Eloriel]

37. Here ya go -- Biden-Lugar, the FACTS

Instead of blm's outrageous spin, apparently taken from the Kerry campaign itself (and I wonder how that could be?) because Kerry is trying to gloss over the actual differences to suggest that he and Dean's positions were similar.

Biden-Lugar -- the facts.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=788060#788268

There was a LOT of diffeerence between IWR and Biden-Lugar.

Eloriel

[ibegurpard]

39. Apparently the ACLU was deceived as well

I was particularly interested in the ACLU's opinion on Biden-Lugar that you provided. Maybe they are in on the attempts to bring down Kerry as well?
On edit: This is sarcasm, by the way.

[blm]

43. That's untrue and you know I've been on this for a YEAR. Tell the truth.

Why do you feel the need to dishonestly portray this as a campaign plot when YOU KNOW I've been saying this about Dean and Biden-Lugar for MANY months. You are purposely trying to deceive people on this board by accusing me of pushing a campaign tactic. If I was part of the campaign I would have had Dean's lying ass in a sling last February after his third blatant lie.

Dean was being deceptive when he accused the other Dems of giving Bush a "blank check" while all along he supported Biden-Lugar but failed to enlighten his audiences of the similarities in the two versions of the IWR.

We have every right to believe the media purposely looked the other way while Dean used IWR as a wedge issue.

Oct. 2002
Kennedy, and presumably from context Robert Byrd agrees, doesn't seem to see a whole lot of difference between Biden-Lugar and the version that passed. (thanks Cocoa)

http://www.monitor.net/monitor/0210a/iraqdebate4.html

<snip>
The test in the Gephardt-Lieberman-Warner Resolution says to defend against the continuing threat from Iraq -- that is the operative word. And in Biden-Lugar it talks about dealing with the threat of Iraq is "so grave" that force should be used. New words, "so grave." The President already said it was a grave situation.

In effect, if that was to be accepted -- the President already said it was a grave situation. It would, in effect, grant unilaterally, without any involvement in the international community, any effort whatsoever to try and bring allies into this, give the authority for the President to go ahead with war, as the President has indicated he may very well do.
more...

[Andromeda]

47. You really need to get over yourself...

nobody I know has ever said that Kerry is a corrupt Washington insider and even if they did, so what? Don't hang onto these things. All it does is make you into a bitter, frustrated and miserable human being.

I think you've made your point, again and again and again. Your posts are so repetitive I don't have to read them all because they all say the same thing.

Everybody on DU knows blm hates Dean so just give it a rest for a while. Go shopping, take a trip, watch TV, whoops---better not; you might see somebody praising Dean and that will just set you off.

Sigh! :eyes:

[Scott Lee]

86. Still with the memes....Dean WAS against the IWR.

No matter how you try to wallpaper over it.

tissue?

[Silverhair]

8. Exactly. Winners win. Losers whine and make excuses.

Even a winning team can lose an accasional game, but when they do, they pracatice more, and analyse the lost game to see how to improve. The losers blame the ref, the weather, the fans, anything but themselves.

I once made my living for a few years by playing poker. Proffessional gambler, NOT an addict. There is a huge difference. Anyway, If I lost a hand because a chump got lucky and caught a miracle card, then I congradulated him on his luck and remember how he played the hand and his mannerisms when he had caught the good card. When the chumps lost, they always whined about how bad their luck was, how the dealer had dealt them bad cards. They never considered that just maybe they were bad players, and needed to improve in a few areas.

When I see all the whining about media coverage, conspiracy theories out the yazoo on every signifigant event, I see the symptoms of a movement in trouble.

We need to focus on what works, and quit the whining. It makes us look like losers, and people don't vote for losers.

[FrenchieCat]

36. Yea....don't whine when it's your turn....

Saturday November 29, 2:00 AM
Congress Gifts FCC With Fewer Reviews On Media Ownership
http://tinyurl.com/x0al
By Mark Wigfield
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--Before leaving for their Thanksgiving break,
congressional leaders gave current and future chairs of the Federal
Communications Commission a gift that could keep giving for years to come.

That gift: easing a mandate that requires the FCC to review politically sensitive media ownership rules. If the compromise becomes law, the FCC will only be required to review its rules every four years, rather than two.

And one of the most sensitive rules - national television station
ownership limits affecting the networks and other large group owners - would be exempt from the so-called quadrennial review altogether. That means the FCC wouldn't be forced by Congress to run into the political buzz saw surrounding national television station ownership limits.

Current FCC chairman Michael Powell's push to deregulate both national and local caps on June 2 sparked a huge political backlash -as have efforts by past FCC chairmen. Critics said the FCC's new rules would spark a wave of consolidation, leaving news and entertainment in the hands of a few corporate giants.

[Padraig18]

10. Why don't the other campaigns...

... form rapid-response teams? Our campaign has, and it's a VERY effective technique. The local ABC affiliate here mis-spoke about Gov. Dean twice during the first half of the morning news, but corrected themselves in the second half, after their error was pointed out to them.

It sure beats whining, folks.

[slinkerwink]

12. yep, I agree also.....

it's obvious that the more you whine about the lack of media coverage on your candidate, that your candidate's campaign is in trouble for not making news.

[mmonk]

25. We know you're hoping

[JohnKleeb]

13. I did a response once

Not sure if ol Tweety got it but I gave that prick a call and left a messge, and damnit Ive tried to write the paper but lets put it simple, I cant write well, literally my handwritting reeks and I dont know how to put my points but I have done reponses.

[Scott Lee]

88. Kerry has a rapid response. It's main instrument is a tissue box.

Oh, and a picture of Dean to point at and blame for all his failures.

Honestly, I wasn't this antiKerry in the outset but the more I see of this guy the more pathetic he looks, and the more disgusted I get with him. He's coming off like the spoiled little rich kid denied his entitlement.

John Kerry: Learn to run an effective campaign, or get the hell out of the way.

[whatelseisnew]

15. What about a whole country that can blame the media for its woes?

Is it time to 'get outta Dodge'?

Is the Country lost?

[KittyWampus]

16. Tariq Ali Was On Cspan: Spoke Of How Our News Media Is Propaganda

He mentioned this while talking about his latest book: Bush in Bagdad.

And he bascially said that our news, compared to what he saw all over Europe is literally propaganda.

So to talk about this is not WHINING.

It is a fact. And that the media is now trying to ensure who the Democratic IS and IS NOT is an outrage.

[Freddie Stubbs]

17. Dean is getting the most press coverage because he has earned it

Six months ago he was not getting the most coverage. but hen he started earning it. He amassed a base of volunteers that dwarfed any of his opponents. He won the MoveOn online primary. And started raising tons of money over the Internet. The press took notice, and the ensuing coverage created a snowball effect that propelled him to where he is today.

[blm]

19. Zell Miller gets press coverage for attacking other Democrats, too.

.

[Padraig18]

22. You make it sound....

... as though Dean never speaks a word that's not 'an attack on other Dems'; please, get real and be honest: he seldom speaks ill of fellow Democrats, and fellow Democrats attack HIM at least as often. :eyes:

[AP]

24. blm, here's a double dose for you: NPR repeats a lie for Dean, and Zell

is given time to attack Dems all in one piece.

Steve Inskeep plays an old speech by Dean, which includes a reasonable statement about the southern vote and pretends that's the one that the candidates were complaining about (when, in fact, as you know, it was the newspaper interview in which he said he wanted to be the candidate "for" the confederate flag waiver).

Then they let Zell Miller talk about it and criticize Dean in quite a demented way, leaving the listener to believe that Edwards and the rest must have the same attitude about this as Zell Miller, if they were complaining about it too (which couldn't be further from the truth).

So, the average NPR listener is left with the impression that Dems are crazy asses who like Bush and don't like a healthy discussion about race, and that Dean is some kind of political-philosophical genius.

http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1499051

[blm]

27. Tell me about it. The ride Dean gets is phenomenol...just like

Bush 2000. And no Deanie wants to admit that truth. If the media had scrutinized Dean at all, they wouldn't still be calling him an antiwar liberal would they?

[Freddie Stubbs]

32. If Democrats didn't like his campaign style

They wouldn't be giving so much money to his campaign. Nor would he have so many volunteers, and he wouldn't be leading in virtually every single public opinion poll. It's hard to argue with success.

[AP]

33. I still say the media gave him everything he has now (NPR especially)

and they're going to take it away as easily as they gave it to him if he gets nominated.

We need to run a candidate who's master of his own domain.

[Eloriel]

44. AP -- you are quite mistaken

One of the strengths of this campaign is that its use of various internet tools bypasses the media filter.

AND, he didn't start getting much press -- except to treat him dismissively -- until that grassroots organization started really kicking in, which was June (fundraising) and September (fundraising).

Yes, he's getting some decent press. Maybe if the other candidates did interesting and exciting things, they could get more press too. AFAIC, Dean has earned it in spades. He's been out there for probably close to 2 years now, starting very, very small and building relentlessly. Had any -- ANY -- of the other candidates put in nearly as much effort, who knows where they'd be today?

Of course, even that isn't the secret of his success. The secret of his scucess is the candidate PLUS his supporters. It's a synergistic phenomenon. He offers something that excites people; those excited people are propelling him forward.

Eloriel

[Andromeda]

52. That's not true.

I know the media is fickle. One week they can love you and the next week they'll "Gore" you. The media is not a constant. They go with the biggest story and right now that's Dean.

Dean doesn't whine but his detractors do. Why? Because he doesn't have to. He's a man of substance and character and the Kerryites can't stand it. When Kerry bashes Dean, Dean's poll numbers go up. Then the Kerry supporter go crazy and say "media bias," "media bias."

Simply put, Dean is a phenomenon. He has started a grassroots movement that is unparalleled. He has raised more money and garnered more support than the other candidates in a very short period of time. There is enthusiasm, eagerness and zeal for the Dean campaign. His supporters love him because he offers them hope and he expresses their disillusionment in a way no other candidate has done.

That might change before the 2004 election. Maybe Clark or Kerry or Edwards will get the nomination. If that happens, so be it.

I'll support whoever gets the nomination because Freddy Kruegar would be better than Bush. But you can't deny Dean's popularity even if you don't understand it.

Whatever the media says about Dean I believe he will handle it very well because he is adept at what he does.

[AP]

92. Media isn't fickle. They know what they're doing, and they plot

it out long term.

There's too much money and power (deregulation, regressive taxation, corporate tax breaks) at stake not to.

[Freddie Stubbs]

85. Unfortunately for Edwards, he is master of few domains

He is only doing well in one state (and that is becasue he is from the neighboring state. Despite raising a ton of money early in the campaign from one sector of the economy, his campaign si going nowhere.

[AP]

93. I'd rather have the slow burn popularity built on a knowledge of the

candidate and his policies, than the mad love for Dean that's based on a misperception of who he is, thanks to lying press.

And being master of the domain of SC is going to be worth a great deal for the candidate who wins it.

[Freddie Stubbs]

94. Even is Edwards wins SC, he won't get much of a bump

The next primary after that is MI. Because of the Internet voting there, people will begin casting ballots in the first week of January. It is quite possible that a majority of the votes in MI will be cast before the the SC primary.

[AP]

97. Says you.

I disagree. Good showings in IA and NH, victories in SC and and OK, and he'll be in a sweet position to roll to a victory.

[Freddie Stubbs]

98. He is polling poorly in Iowa and NH

SC seems to be the only state where he is gaining any traction.

[AP]

104. He's gaining traction

where he's campaigning.

He's building a strong foundation on things that matter, like his policiy positions, and on optimism and good character.

It may take longer for people to get it, but when they do, it'll be a strong foundation for a Gen Elect victory. And if they don't get it, and he loses, and I have a feeling nobody is going to beat Bush (not that I won't be there to support whoever gets the nomination).

[blm]

34. Yeah, deception worked for Bush, too.

It's hard to argue with success.

If Dean was SO worthy, he wouldn't have used deception on IWR to force a wedge issue created by Bush.

[Eloriel]

45. If YOU were SO worthy

and your candidate had anything to offer, YOU wouldn't need to use deception to try to prop him up by knocking Dean.

It's not going to help him. It's likely to cause him harm. It certainly has deteriorated his reputation with me to see people like you repeating these lies. Apparently, the Kerry campaign thinks it's fine -- useful, perhaps -- to have their campaign workers and volunteers spouting lies about other candidates. Not exactly someone I'd want to vote for.

Eloriel

[blm]

48. I don't knock Dean with anything but the truth.

And YOU are the one saying that I take direction from the Kerry campaign when I am the one who noticed Dean's lies about his support for use of force back when he ramped up the attacks last Jan. YOU know this, yet you try to make others believe that I am only now talking about it under orders from a campaign. I am not part of Kerry's campaign team at all.

And the lying and deception is a tactic employed by only two campaigns, Dean's and Bush's.

[Northwind]

77. That's funny

You've tried to equate me with the Dean campaign on several occasions, but when someone does the same to you it is a big foul, huh? Is hypocrisy big in the Kerry campaign at large or just his online "unaffiliated" supporters? Oh, wait, never mind, silly question, what can I expect from the campaign of the corrupt Washington insider?

[Scott Lee]

89. You knock Dean with a Meme-stream. Nothing else.

I've seen no other participant on DU that screams more about "memes" and uses them so much themselves.

Why is that?

[Carolina]

101. don't be fooled

Repugs are donating $$$$ too because Heir Rove said that's the one we want!

[Andromeda]

53. That's true, but Zell Miller isn't the issue here.

Michael Jackson is getting lots of attention too and he isn't the issue either. The media always go where the story is.

Dean is a dynamic individual and he has charisma. He's also controversial and the media is fascinated with Dean because of that. Kerry, Gephardt, Edwards and Lieberman have all beat up on Dean during the debates and he kept his cool. People admire that. All of the anti-Dean people expected him to blow up and start ripping heads off. Didn't happen, sorry.

You're just going to have to live with it, blm. If it changes, then it changes.

Attacking Dean is the focus for all the other candidates because they want to bring him down. It's all part of the political process. It's been going on for as long as I can remember and it's just going to get more intense as election time draws near.

[Andromeda]

54. That's true, but Zell Miller isn't the issue here.

Michael Jackson is getting lots of attention too and he isn't the issue either. The media always go where the story is.

Dean is a dynamic individual and he has charisma. He's also controversial and the media is fascinated with Dean because of that. Kerry, Gephardt, Edwards and Lieberman have all beat up on Dean during the debates and he kept his cool. People admire that. All of the anti-Dean people expected him to blow up and start ripping heads off. Didn't happen, sorry.

You're just going to have to live with it, blm. If it changes, then it changes.

Attacking Dean is the focus for all the other candidates because they want to bring him down. It's all part of the political process. It's been going on for as long as I can remember and it's just going to get more intense as election time draws near.

[Andromeda]

55. That's true, but Zell Miller isn't the issue here.

Michael Jackson is getting lots of attention too and he isn't the issue either. The media always go where the story is.

Dean is a dynamic individual and he has charisma. He's also controversial and the media is fascinated with Dean because of that. Kerry, Gephardt, Edwards and Lieberman have all beat up on Dean during the debates and he kept his cool. People admire that. All of the anti-Dean people expected him to blow up and start ripping heads off. Didn't happen, sorry.

You're just going to have to live with it, blm. If it changes, then it changes.

Attacking Dean is the focus for all the other candidates because they want to bring him down. It's all part of the political process. It's been going on for as long as I can remember and it's just going to get more intense as election time draws near.

[Andromeda]

56. That's true, but Zell Miller isn't the issue here.

Michael Jackson is getting lots of attention too and he isn't the issue either. The media always go where the story is.

Dean is a dynamic individual and he has charisma. He's also controversial and the media is fascinated with Dean because of that. Kerry, Gephardt, Edwards and Lieberman have all beat up on Dean during the debates and he kept his cool. People admire that. All of the anti-Dean people expected him to blow up and start ripping heads off. Didn't happen, sorry.

You're just going to have to live with it, blm. If it changes, then it changes.

Attacking Dean is the focus for all the other candidates because they want to bring him down. It's all part of the political process. It's been going on for as long as I can remember and it's just going to get more intense as election time draws near.

[Andromeda]

57. Hey---what happened?

website wasn't responding so I tried to reload my post. Looks like I was successful---too successful, sorry about that.

[JNelson6563]

64. I dunno but do you think Zell Miller might be an issue?

haha just kiddin'

[Scott Lee]

95. If Zell attacked other dems as much as you attack Dean...

He'd already be out of office.

Why don't you realign your priorities, stop spreading memes (you are the biggest offender of this on DU) and get with overthrowing Bush?

Or are you too busy with digging up the Dean dirt du jour?

[Carolina]

100. and Joe Lieberman, too

[cally]

21. I think this belief led to Gore

not living in the White House. The media lies and the candidate has to call them on it. I know you are only thinking of the primaries and the lead your candidate has. Wait until after the nomination. If your candidate keeps this attitude, he will lose. If we had a fair media, I would agree with you. But the media has changed and we have to call the media on their lies.

Rightly or wrongly, the repukes believe that Dean can be beat. I know Dems said the same things about Reagan and were wrong. I believe some of the whore coverage is designed to promote Dean and paint the other candidates in less favorable terms.

I will support whichever candidate wins the nomination. I obviously prefer one candidate but I hope we can discuss media coverage and the lies as a team united agains the right junta. Dems get poor coverage and lies, * get fawning coverage. We have to deal with it and one way is to complain. That's what the right does and did. IT WORKED!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

23. why should they stop "bleating" the fucking TRUTH????

[AP]

26. If a campaign isn't addressing media bias, it's going to be fucked.

Dean fans, it's quite amusing that you don't think your candidate is going to get the same treatment when it's his turn, and when there won't be any alternatives available.

Read my sig line.

[mitchum]

40. AP, I 'm certain that we won't hear any whining from the original...

poster when the inevitable happens.

[Northwind]

28. Hilarious responses

Are people here professionally obtuse or is it just a hobby pursued with amazing devotion?

No one is saying the media is fair. It isn't fair. Never has been, never will be. So what? That is not the point.

It doesn't matter if they are fair. They were not real fair to Dean early on. Remember things like "liberal anti-war candidate" and "Candidate of anger," some of which still gets tossed around? Did the Dean campaign whine and bitch about them being unfair? Hell no, because if it had, Dean would not now be the front runner. The Dean campaign got out there, refused to let the media make the rules, and got the message out. They did not allow the media to form the parameters of the race, did not allow the media to define the campaign. As a result, Dean is now way out ahead of everyone else.

Is the media unfair? You bet your ass it is. But whether it is unfair is irrelevant, all that matters is any given campaign's reaction to it.

[AP]

29. "liberal anti-war candidate" not fair? Repeating that over and over agian

on NPR is what got all those people on his side!

"Professionally obtuse"? Pot, meet kettle.

[Northwind]

35. Who, exactly, are "those people"

Of which you speak?

The Dean supporters I know are not, by and large, far left liberal anti-war types.

[Padraig18]

30. Bravo! WELL said!

The whining from the imploding/sinking/never-got-traction campaigns is becoming annoying as hell! Quit whining and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, you bunch of wussies! :grr:

[cally]

38. Do you realize how condescinding

your post is. "Hilarious post? "

I refused to read after that.

If you want your candidate to win, and want other candidate's supporters to move their energy and money to the winner of the campaign, then why do you attempt to ridicule other voices. Just make your case without insulting others. It works because you build respect instead of vile. It may work in the primary, but it will not work in the general. This is one of major concerns about Dean. We have to build a coalition and fight the media together. If we can't get the progressives together, then we have no chance at the swing voters.

[Eloriel]

46. Oh, please

Like the other campaigns -- Kerry, CLARK, even Kucinich -- haven't built plenty of "bile" here at DU in their attacks on Dean? Hell, just read this thread, esp. blm's posts. Don't EVEN try to play victim and martyr after all the shit that's gone on here at DU against Dean. You may not have participated in it (but I don't know one way or the other) -- but until I see you on record dressing down some of the other ridiculing and insulting things that are said to Dean supporters, don't come looking for sympathy from me.

Eloriel

[cally]

49. You obviously have not been paying attention

or thinking long term. This isn't about DU bile. WE WILL NOT SELECT THE NOMINEE. Read my post and think about your own posts. This is about getting rid of the maladministration. It is not about infighting which I have not engaged in...ever. I want a Dem to win. I don't want a fractured party at the end of this primary.

If you cannot see that not attacking the media for their lies will lose us this election, then you have not been paying attention.

[Northwind]

50. Attacking, yes

Whining, no.

Dean took the media to task early on. The others just whine and complain and moan about the powerlessness.

[blm]

51. Cry me a river, sweetness and light.

You all applauded Dean's attacks when he first started. His lies were easily consumed here and spread. Your people have smeared Kerry as a "corrupt Washington insider" and you gloat about the success of your smears.

Disgusting, shameful behavior.

You all smear Kerry, but not one of you have ever provided an answer to this: Name one lawmaker alive today who has exposed more government corruption than John Kerry.

[Padraig18]

65. So, that means he *deserves* to become our nominee?

You Kerry folks STILL don't get it--- it's not a 'divine right of kings' method for the nomination. John Kerry is just another piece of swinging meat in this race, and he's CHOKING.

Are you clear on the concept now, blm?

[Scott Lee]

91. Meme No. 23,458

"Name one lawmaker alive today who has exposed more government corruption than John Kerry."

I swear, these have to be a in a book somewhere.

[Padraig18]

96. Ain't it the truth?

"I'm Left, I'm Loud, and I'm ARMED. How about you?"

Me, too, btw! :hi:

[Northwind]

63. Well said

:)

[Scott Lee]

90. the Mods at DU can attest to the preeminence of antiDean threads

If I may be so bold. Just open your eyes and watch the flow of conversation.

[Northwind]

70. 2 points

Point 1 is that while I myself am a rather poor typist, I feel ok about being "condescinding" to someone so worried about me building "vile."

Point 2 is that the other candidates do not have enough supporters to field a good softball team, so who needs 'em?

[cally]

72. I got your point

The primary and your candidate winning the primary is what matters to you.

I know Dean advisers see it much differently which I am greatful for. I admire Dean and his advisers. They are already thinking of the general. Any candidate or adviser who is not doing that doesn't deserve support.

I'm so glad you enjoy being condescending to a potential supporter. I sure hope you do not volunteer for a phone bank or walk any precincts. We need votes, not folks who enjoy turning off the base.

[Northwind]

73. Dean haters are so touchy

Ya'll are so much fun to mess with, sometimes I cannot resist the temptation.

[cally]

78. I just said I admire Dean and his advisers

and I'm a Dean hater? :eyes:

I don't find your humor helpful or funny. I want to win the election. I want a united force against *. I think Clark is our best candidate but I will wholeheartedly support all of our candidates. I hate to see this bashing and having fun antagonizing other voters. We will lose is we do this all through the primary.

[Northwind]

80. Oh come on

Just having a little fun at your expense. No harm, done? Truce? :)

[cally]

83. Sure

Peace. The truce is off if you don't support the primary winner. I want to defeat Bush. :bounce: ;-)

[RichardRay]

31. Not 'fair' to anyone, why should they be?

They're in business to sell air time, ad space, whatever. Journalism isn't a really important part of media behavior anymore, it's a question of entertainment value.

I can certainly get royally pissed about that, and rant to anyone who will listen and preach to the choir about how it should be different, but that's not going to get the job done! It's like the (proabably apocryphal) tales of the British generals who complained about the 'unfair' tactics of the colonial troops who shot at them from behind trees.

Get over it, find some better tactics, pick some better battlefields and move forward. If we stand around moaning and waiting for the media to experience some sort of an epiphany that changes them all into journalism school seekers of truth we might as well give up now!

[mmonk]

41. Dean the Great

:boring:

[Zero Division]

58. Let's not forget, though, that

there's a difference between an actual campaign complaining about media coverage and a few candidate supporters complaining consistently about it on DU.

I'm not saying that you (the original poster) are definitely saying this, but it seems like some DUers do occassionally confuse the status of a particular campaign with the general sentiment of some candidate supporters on DU.

That said, I can see your point about the underlying implications that can be made when a campaign actually does start complaining and does nothing to try and and correct the problem with their media coverage.

[poskonig]

59. You hit the nail on the head.

The Dean people seem to have a "let's work with what we have" attitude, while the other campaigns expect victory to be awarded to them without actual work.

[KittyWampus]

61. Clark & His Supporters Are Working Their/Our Asses Off

The hubris of some Dean supporters is really disgusting.

How is it that CNN can run a crawler on the bottom of the page asking "Was Clark Involved In Waco" and Dean supporters can say when we mention it, Stop Whining?

This isn't whining you arrogant fools- it's pointing out the reality.

And if Dean gets the nod you can surely bet that his "Teflon" will mysteriously disappear.

Frankly, this post indicates to me that Dean supporters are subconsciously becoming aware of the truth that the media is gunning for him... and they don't want to face it.

Why would the media be trying to force Dean down our throats the way they did Schwartzenegger???????

[Zorra]

60. Wow, isn't that like, um, gloating? Uh, oh...consider this:

I like Dean, so don't get me wrong here, but the time to get cocky is after the nomination is a wrap. Behold the stats:

By contrast, every other eventual Democratic presidential candidate since (with the obvious exception of uncontested incumbent President Bill Clinton in 1996) has trailed -- often badly -- in surveys the year before the election.

By that October, just 13 months before he would defeat President George Herbert Walker Bush, Clinton had slipped to a discouraging 6 percent in the Gallup.

Yes, John F. Kennedy was running second to two-time nominee Adlai Stevenson in polls conducted in January, April, May and November of 1959. But JFK looked like a world-beater compared to other eventual Democratic standard-bearers. Vice-President Hubert Humphrey, the 1968 nominee, was the first choice of just 6 percent of Democrats in September 1967.

Former Georgia Gov. Jimmy Carter, who won the presidency in 1976, did not register -- not even in single digits -- in any of the four 1975 polls. By August 1979, President Carter was again the underdog, trailing Sen. Kennedy by 63 percent to 25 percent before the Iranian hostage crisis rescued his political career.

Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis ended 1987 tied with Illinois Sen. Paul Simon with 10 percent each and behind Jesse Jackson and Colorado Sen. Gary Hart, who led with 31 percent.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/08/11/column.shields.opinion.dark.horses/

[Northwind]

62. This is 2003 (soon to be 2004)

None of the other years you mentioned have any bearing or significance now.

[cally]

67. Why don't they have some bearing on this election

We have to learn from every election. If we don't, we lose.

[Northwind]

68. Bullshit

Every election is different. I have heard on this forum, at various times, that we MUST have a candidate from the south, that we MUST have a candidate with strong union ties, that we MUST have a candidate at least a certain height. It goes on and on. All of it based on coincidental or circumstantial data in past elections, none of which has anything to do with THIS election.

What we MUST have, is a candidate who inspires people, who gets people excited about being involved in politics, who gets people to get out and vote. In other words, DEAN.

[cally]

69. Wow...my comment was just about Dean

It was about winning elections. Yes, we do have to learn from past mistakes and successes. How do we get out the vote? How do we turn union endorsements into actual phonebank volunteers and votes? How do we counter Limbaugh spin? How do we attract seniors? What works and what doesn't?

Fine, you may think this election is so different and the candidates are so miraculous that grassroots campaigning doesn't matter. I don't think so and I sure hope those running the campaigns know much different.

[mitchum]

81. Thanks for confirming my conclusions about the link between...

an ahistorical point of view and support for your candidate.

[mrgorth]

71. I didn't think he was gloating

I agree that it has gotten rediculous with these people blaming the media for Dean's rise. It's just pathetic. Give the man, and all his supporters, some fucking credit. We, and he, work our butts off at this. BTW, I'll happily vote for any of the others. All good candidates IMO, including Kerry.

[chaska]

74. I can't disagree with a word of that.

But Dean supporters need to be very careful. ABB could become ABB or Dean. No flame.

[Northwind]

75. COULD become?

We've already had people here saying they will vote Bush or Green before they vote for Dean.

So what?

People on this board are a minute, non-representative sample of the country at large. The opinions thrown around here have no bearing on the election.

[mitchum]

82. Link?

[mrgorth]

76. (scratches head)

Why? Because we're running a good campaign and people are mad? If you have an anger meter to use someday around here you'd see how much more was directed AT Dean and his supporters than from.

[Northwind]

79. It's all about the fear, mrgorth

There's Dean and Kucinich, running good, hopeful campaigns based on empowering people, and then there's everyone else, trying to make us afraid.

[Freddie Stubbs]

84. The nominating process is much more front-loaded now

The Iowa Caucuses are less than two months away.

Dean was trailing earlier this year. He didn't begin theyear as the frontrunner, but he will certainly end the year that way.

[AP]

102. NH: Two Homeboys in that race. IA: if Gep doesn't win there

or come in second, then something's wrong with the world. Edwards is in a tight race for 3rd in both those states and has momentum.

SC is a true litmus test. Half the Dem voters in SC are black. To win the GE, the Dem is going to have to excite that Democratic base. Whoever wins in SC is going to get even more momentum. Edwards is in first place in SC.

Just because we never hear about SC doesn't mean Edwards's first place there isn't important. He could also win OK, which might make him the first candidate to win two primaries. (Someone correct me if I have the order of primaries wrong.)