The way Democrats approach primaries ...It's KILLING us...

[SoCalDem]

For several election cycles, we have done pretty much the same things, and have gotten our asses handed to us..

It's a forgone conclusion that the verbal attacks that happen in primaries are gift-wrapped and presented to the opposition for further research.

We need to start taking a page from the repube playbook... It's been said that Bush had many "opponents" in his primary the first time, but looking back , we all know that wasn't "really" true.

The repubes in charge, behind the scenes, anoint the "one they want" and do their own undermining of the "others" before they can inflict severe damage on the "chosen one"..

Did we hear digs at *² about his military or DUI or any of the stuff we know about him, coming from his primary opponents? Nope..

On our side, the "flip-flop" stuff came from our own primaries, as did a lot of the stuff that would later be hung on Kerry's neck..

I know there are HUGE egos involved in running for president, but if the party is so willing to concede a race that they "may still have a chance at" AFTER spending as much money , time and effort, why on earth does the party not step in during primaries and exert some realistic "pruning" before irreparable damage is done to the eventual candidate?

[DoveTurnedHawk]

1. Our Party Could Do Well With Greater Discipline

I never see it happening, however, due to the extreme ideological diversity and strident anti-authoritarian bent of many of our party faithful, however.

DTH

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. I agree.

I also think the comment about standing up to Dean in the primary by Bush did hurt Kerry, like it or not. The problem is we're a big tent with a lot of diverging viewpoints. It'd be hard to get a consensus on one candidate as easily as the repukes did.

[SoCalDem]

4. The big tent has a Big-ole RIP across the back side

As much as I liked Al, and Carol, and some of the others, did ANYONE with half a brain think that there were more than 2 or 3 who had a "real shot" at it??

Our primaries tend to be events of massive flailing about, with little substance....

and debates with 9 participants:eyes:...come on..

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

15. Again, I agree completely.

Our primaries this year were a total joke. There were only 4 legit candidates, not 9. 4 might even be too many, but I think that's as low as we're gonna get it down to.

[Kahuna]

21. This is the reason why I favor vetting candidates for support..

this early. By the time candidates begin to seriously consider whether they should run, we will have the answers ready for them.

[NVMojo]

3. I am seriously considering going Independent

my local party is an embarassment. They have already rolled over and played dead. Not a one of them wants to fight.

[Mike L]

22. Get them to start grooming moderate candidates and get them excited again.

Tell them about Mark Warner and how he won in VA. If they are radical leftists who won't listen, start recruiting new intelligent, realistic members for your local party.

[SoCalDem]

35. and for starters, we need to start POURING assistance & money

into secretary of state races..

As long as we are "locked out" of the decision-making part of the process, we will forever be on the outside with noses pressed to windowpanes..Watching in disbelief as yet another election slips away

[unfrigginreal]

5. The flip-flop charge resonated against Kerry because it's true

If you think that Rove and crew wouldn't have used it if we just didn't bring it up, then you're fooling yourself. The only thing that we'd accomplish with your proposal is less time for any of our candidates to develop a strategy to combat any forthcoming General Campaign attacks.

[SoCalDem]

7. You proved my point.. The party needs MORE say in who runs

Why "waste" four more years because the party takes such a "hands-off" position early on..

The party gave tepid support to Gore, then bailed on him as if he were Typhoid Mary when he needed them the most..

The party has done the same now..

Perhaps the party needs to "go local" sand start supporting people at state and local levels, so it's not a "Hail Mary pass" every 4 years, and then back to the cave to lick the wounds..

The strategy now, is seriously sucking.

[unfrigginreal]

12. I'm not sure that I follow what you're saying

Are you suggesting that the Party would not have backed a Kerry candidacy? He was the Party leaderships' choice as far as I can tell.

[blm]

20. No mindful, HONEST read of Kerry's record would conclude he flip-flops.

Take whatever ANYONE says out of context, give it a spin in your media machine and, voila...an attack is born.

[RafterMan]

6. Hold on there

Who called Kerry a flip-flopping traitor in the primaries? I just remember Dean calling him Bush-lite.

Plus, I don't think they really need any help in their research. If they have trouble finding something good, they'll just make things up.

[question everything]

8. The problem is that the "movers and shakers" want to have an early winner

And the early winning meant that Kerry was not faced with all the charges that were raised later.

Many have raised the questions that two small homogeneous states decide on the candidates and that by the time voters of larger, more diversified stated get to vote, all that left is to rubber stamp the decision.

Several secretary of states - Republicans and, I think, some Democrats - came with the idea of rotating regional primaries and I think this is an excellent suggestion.

Thus, in 2008, the first primaries are the New England States, followed by the Mid Atlantic, then by South, followed by the Upper Midwest, the Lower Midwest, then the Mountain, Southwest and the West Coast. (more or less).

In 2012, the Upper Midwest are the first and the New England states are the last and so it goes. Also, I think, only one primaries per month so that we do not have this crazy run from one state to the next.

I really think that we should push for this. I think that many good people do not even consider running because of this crazy process.

[JI7]

9. not really, the Republicans are just nasty no matter what

assume there was no primary. or that only kerry decided to run. what the republicans do is they keep repeating the same shit. all of them every fucking day all the time on tv repeating the same shit. and the media does not call them on their claims.

when kerry answered back on the swift boat thing they said how kerry had mental problems from the war and he needed to leave the past behind and some other shit.

[russian33]

10. What I always admired about the GOP...

...is their unity. They unite behind their candidate, and close ranks (Of course, whether the candidate is good or completely horrible, is a different discussion). The present a united front, and it works. We start criticizing each other, trying to bring a person down, and not thinking that our words (paging Joe Lieberman, and others), can and will be used later on to blast the candidate.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

11. It's Easy for Them to Be Unified

They're mostly white, more likely to be male (and much more likely to be non-feminist), and generally much more homogenous than us.

DTH

[russian33]

14. That is true, we also think for ourselves.....we're freaks I tell you!

[DoveTurnedHawk]

17. We Do...But Like I Said, I Think I'd Take Some Party Discipline Right Now

Because I think we sure could use some.

DTH

[JI7]

16. they are mostly united by hate and fear of difference

democrats are more about hope or change for something positive. and how or which of those things are important to them is what makes the democratic party a big tent. you have women for who abortion rights is the most important and they are part of the democratic base. and then you might have union members who may be against abortion but can be considered the base of the party because they regularly vote democratic based on labor issues. and the same on many other things like environment, taxes, race issues etc.

the republicans are mostly about hate and fear. hate that democrat from massachusettes, hate that trial lawyer, hate those colored and women taking away jobs because of affirmative action, hate those gays etc.

[RafterMan]

13. But look at how that's been used against them

A small cabal of crazy people have taken control of the Republican party and the rest are cowed into silence for fear of violating the 11th commandment.

Do you want that in the other national party as well? I think the weakness of the "unity" model has been exposed.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

23. So Weak It's Won Them Control of Every Branch of Government

And if their cabal has taken control, why haven't we been able to exploit that message to victory?

DTH

[RafterMan]

27. Phyrric victory

There are plenty of Republicans who are nearly as afraid of Bush as I am. But that unity gene kicks in, and they decide to go with what they've got and try to weather the storm.

That answers your question as well, I think.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

29. So the Reality Is, Their Cabal Is in Control

If I had to choose between their cabal and ours, I'd take ours in a heartbeat. But that's not even an option.

DTH

[Mike L]

18. Believe me, Rove and the RNC will dig up the dirt and find the best attack

anyway. I think it's best to get ALL the damaging info out in the primaries so that we can pick the candidate who has the best chance of winning the general election. In the primaries, we thought Kerry's Vietnam related activities were untouchable. We didn't have all the info.

[JI7]

19. we did have info on it

and it was an asset for Kerry in the primary. Kerry ran clips of his anti war days for his tv ads during the primary himself. and spoke about it often also.

[Mike L]

25. Where, in the Northeast? California?

Did he do that in Iowa? I only saw him drag Jim Rassemann out in Iowa.

[JI7]

26. yeah

iowa, new hampshire. and he talked about it himself a lot during campaigning.

[Mike L]

28. I bet he didn't inform Dems about his 1971 Senate testimony.....

"US soldiers raped, murdered, cut off ears...."

[JI7]

30. it was all out there in public for years

why would he need to inform anyone ?

[Mike L]

31. I seriously doubt Iowans knew about it, or remembered.

The same goes for the rest of the country, with the exception of Massachusetts.

Also, we didn't know he used an obscure Navy "three purple hearts, you're out" rule to leave Vietnam after 4 months. I think that many voters concluded that he shouldn't be running as a war hero since he didn't do an entire 12 month tour.

Let's face it, Kerry's strength turned into a weakness after the primaries.

[TheDonkey]

24. hmmm. I think we do need greater civility in the primaries

and that's why I fell out with Dean when he became the most negative in the bunch. Well other than Lieberman but I don't even have to comment on him

[depakid]

32. Get rid of IOWA

It's INSANE that an insignificant midwestern state in the dead of winter, using an archaic 19th Century process has so much influence on the nominee. INSANE. There's no other word for it.

[Mike L]

34. I disagree. It's a good indicator of how middle America will vote in the

general election. It didn't work out this year because Iowans didn't have all the information about Kerry.

[Killarney]

33. I think you make some very good points.