Republicans for Dean!

[ameriphile]

Just when you thought you'd seen it all...

http://republicansfordean.blogspot.com

[Cha]

1. Yeah! Ain't it Great? I found this on the blog..

"To borrow a word from Generation Dean, George Bush Sucks! The last time we had a Republican President who lied this much to the American people, we threw Dick Nixon's ass straight out of the White House. Bush has lied to you, he has lied to me, he has lied to our allies, and no one is talking about it."

[janx]

13. I think Dean will make a GREAT president.

Just wait until the general election. People are going to love him.

[HereSince1628]

2. Well, is it real or PsyOps? If so, who's side is tweaking whom?

With my tin hat on I can see this coming from multiple directions.

[Demobrat]

3. Republicans need jobs and health care too.

I guess it's harder to worry about the sex and reproductive lives of people you don't even know when your own survival is at stake.

[renie408]

20. That was funny.

[rwork]

4. God forbid,

no way in hell, not even in some parallel universe, could there be a democrats for bush*. I want to go and wash my mouth out with soap. I feel creepy, crawly for having said that.

[wtmusic]

8. LMAO there IS one!!!

coming soon. Domain name is owned by this assclown:

Wilson Research Strategies (DEMOCRATSFORBUSH-DOM)
8550 Georgetown Pike
McLean, VA 22102
US

Domain Name: DEMOCRATSFORBUSH.COM

Administrative Contact:
Wilson Research Strategies (PR838-ORG) [e-mail]
8550 GEORGETOWN PIKE
MCLEAN, VA 22102-1206

CWilson aka KRove, huh?

[German-Lefty]

11. There were the Reagan Democrats, some see this as the flip side.

[wtmusic]

5. It's completely for real

Believe it or not there is an exploding number of Republicans who are crossing over (my Dad, for one).

They see Dean as the anti-Bush and are willing to put labels aside.

[dkamin]

9. I agree

My mom, who I've tried to convince for decades that the Republicans are evil, claims that she won't vote for Bush, based on the economy. She still thinks Bush is great in every other area, and couldn't give a hoot about Iraq, but she's voting against Bush.

The loud yahoos at my office (why are George W. republicans always the loudest and most in-your-face about politics?) have been quiet for the last few months- the momentum has definitely shifted. largely because all of the lies are being exposed now...

[sfecap]

16. Here's another example...

A co worker of mine, who knows of my support for Dean asked me why I supported him a couple of weeks ago. I briefly ran it down for him, and gave him the Dean website address and encouraged him to check it out for himself. (Now this is a former military, ANG, republican who voted for bush.)

A couple of days ago, I ran into him. He pulled me aside and told me that he had looked at Dean's site, did some more reading about him, and will now vote for him if he gets the nomination. He said he is disgusted with bush and his policies.

I asked him what he particularly liked about Dean? He said that he liked Dean's fiscal policies, his position on Iraq, and (gasp) his stance on civil unions and equality! I was blown away by this. A republican who supports civil unions? I just had to ask him about this, and he said that while he doesn't necessarily favor the lifestyle, he does support that those who choose to live together in a committed relationship should have the same rights as those who are married. Wow!

Don't believe the pundits...change is happening.

[wtmusic]

18. The pundits are always 2 months behind

public sentiment, thanks to media conglomeration and the elimination of competition.

[no name no slogan]

6. And why not?

Dean's the Rockefeller Republican that hasn't had a home in the Republican Party since the 80s. If he wins the nomination and election, he'll be the greatest Republican president since Eisenhower (even BETTER than Clinton!) :)

Why, even Nixon was more liberal than Dr. Dean on some issues.

[HereSince1628]

10. Thanks for demonstrating my point that this could be from any side

:)

[Brotherjohn]

7. This just proves the point that Dean is not the "wacko liberal" ...

... that the right would have you believe. He is actually very moderate on many issues. He is just very anti-war, so the Bushies are trying to use that to paint him as some leftist fringe candidate.

They have to. He scares them to death. Perhaps more than any other Dem, he has the ability to pull Republican voters away from Bush in 2004.

[DrFunkenstein]

12. You Confuse Policy With Style

Dean is not considered a liberal wacko for opposing the war, but for banging pots and pans like an activist. Believe me when I say that if Dean gets the nod, there will be plenty of archive footage of Dean acting screechy and very unstable. What effect that has will be up to the American people, but they are not known for electing boat-rocking Rage Against The Machine types.

[Brotherjohn]

19. I agree that they may use his style against him in this manner as well.

But there is no doubt that they will (and do) use his "anti-Iraq War" stance to brand him as a liberal as well. Just yesterday, Rumsfeld was out there again saying that those who criticize Bush's policy in Iraq are giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Now, that's much more than branding him a liberal. It stops just short of branding Dean and war critics as traitors and terrorists.

Dean's Iraq War stance, in fact, is what scares Bush (& Rove) the most. Like Wesley Clark, he is a strong-voiced opponent of the war who is also fairly moderate. The War (on terror, on Iraq, whatever) is Bush's only issue. It's the only way he can say he's done anything at all that registers with the American people. It's also his only excuse for the poor economy ("freedom costs money!"). If someone effectively criticizes it, he's lost the only ground he can stand on.

[no name no slogan]

14. Have to partially agree

with you on this one. Dean is quite moderate, even conservative on many issues. Also, he's not necessarily "very anti-War", he's just against the present Iraq war. He supported invading Afghanistan and Operation Desert Storm.

So, yes, he does appeal to the so-called "swing voter" that every Democrat since the '60s has tried to get.

Of course, the fact that only one successful Democratic presidential candidate (Carter) has won with a majority of the popular vote since the party tried this strategy might be one to consider, too... :)

[Brotherjohn]

15. Umm.. What about Clinton?

He won by appealing to moderates, and twice, and by large margins.

Not that I think we should adopt DLC tactics, by any means. The DLC has become nothing but apologists for Bush. But appealing to moderates on certain issues has been shown to work, while sticking to your guns on liberal issues you truly believe in (Dean is Pro-Choice, right?). I have no problem with appealing to moderates (or being moderate) on certain issues. I think most people are. I just don't think the party should confuse that with "shifting to the right", which is what the DLC tends to do.

As far as "very anti-War", I was speaking specifically about his stance against the Iraq War... the Iraq Invasion.

[no name no slogan]

17. Like I said previously...

He NEVER won with a majority of the popular vote. As far as being a Democratic president, he was a huge disappointment-- "don't ask, don't tell", ending "welfare as we know it", blowing up aspirin factories in the Sudan and civilian targets in Serbia, the embargo on Iraq that killed 1/2 million children,...the list goes on.

Why should we, as liberals and Democrats, support a "moderate" president who will have to compromise with the Repubs?

If the Repub is starting from a far-right position, and we're starting from a center/center-right position, what are the chances that your compromise will be in the center/center-left position?

Highly unlikely, to say the least.

So, if we all are looking for someone who will govern from the center-left or left, why should we support a centrist/center-right moderate?

[Brotherjohn]

23. I don't want to hijack this thread into a "defend Clinton" one, but...

I don't think Clinton was as big a disaster as you seem to. Yes, sometimes i think he compromised a bit too much, but he was working in a very hostile environment. He was nearly run out of office with the whole Hillary/Health Care Plan, and trying to okay gays in the military. These early tries at policy taught him what he was working with, and his limits. As far as "blowing up aspirin factories in the Sudan and civilian targets in Serbia, the embargo on Iraq that killed 1/2 million children", he does not have zero blood on his hands (no president ever will). But let's remember that the sanctions were U.N. mandated (unlike Bush's Iraq invasion), and Serbia was NATO-sanctioned. And we ARE a signatory to the the UN charter (and NATO), as we would often argue when Bush was threatening Iraq before the war. Yes, the aspirin factory bombing was a horrible mistake, but it pales in comparison with the pre-emptive invasion and occupation of an entire country (make that two). Clinton could have gone into Iraq, but didn't. If you are about to say "If 9-11 had happened on his watch, he would have", I completely disagree. But we can play "what if" forever. No one really knows. I'm not saying Clinton's foreign policy was without fault, but to equate it with Bush's is simply not realistic.

You can only do what you can do, as Clinton learned quickly. Bush is much more radical to the other side, but he is operating in an environment created by an attack on the U.S., and with almost total cooperation from both chambers of Congress.

In answer to your question, "why should we support a centrist/center-right moderate?". Umm, because he can win? I would ask you: Will the White House be governed from the center-left to left if we support a far left candidate and he loses, and Bush is in office for another 4 years (and likely Jeb in 2008)?

But it's not just that I'd support Dean because he could win. I haven't decided yet, but I AM fairly moderate to left-minded, and I think many of my beliefs are matched by his.

All this being said, I think the primary policy will result in a decent choice that MOST Democrats will back. The primaries will sort a lot of this out. Fight like hell for whchever candidate you believe in now, but then and we should all get behind whoever that ends up being nominated to ensure that Bush gets booted out of the White House in which he is squatting.

[Brotherjohn]

24. Oh, yes, and you're right about the "majority of the popular vote"...

... but that is only because there was a significant third party candidate in 1992 and 1996 (Perot).

You are parroting freeper talking Points here, so often used in the 1990s to imply that Clinton did not deserve the White House (funny how they never use that point now, though). If there is a significant third party candidate, it is rare that anyone will get a majority. That does not mean they were an "unsuccessful" candidate in any way, though. Clinton was widely considered to have won both elections handily, and maintained strong approval ratings throughout most of his presidency.

[renie408]

21. Trying to keep track...

Do we think it is a GOOD thing that Republicans like Dean? I mean, what does that say about Dean? Or is he just the most moderate of the Dems currently running and since they hate Bush, they are opting for Dean? And if he is the most moderate of the Dems, what is going to happen to all those Dems that were supporting him because they thought he was liberal?

And why now are Dean people acting all happy about this when awhile back, an anti-Dean person posted this same thing and everybody said it was Dean bashing? Now, two weeks later, saying that there are Republicans for Dean isn't Dean bashing?

I can't keep up.

[CMT]

22. it says the same thing that it did when we had Democrats for Reagan

that he can win an election. Many Republicans are horrified at the debt this president is leaving our children and they see Dean as someone who has a strong record of fiscal responsibility.

[Brotherjohn]

25. I think people are still trying to figure out who Dean is (even here)...

... but that goes for most of the candidates at this stage of the game.

As far as being a good or bad thing that Republicans like Dean, it is always good when Republicans move to the left. Their leaders have moved so far to the right in reent years, that you knew they would eventually be a recoil effect. I would hope that people won't demonize middle-of-the-road Republicans and moderates, especially if they consider going for a Dem. There are a whole lot of people in this country who are moderates and are decent people, and some of them might even be Republicans. We cannot win without getting at least a few of them to jump back over the fence.

Also, I would hope that people won't demonize Dean if he gains their support. He is just being who he is. If you don't like him, don't support him in the primaries. But don't act as though he's some "bad seed" spiloing all that is good and pure about the Democratic Party because he attracts some Republicans. I think this is a good sign, and says as much about people's growing distrust of Bush as it does about Dean the candidate.

[loyalsister]

26. I've met a few

They're the Libertarian leaning Republicans. They seem like closet Democrats when you talk to them. Some just want the Republican label. Right now, some of them are ready to follow their conscience.
Dean is an obvious choice for them, because of his fiscal positions.

[genius]

27. No surprise.

The Republicans would be happy with either Dean or Bush. They have too much in common.

[MercutioATC]

28. Or maybe his appeal is broadbased enough to appeal to ALL Americans...

...hmmmm

...food for thought...

[E_Zapata]

29. Conservative PAC gives Dean money

It is more than just individuals who are disgusted with Bush:

NATIONAL PAC INC AKA NAT PAC $5000 to Dean on 3/11/03


NatPac has given to: Hastert, Delay, Ashcroft,
L.Graham, Newt Gingrich, Bill Frist, Saxby Chambliss, Dick
Armey! And select dems like Ben Nelson and Joe
Lieberman)

and to, DRUM ROLL: George BUSH $5000 in May
2003.

NatPac gave $5000 to Saxby Chambliss of GA in
fall 2002.

Ref: www.fec.gov

Follow the money and you can get a good idea of what a candidate will do if he wins. I hope the individual donors to the Dean campaign keep Dean with the people if he wins.