Question for NBDers

[Mattforclark]

If Kucinich wins the nomination, will you support him?

[xrepub]

1. Yes

[YellowDawgDemocrat]

2. No, If Kucinich is the nominee, I'll slit my wrists

because we will have completely lost our minds.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

7. Please explain

What issues that Kucinich believes in constitute 'lost our minds'?

TWL

[AntiCoup2K4]

3. Yes

But he doesn't have a chance in Hell of beating Junior :(

(I'm not an NBD'er really. Just AB-PNAC)

[ShimokitaJer]

4. What a loaded question

I am a Dean supporter and I will wholeheartedly support Kucinich if he is our candidate in the General Election.

However, anyone who declares themselves NBD will, by definition, not support anyone else in the General Election. Why even ask the question?

[Mattforclark]

6. Because I am curious

as to whether NBDers are really NBD.

[bitchkitty]

21. It's not a real question -

just another smear Dean thread. Haven't you gotten with the program yet?

[Hoppin_Mad]

5. Silly -There AREN'T more than 3 or 4 NBD on all of DU

And I suspect there are more NBDK here than there are NBD.

[Sean Reynolds]

8. Wouldn't that make them an oxymoron?

Sayin' that they're NBD, but they'll support Kucinich? Cause that isn't NBD.

I'm NBDKC (nobody but Dean, Kucinich, Carol).

[Mattforclark]

9. Yeah

"Sayin' that they're NBD, but they'll support Kucinich? Cause that isn't NBD."

Yes.

"I'm NBDKC (nobody but Dean, Kucinich, Carol)."

That makes more sense.

[Goldmund]

10. Here's a question to you from a fellow Dean supporter:

Are you really not going to vote if, say, Clark is the nominee? Do you really believe that electing Clark would be equivalent or worse than 4 more years of this cabal?

Because if you do, I don't think you understand that it isn't about rhetoric or likability or ideology this time, it's about ousting this mob.

I'm pretty extremely to the left and I'd enthusiastically vote for Pat Buchanan over W.

[bowens43]

13. There are choices besides Dem and Repug

If you throw away ideology, what does it matter who wins? There are more important things then beating bush. I won't vote for neo-con to oust a neo-con. I believe that Clark would do irreparable harm to our country and especially to our party.

[Goldmund]

15. Oh, yes, right

you can write in "Sponge Bob", or "Ralph Nader", or "Bob Dole". Which would be different from not voting at all because it'll give Keith Olbermann a little chuckle-chuckle story saying "5000 Americans voted for a cartoon character!"... Then he'll throw some papers across his studio.

[ShimokitaJer]

14. That's the problem with ABB

"I'm pretty extremely to the left and I'd enthusiastically vote for Pat Buchanan over W."

I know you're exaggerating, but what do we gain if we elect someone with a <D> behind their name who doesn't really represent Democratic ideals? What if the candidate were Zell Miller, for example? All we do is breed further resentment from those within the party who believe their leadership has abandoned them. Yes, it's vitally important to replace Bush, but it's just as vital to replace him with a real Democrat.

I am not attempting to target Clark in this post. For myself, the line I will not cross is Lieberman. Yes, I would rather see the Democrats in control of the presidency, but I believe that long term progressive goals will not be best served by having a DINO in the office, pushing forward a conservative agenda while telling us we're the ones in control. It's not a matter of whether or not that candidate would be "worse" than Bush... it's a matter of what kind of damage they will do to our chances for real reform.

[Goldmund]

18. All valid points.

But not for this time in history.

I'm not exaggerating. I really _would_ vote for Pat Buchanan over W. I really _would_ vote for Bugs Bunny -- unless I thought that ol' Bugs was also a part of the same mob. Why is it not about ideology or rhetoric? Because the only ideology that * truly follows is the ideology of grabbing as much wealth and power for his clan of neo-cons. Everything else is pudding to sell to sheeple of one ideological stripe or the other.

That's why. Because we're not living in a democracy. If we were, your post would be absolutely valid. Our governmenment has been taken over by a mafia with absolute loyalty to their own interests and their own interests only, not simply with a different take on the interests of the country. It doesn't matter whether Tony Soprano says he's a conservative or a liberal or an automechanic or a Yankees fan; what matters is that the one and only token of value for him is his own unsatiable greed and an unscrupulous disregard for the interests of anything and anyone but him and his clan.

So, my take on it is, the CLAN has to be removed. Zell Miller is probably a part of it. Clark probably isn't. Dean probably isn't. Pat Buchanan probably isn't. My grandma... well, forget that one. This is not the time to pretend like these elections are a nice clean battle of ideas. It's time to evict the criminals. Period.

[ShimokitaJer]

19. Whoever said battles of ideas were clean?

On the contrary, those are the hardest battles to fight. It's the decision to buckle under and choose one of the two choices they give you that is the easy thing to do. Let's face facts, here: there's never going to be a "good time" to vote third party, because unless we demand it, there's never going to be a viable third party to vote for.

As long as we accept the same old definitions of what the Democratic party stands for, without demanding they live up to those claims, we're never going to move the party forward. This isn't about restoring the party to ideals it has lost; it is about demanding the party conform to the ideals they claim to represent. Your claim that the Bush administration is interested only in retaining power is quite true, but the Democrats' performance on IWR and the Patriot Act should have shown you that the same is true of the Democratic party leadership. Lieberman continues to insist he was correct on those two votes, so why should I assume he'll do any different if elected president?

I will never regret losing an election as much as I would regret winning it and knowing that I had helped enable a further shift to the right in the process.

[Goldmund]

20. Our disagreement, my friend, boils down to this one statement:

"there's never going to be a "good time" to vote third party, because unless we demand it, there's never going to be a viable third party to vote for."

This is a statement I wholehartedly agree with. And you won't meet anyone who is more dismayed by the Republicrat 2-party system than I.

But let me ask you something: is there ever a "good time" to set aside long-term ideological goals and tend to the burning fire?

Because, the issue we're facing isn't just a "shift to the right". It isn't an ideological blending of the 2 parties, and it isn't the lack of representation of ideologies like mine, and I think yours, in American politics.

The issue is a coup by a militant cabal. This coup has to be reversed before we can even begin to think about politics as such.

Now, I think that you don't necessarily disagree with that on its face; my sense is more that you're doubtful that electing just any Democrat would consititute a reversal of this coup.

And I agree: it wouldn't. Zell Miller, or probably Holy Joe, would be in the pocket of the exact same interests as *. But my bottom line is this: there should be a single and only a single criterium this time around, and that is whether or not the candidate is likely to be affiliated with the same narrow specific interest group as the mob in power now. Not whether or not they are close to us ideologically or whether we like them or not. Or whether electing them would serve to advance the goals of deeper political representations of diverse ideologies. After we regain some semblence of democracy in America, we can think about these broader long-term issues, because time may be running out.

[lastliberalintexas]

16. Although at this point

I would unenthusiastically vote for Clark, I would not be happy about it. I don't see him having a positive effect on my party, helping us to redefine the debate AWAY from repub talking points, or any realistic chance of helping us recapture Congress.

The one issue that sways me for now is that of federal judges. But for that one issue, I'd vote Green. Which I may still do since my vote doesn't count in Nov anyway.

[bowens43]

11. That's a silly question

how can they be NBDers if they would vote for anyone other then Dean?
Now if the question had been addressed to Dean supporters, I would have answered 'absolutely'. I will vote for any of the candidates except Clark.

[Goldmund]

12. Then, if you please, my post #10 is directed at you as well

[JVS]

17. What would Joe Lieberman do?