If Dems are smarter, why do Republicans keep beating the crap out of us?

[Ladyhawk]

I think they have people who are mean and know how to manipulate. It isn't necessarily about brains on either end. I think Dems just can't wrap their minds around how much mud Republicans will sling and what (criminal) depths they'll sink to in order to win an election.

What's on your mind?

[tjdee]

1. We think Americans are deep thinking, rational people.

And as the saying goes, it ain't necessarily so.

Our PR/media relations people place the focus heavily on "Americans will see past the bullshit".....doesn't work.

[jrthin]

54. And there lies the

problem: thinking "Americans are deep thinking, rational people." They are not. Generally speaking, most Americans are simpletons and dolts. PR people know this, that is why commericals and movies appeal to the emotion, rarely the intellect.

[InvisibleBallots]

82. "most Americans are simpletons and dolts"

I disagree.

[jrthin]

110. Disagree all you want,

the facts speak for themselves.

A few examples of the fact:

Most elected politician are off-the-wall. Who elected these off-the-wall idiots? Rational, thinking people?

A good majority of the American public "believe" that WMD were found in Iraq. This plurality from a thinking public?

A majority of the American people voted for *. What about this man's policies made him electable? A "thinking" public voted this man in?

This is just the tip of the iceberg. If you look at the facts, and forget the machismo of Americanism, it's difficult to arrive an any other conclusion that a good majority of Americans are just not that swift.

[InvisibleBallots]

125. who elected them? A minority, that's who

The majority of Americans don't vote. You can bitch about how stupid they are, or you can give them something to vote for. So far, the Democrats rarely do.

[jrthin]

126. You are making my point.

A "rational, thinking" group of people understand and know that a democracy exists only when people vote. "Thinking" people understand the importance and therefore make the effort to vote. "Thinking" people also understand that there are no perfect candidates, therefore one has to think through the arguments and then decide (even if you don't have "something to vote for) which candidate will do the lesser damage. Have you ever spoken to someone who doesn't vote? I have. Their reasons for not voting are so convoluted, my head spins.

You say a majority of Americans don't vote: thanks for making my point.

[InvisibleBallots]

127. maybe they don't like "democracy"?

Maybe Americans don't care? Does that make them stupid?

Let's look at some facts - under Clinton we attacked a few countries, the Democrats kicked poor people off of welfare, waged the war on drugs against ethnic minorities and locked us as many Black men as they could. That was the "good" alternative to the GOP.

Most Americans don't bother to vote because it hardly makes a difference in their everyday lives. As you go from poor to middle class, voting makes more sense, but it's immediate and even short term effects are virtually undetecable to a large number of Americans.

Maybe it's not the American non-voter that's stupid. Maybe it's the politicians and the parties that can't get the Americans to vote for them that have a problem?

[FormerDittoHead]

84. THEY'RE IDIOTS - WE SHOULDN'T TALK OVER THEIR HEADS.

Being The Former Rush Fan, I started a website (back in the day) in tribute to right wing talk radio.

I found out, however, that the vast majority of them don't have an original thought in their head, let alone able to accurately repeat what Rush told them to think earlier that day.

The red staters are PROUD to be ignorant. Let me repeat that.

They WANT their children to be told that Christopher Columbus REALLY DID "discover" America and that the Spanish who he worked for were "explorers" rather than slave masters. They DON'T want to hear that most of the founding fathers were rich slave owners and that Jefferson had an affair with one of his slaves. They DON'T want to hear how the founding fathers were DEITISTS. The only thing they want to be told about slavery is that the white man set them free, and indeed, slavery had nothing to do with the civil war!

They ACTUALLY BELIEVE that blacks have been given "enough" and that the "pendulum has swung too far". (implying of course, that the current state of affairs is the fault of the blacks, and that the best thing to do for them is... NOTHING.)

THEY ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT RACISM NO LONGER EXISTS. IF THAT'S NOT PROOF OF IDIOCY, I'LL NEVER BE ABLE TO CONVINCE YOU OF ANYTHING.

(btw: the red staters are RACISTS - BIG TIME)

They believe that God thinks American lives are more important than lives elsewhere in the world, even the countries of their national origin!

They believe, most of them, that they will hit life's lottery in one way or another, when that's statistically impossible.

They don't believe cigarettes cause cancer and that they'll be like the old man they knew who grew to be old but still smoked.

They believe that the rich pay TOO MUCH TAXES...

They TRUST in George Bush - that he knows things he "can't" tell us!

I could go on but you get the idea....

[unblock]

90. welcome to du, formerrushfan!

:party:
:hi:

[CatWoman]

104. wow. powerful post.

thanks and welcome to DU!!! :hi:

[MissBrooks]

107. Tell us MORE

Tell us more about working for Rush back then. Did you talk with the callers? Did you ask them questions?
What made you change your mind so quickly?

I think you have a real story to tell us!

We're all ears!

[FormerDittoHead]

113. I never worked for Rush but...

I STILL host my old website in a top 5 radio market and manage a website for a non-syndicated right wing nut talk show host who broadcasts from one of the top *2* markets. I do not wish to be more specific than that at this time.

I've got to see their world from the inside. Outside of the clique of top syndicated hosts, the business is cutthroat and vicious. It's hard to make a living unless you're at the top of the foodchain and you really need the money.

I once got a taste of their viciousness once directed toward me from a show host once and that was the first step to my 'salvation'.

The website I continue to manage is for by someone who I would call an independantly wealthy kook. He inherited over a million dollars, doesn't have to work for a living, but chooses talk radio over an honest living because it allows him to express his neo-facist philosophies.

In the beginning, I was IN the "loop" of right wing radio. My website was endorsed by the local radio stations. But when I refused to take my "marching orders" (told what to say, what not to say, etc) from a few of the "insiders", I was quickly ostracized by all of the show hosts in town. Again, the business is cutthroat and any little thing that a PD can hold against a host (contract renewal, pay, scheduling, etc) he WILL. "...You support THAT guy? (me) He's a loose cannon!".

The people who were posting on my msg board were told (via public and private msgs like this BBS has) they would not be able to post on the "official" BBSs if they continue to support mine, etc.

I continued to hold the flame, however, even voted for W the first time, although he didn't carry my state, so no harm, no foul.

But when the WMD's didn't show up ON THE FIRST DAY (as in - they didn't *K*N*O*W* where they were? Not *ONE* barrelful??? That what the last straw - I realized that it was LIED to, BIG TIME by the side which claimed it was for truth and honesty, etc...

It made me completely reevaluate my philosophy and, thanks to the DU and the White Rose Society, Thom Hartmann, Mike Malloy et al, I was able to get my head on straight!

To keep consistent with this thread, however, through my experience, however, I truly understand their way of thinking and, to put a fine point on it, it's either ignorance, religious intolerance, racism or greed.

[Kurovski]

115. A big, fat WELCOME to DU!

I hope you'll stick around.

I've never been a big believer in Americans as stupid, but maybe you can change my mind.

Folks I know who are for Bush are smart to very smart. It's mostly a matter of trust with them, and many of them are asking questions--as you apparently have.

Were the founders "Deists" or "Deitists", or do both forms work?

[FormerDittoHead]

118. Spell Check.

Deists - is penmanship graded as well as spelling?

>I've never been a big believer in Americans as stupid...

First off, by definition, 50% of people are below average intelligence. I'm thinking you socialize with members of the upper 50%? Do you honestly believe that the "faith vote" represents these upper 50%?

High School (underfunded public) graduation rates are like 50% in some Red states.

Check how Americans rank in advanced science and math.

http://4brevard.com/choice/international-test-scores.htm

>Folks I know who are for Bush are smart to very smart. It's mostly a matter of trust with them...

Smart people may be good spellers and put a high value upon it, able to memorize arbitrary grammar rules, but that doesn't make them intelligent, able to PROCESS information.

Your observation about trust is the key point.

Trust is akin to faith, and faith is the antithesis to intelligence. You can only BELIEVE something you DON'T KNOW.

I would also submit that your friends aren't that smart if, especially what we KNOW with all the lies and deceit., they "trust" the Bush administration.

gotta go.

[Kurovski]

119. I meant no offence on the Deist question

I honestly thought both might be in use. I'm not well educated and so allow for the possibility that I may not know a thing or two.

Regarding the trust matter, I hold the press accountable for some Republican belief in the rampant dishonesty of the Democratic party.

Those I speak with think the press is already liberal and cannot find much of the information I discuss with them regarding Bush's corruption in American media.

So I get alot of "You can't believe what you see on the internet."

I think even the PIPA study addressed the role of the press in mis-informing the electorate.

Again, welcome to DU, I mean it.

EDIT: You yourself are a very intelligent person and it took some time for you to see what was going on. I write this because I'm very certain of the intelligence of the Republican friends and family members I have mentioned.

Well, 80% of them anyhow.

You seem to be a busy person, but please find time to continue posting.

[LiberalFighter]

70. If voters are so smart then why do they vote for idiots and scoundrels?

[podnoi]

102. NARCISSISM!!!!!! We have huge problems with it!

Which is really interesting given that many RW claim to be "Christian" and the second commandment of Christ is to "Love thy Neighbor as thy self". The opposite of loving one's self.

Having spent time out of the country it became clear to me. Our country is extremely self centered. Many are also overly fearful people. We hold to our life much tighter (Bible "He who attempts to keep his life shall lose it) because we have not known adversity. Our reaction to 9/11 was an indicator of this. It was far out of porportion and we went on a killing spree and in our wrath have 20 times as many innocents.

It is apparent in our leadership as well. In other countries your life can be threatened if you fight leadership. In this country our politicians, despite some being well intentioned, are cowards, they won't even risk their money or livelyhood, much less their lives, in the pursuit of what is right.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

121. Sort of like the posters who during the election period said that

they wouldn't display a Kerry/Edwards bumper sticker because they were afraid their car would get keyed.

The fate of the country was at stake, people throughout the world have risked their lives to stand up to governments much, much worse than this one, and they were afraid because their stupid car might get keyed?

No wonder everything's going to hell.

[ailsagirl]

2. I think that about says it... Dems tend to take the high road

My congresswoman said the Dems (including herself) would have to be "bolder."

Makes me wonder if some of the Dems aren't reticent to speak up because they're afraid the repugs have dirt on them.

Certainly blackmail wouldn't be something they'd refuse to stoop to!!
They've done worse things

[msgadget]

117. Maybe they know the other side has no bottom

when comes to getting down and dirty.

[48pan]

3. I Think We Underestimate...

the Republicans. We assume they must be stupid because of their political stances. Evil maybe, but not stupid. If you keep saying someone is an idiot often enough, sooner or later you begin to believe it and act as if it was true.

They're smart AND evil. We have to run our campaigns accordingly.

[ailsagirl]

6. They may be shrewd but that doesn't make them smart

Smart (or wise) to me means intelligent and so many of their policies are short-sighted and extremely dangerous, which, IMO, makes them not very smart.

[Ladyhawk]

42. This very well could be. They seem to be one step ahead of us...

...at all times. This more than annoys me. :mad:

[xerenthar]

4. Republicans keep beating the crap out of Dems because...

Of posts like this. The elitist attitude turns many, many, many voters off. Saying 51% of the country is "ignorant" and "stupid" pisses off moderate/centrist type voters.

[CatWoman]

10. People on DU keep getting tombstoned because of crap like yours

[xerenthar]

12. I didn't want to see Bush in office any more than you...

Doesn't mean I'm going to call the swing voters who voted for Bush stupid. Do you think "Hey, you ignorant, stupid, fucking piece of shit" is a way to win people to our side?

[sonicx]

38. This is a message board for liberals. We say stuff here that we never say

in real life. Dems in the media are WAY more respectful than the republicans in the media.

and again, go to a Republican message board like Free Republic and see what the otherside says.

[forgethell]

86. Dodn't you think that

the conservaatives monitor this site?? they do, and when we make fools of ourselves, which happens often enough, they spread the word and laugh their asses off. Same as we do them. And why not? Do we expect better of them??

[sendero]

52. Guess what boopie...

... I don't want them "on our side". I want them to suffer the consequences of their abject stupidity, and then come hat in hand to "our side".

President Bush* is the president of, by and for the moron. It's just that the morons haven't figured it out ... yet.

[CatWoman]

56. I hope all the residents of Dumbfuckingstan secede ........

[Geek_Girl]

73. Well Unless your in the defense industry

or a very wealthy individual Bush's policies have only hurt you. So anyone who votes against their own self intrest because of their "so called moral values" is a moron in my opinion.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

97. people all over the WORLD say that people b*sh voters are stupid!

So don't blame us! Remember the UK paper with the headline (something like) "How can 50 milllion people be so DUMB"? But actually, only SOME DU'ers talk like that and the stuff said by freepers is no better.

[Ladyhawk]

19. Actually, I was trying to take a witticism and see if it measured up...

...to the light of truth.

There is a graph that shows that the higher the IQ, the more likely people were to vote for Kerry. This graph is by state and the blue states are on top (higher IQ); the red states are on the bottom (lower IQ). Of course, IQ only measures certain parts of a person's intellect, so that whole construct could be argued against as well. My IQ is very high, but that doesn't mean I'm mathematically intelligent. Far from it! Also, I don't know how to manipulate people, even in a good way.

I believe the Republicans are intelligent, but lack something in their internal makeup that Democrats have. The Republicans would put it this way: Democrats are encumbered by something that Republicans don't have.

[xerenthar]

29. Debunked.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/stateiq.asp

[Ladyhawk]

31. Thanks. That's important to know.

I do think that "IQ" measures only part of someone's intellect, regardless.

[zann725]

88. "Republicans lack..." the very morals and values they pretend

to hold dear. Not to generalize, but Repug (leaders at least) tend to be in "denial" about their own mean-spiritedness...and tendancy to "fight dirty" (lying,stealing...and even killing) to win and/or stay in power. The word "sociopath" tends to come to mind here...in relation to the lack of "ethical" means they use to achieve their self-centered, self-serving (UN-Christian) goals. Yet hiding behind Religion, and the flag...Repug's accomplish things Dem's could only dream of in our 'aw gosh' ways.

To answer your second question": "Dems are encumbered by..." the very "morals" and "compassion" and "ethics' that Repugs claim to have, but ironically lack.

[Webster Green]

14. How does voting for extremists like the chimp make one "moderate"?

There is nothing moderate or centrist about the fascist religious fanatics who have taken over our country.

[xerenthar]

17. That's just the thing

Not everyone who voted Bush is a fascist or a religious fanatic. Sure, there are fascists who voted for Bush and religious fanatics who voted for Bush. The Communist Party endorsed John Kerry, but that doesn't make everyone who voted for Kerry a Communist.

The people who believed that Bush was a better choice for whatever reason - they wanted to support our troops, they wanted to show Bin Laden we wouldn't back down, they wouldn't vote out a President in war-time, or they simply didn't like John Kerry... they are not all fascists.

You can label the stupid as stupid, and the ignorant as ignorant... but not all of that 51% are stupid and ignorant. My step-dad voted Bush, and he's not ignorant or stupid. My mom voted Kerry, and she's not ignorant or stupid either.

[Skittles]

22. I disagree

anyone who voted for that thieving, incompetent PIECE OF SHIT is either STUPID or VERY MISINFORMED.

[xerenthar]

25. This is where we disagree...

I think it's very easy to want to vote for Bush.

I also think it's very easy to not want to vote for Kerry.

I probably would have voted 3rd party, for the record.

[sonicx]

33. and you say this, why?

reasons please.

[Skittles]

36. Bush is TRASHING AMERICA

there is not ONE THING that bastard has done to make America better or safer - you need to pull your head out of your ass QUICKLY. I shudder to think what will become of America if the younger generation thinks like you do.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

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

[xerenthar]

60. I like Pizza!!

[InvisibleBallots]

101. to answer your question about John Galt

He's a fictional character from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, a rather silly novel that is an exercise in kissing the asses of rich people. Hope that answered your question!

[ailsagirl]

27. PIPA conducted a study on Bush supporters...

and found that many of them had "gross cognitive dissonance"

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_10_21_04.html

http://www.antiwar.com/blog/comments.php?id=1376_0_1_0_C


PIPA (Program on International Policy Attitudes) is non-profit, non-partisan, by the way

[proudbluestater]

39. Ailsagirl! Thanks for posting that PIPA link!!

I wanted to bookmark that but forgot!

[Ladyhawk]

41. I'll have to look into this. Cognitive dissonance changed my life.

I had to start incorporating "facts" whether they fit my world view or not. I'd like to see what PIPA came up with, but I must go to yon grocery store, pick up some meds, etc.

[ailsagirl]

44. It helped me (a bit) to understand the mindset

I remember Franken referred to the study as "jaw-dropping." He couldn't BELIEVE how misguided many of the Bush supporters are. For instance:

Majorities of Bush supporters incorrectly assumed that Bush favors including labor and environmental standards in trade agreements (84%), and the US being part of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (69%), the International Criminal Court (66%), the treaty banning land mines (72%), and the Kyoto Treaty on global warming (51%). They were divided between those who knew that Bush favors building a new missile defense system now (44%) and those who incorrectly believe he wishes to do more research until its capabilities are proven (41%). However, majorities were correct that Bush favors increased defense spending (57%) and wants the US, not the UN, to take the stronger role in developing Iraq’s new government (70%).

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_9_29_04.html

[Ladyhawk]

64. The thing is, I think my family knows these things...

...but support the weed, anyway. What do you call that?

"Gross cognitive dissonance. A mass Stepford complex among Bush’s masses. Legions of people who get their news from a discredited source, who are unable to confront the fact that they are being used and manipulated (see Thomas Frank's What's Wrong With Kansas). These same people ascribe mainstream positions and beliefs to their leader contrary to the facts almost as if they are in denial that they fully support a man who is an extremist."

Wow. This is what it means to be willfully ignorant. How do you fight such a thing when these people don't respond to facts? It seems to me their ideas are faith-based. They have too much faith in George W. Bush. I just can't understand the mindset, even though I've been there with fundamentalism.

"Faith is not the result of fuzzy thinking; it is the cause of it." - Dan Barker, Losing Faith in Faith

(No wish to start another religion war here. I fully support the religious left. I'm arguing with non-critical acceptance of dogma as fact.)

[Webster Green]

34. Maybe they are not ignorant AND stupid....

But they are surely one or the other.

[sendero]

53. And the ones..

.... whe weren't facists or religious fanatics piss me off the most. They are simply ignorant and buy any pablum fed to them.

At least the fascists and fanatics are voting with a purpose.

[Crunchy Frog]

75. So, they voted for the chimp because they

wanted to support our troops by voting for the guy whose daddy got him into the "champaigne division" of the TANG so he wouldn't get drafted to go to Vietnam, and ended up deserting his unit during wartime anyway, against a guy who voluntarily served in combat. A guy who has been responsible for more troops being killed and maimed than anytime since Vietnam, and who is more concerned with funneling money to his buddies than he is with equipping the troops with basic body armor and armored vehicles. That's supporting the troops in these people's minds.

And he showed Bin Laden we wouldn't back down by losing him in the mountains of Afghanistan and then forgetting about him so that he's still on the loose more than three years after 9/11. Plus, he got rid of his arch nemesis Saddam Hussein, and massively mobilized Al Queda recruitment. Yeah, that sure showed him.

And hey, I don't particularly like John Kerry either, but I would have written in one of my cats before voting for W.

Yes, I do think that people who voted for Bush on the above mentioned bases are stupid and/or ignorant. Maybe that does make me an elitist and single handedly responsible for the Democratic party's bad fortunes.

Republicans on the other hand, call people like me traitors, and call for us to be rounded up into camps, or shot, or expelled from the country. That sort of talk never turns anyone off though. Just that damned elitist talk from libruls like me.

[MAlibdem]

99. actually, the "Communist Party" that endorsed Kerry

is a Republican front group designed to discredit him. It would be like the dems setting up a group called KKKAmeriKA that endorsed Bush and said "He doesn't agree with us on everything, but he's moving the country towards White Power Fascism, and we agree with that."

[Ladyhawk]

23. Excuse me, but this is pretty darn close to an ad hominem attack.

That is not OK. You can attack my idea and discuss it meaningfully, but attacking me personally is not OK. The reason I posted this is to test the idea. If the idea of intellectual superiority is being held by Democrats and that idea is wrong, it needs to be debunked, but not in an obnoxious manner.

You will note that I said in the original post: It isn't necessarily about brains on either end.

I think we need to define just what our true strengths and weaknesses are.

edited: clarification

[sampsonblk]

26. Have you talked to any of these people?

I can't say the pct, but a vast number of them are ignorant and stupid. They think the WMDs are hidden in another country. They think Saddam and Osama are buddies. They think killing "raghead" women and children in Fallujah is okay, but Bill Clinton got a blowjob and that's treason. They think Bush's lies are for our own good, but everyone else lies because they are wicked and they should go to hell. They think when our military succeeds, its Bush's wisdom, but when it fails, its because Bill Clinton destroyed the military. I actually heard this crap with my own ears!

If the truth bothers them, maybe they will be inspired to read a little more, learn some history, and do some critical thinking. But I dont think we should hide the truth to avoid pissing them off. That would be a little pathetic, don't you think?

[Ladyhawk]

37. Some of the people I know who voted for * are very smart,

but are "willfully ignorant." That's not OK with me. Each of us has to learn to incorporate new information as it comes in. And if some of that information doesn't gel with previously-held conceptions, then the conceptions must change.

Fundamentalists are experts at keeping out information that doesn't fit with their world view.

[proudbluestater]

46. Ladyhawk, while I agree with the ignorance part, I'm

not convinced it's willfull. I'm sure you've seen the entire cabal hit the Sunday morning talk show circuit and all read the same line from the playbook. It could be Saddam had links to 9/11. Six people will go on tv and repeat, repeat, repeat.

Winston Churchill said, A lie is half-way around the world before the truth even gets its pants on.

Once the lie is out there it may be refuted. But never as often as it is repeated. The Repukes will continue to repeat the same lie 1,000 times anyway. I've seen it in this past campaign. Biggest offender is Cheney.

The complicity of the MSM helps. They don't bother to refute it each time the lie is repeated. Once out of every ten times, maybe.

[xerenthar]

49. MSM?

[Crunchy Frog]

76. Mainstream, aka corporate, media. n/t

[sampsonblk]

71. I consider that stupid

If a person is really bright, but insists on avoiding evidence that her/his world view is ludicrous, I consider that stupid.

Even rocket scientists can be oblivious if they try hard enough. Doesn't mean they can't count or read. People like that, in my opinion, are part of the problem. Like people who are "pro-life" but see no problem with bombing a wedding in Afghanistan or Iraq. They just refuse to get it. Very frustrating.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

122. Yes, the truth IS out there, and

it doesn't take all that much effort to find it.

The American people have been lulled into ignorance and complacency. It's uncool to be intelligent and inquiring.

Some people want to be cool above all else, and in today's mass culture, that means being ignorant of and indifferent to everything that isn't currently deemed cool.

[pretzel4gore]

55. ironic, isn't it?

every time a bushevik makes a mistake, it cost some innocent hapless creature somwewhere, and never them! That greasy bushevik mediawhore chrstopher hitchens wrote a book attacking Mother Theresa, who spent her life working with the poorest of the poor (and became ruthless in many ways in her language and demeanor, giving that goat hitchens crud to chew on...) and who popularized the following prayer:
"Deliver me, oh Lord, from the desire of being loved
from the desire of being extolled
from the desire of being honoured
from the desire of being praised
from the desire of being preferred
from the desire of being consulted
from the desire of being approved
from the desire of being popular...'
'Deliver me, oh Lord, from the fear of being humiliated
from the fear of being despised
from the fear of suffering rebukes
from the fear of being slandered
from the fear of being forgotten
from the fear of being wronged
from the fear of being suspected'"
etc

[sonicx]

32. Kerry WON moderates and centrists, first of all...

Secondly, have you ever read an Ann Coulter Book? Please name Democrat in the media that's as vile and nasty as her.

Third, we are a message board. We don't make or brake elections.

Fourth, ever been to Free Republic's Blog? they call people worse names than 'stupid.'

[xerenthar]

50. Answers

2) Ted Rall. Yes, Coulter is vile.

3) True.

4) Yes. Both sides call the other side very bad things.

[sonicx]

57. Ted Rall is not as bad as Coulter. You must have blinders on

Or haven't read anything she's made. Go to spinsanity.com and do a search for her. Rall isn't even half as bad. Also, Coulter is on TV 10 times as much.

So...now that we have established that Republicans are nastier and meaner, why are Democrats elitists again?

[xerenthar]

59. Coulter's a fucking idiot, don't get me wrong.

Ted Rall called our troops idiots... =o

Coulter's a piece of shit though. The convert them to Christianity quote is a perfect reason why.

[sonicx]

61. do you remember the context of ted's comment?

He was talking about the prison abusers, who are indeed idiots.

Coulter thinks Liberals should be put to death or or attacked with blunt objects and that Women should not be allowed to vote. Go to Spinsanity.com to read several dozen of her other lies and attacks. There's no comparison between her and Rall.

Now, why are Democrats elitists while Republicans are not? You still haven't answered me.

[xerenthar]

62. He said that about Tillman, not the Ghraib jackasses.

Republicans(for the most part) do not call 48% of the country stupid, fascist, idiot, Nazi, etc. It's a common theme I've noticed among a LOT of anti-Bush people. I think it helped Bush get re-elected.

[sonicx]

63. You are mistaken.

Republicans denigrate more.

Listen to Talk Radio, Cable News, and go to Republican message boards. They called Democrats or People who vote for Kerry...Terrorist Lovers, America Haters, Saddam Lovers, Baby Killers, Communists, Socialists, French Lovers, etc.

If Bush supportters ever called idiots or stupid, it's usually on the Internet in liberal only sites. We don't have a media for denigrating people in the first place.

[Debs]

65. Ted Rall

Is a cartoonist. Cartoonists are supposed to be controversial and thought provoking its the point. It was supposed to be funny and over the top. The point being that the War was a stupid idea. Whether you agree or not to compare a political cartoonist to a woman who is accepted on newsshows as a political operative is not logical.

[Crunchy Frog]

78. In my experience, they call us far worse.

Maybe I'm just reacting to what's in all the popular RW books, what they say on the RW TV and radio talk shows, what gets written on RW internet boards, etc. Probably not to what's actually being said by Republicans.

I guess it can be easy to confuse the two.

[Crunchy Frog]

77. How frequent are Ted Rall's TV appearances

relative to those of Ann Coulter? Just wondering if you know since I don't really watch TV anymore. The last time I was watching TV, Coulter seemed to be on all the time, all over the place. That's one of the reasons I stopped watching.

In other words, how much exposure does he get in the mainstream media to turn off moderates the way that Ann Coulter does?

[American Tragedy]

83. Read this, then maybe you'll reconsider

If you don't think that people who voted for Bush are deluded or ignorant...

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_10_21_04.html

[leftofthedial]

5. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

and not just campaign "war chests," which are a drop in the bucket compared to virtual ownership of the entire Murkan media infrastructure, the domestic intelligence and terror apparatus, the voting machines and processes in most of the country and all the corporations and financial infrastructure.

[robbedvoter]

7. 2 coups? Intelligence is not a factor (except maybe in recognizing the

facts for what they are)

[iconoclastic cat]

8. Because we're so easy to divide and turn against each other.

And we're not natural liars.

[Ladyhawk]

24. We do seem to fight an awfully lot, especially since November 2.

I hope that this calms down a bit.

As for the second part, I don't want to learn to lie. We need to learn to be avid truth-exposers.

[CatWoman]

9. It's not a question of intelligence

It's a question of ethics and fair play.

They win at any and all costs. We win fair and square.

Simple.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[sam sarrha]

13. they have Satan and ALL his Minions on their side.......

[sam sarrha]

15. actually they have found out how to use Apriori logic as a weapon of mass

distruction,.... it is invincible, but has a problem of coming back and biting them on the ass. the Saudis found that out when they used it in spreading Whabbieism

[48pan]

16. That presumes the existance of God...

In that case, they may not be so stupid.

[sam sarrha]

48. Your comment is a perfect example of Apriori logic..that was really a good

example of how they brainwash people.. to always come up with the same conclusion..

I was making a joke.. unfortunately you seemed not to be...

[Skittles]

18. republicans don't have consciences or morals

nt

[dave123williams]

20. Because they're bullies at the core? Just a thought.

[OneBlueSky]

21. the short answer is that . . .

Republicans are procative, while Democrats are reactive . . . the Republicans lay out what they stand for and fight for it, while the Democrats wait to see what the next poll says before taking a position . . . witness the current effort to modify the party's position on abortion in response to public opinion . . .

[Ladyhawk]

28. Yeah. It seems like we're forever REACTING to something unthinkable...

...instead of anticipating the "unthinkable" and being ready for it.

[proudbluestater]

30. If Dems are smarter, why do Republicans keep beating the crap out of us?

1. Because they own 80% of the voting machines.
2. They are NOT beneath using this advantage to steal elections.
3. See (2), they have NO moral values whatsoever. If the machines can't help them steal the election, their ownership of the media and the lies they feed the American public will do it for them.

Fascists don't believe in rules. They make up their own and nobody holds them accountable until one day the people get fed up and do something serious about the corrupt system.

[charlie]

35. Repubs play to win

Dems play not to lose.

[wyldwolf]

40. complex... but here is a theory

I think highly intelligent people tend to vote Dem.

BUT liberals often take the high road in a conflict - we'd rather reason it out instead of fight.

Works to our disadvantage sometimes.

In the early days of DU, high horse liberals (coined from a Michael Moore quote) would tar and feather you if you suggested Dems fight dirty like Republicans.

Well... four years later... look where we're at.

[sword]

43. Tough for small factions seemingly united to win.

That is the problem in a nutshell

[Ladyhawk]

45. Note to xerenthar:

Psst...you're too new to get obnoxious. :) Please temper it a bit.

I wanted to discuss this in a manner that lets in the light of truth. Thank you for the link to snopes. I've now digested more truth, which is good.

Please note that I tempered my topic with these words: It isn't necessarily about brains on either end. The topic was an attention-grabber. It's usually a good idea to read a person's entire post before flaming him or her.

Thank you.

[demosincebirth]

47. We ought to go back to the days of FDR, and listen to the

truth about republicans...the way FDR said it.

[Kitsune]

58. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

[zann725]

111. ...as drunken, yelling, body-painted Sports crowds attest!

n/t

[Debs]

66. Two Reasons

First they have a built in media advantage. Have you ever wondered why all news media are paid for by advertising? At one time newspapers werent but they are now. You arent buying news they are selling YOU to bussinesses which will not support overtly progressive messages. This is why every newspaper has a bussiness section and no newspaper has a labor section. There was a time when there was a labor press any large city had a labor newspaper and a socialist newspaper. Tax laws were changed publishing became more expensive now 60% of a newspapers revenue comes from advertising its obvious enough how that changes the dynamics. News consumers are not important enough to be in the supply and demand equation because they were taken out.

Second and this is tough. There side since it deals with black and white does the soundbite much better. Saddam is a bad guy. Who could argue, now you have to explain the nuances of why when you consider the whole situation, its not morally or practically feasable to invade even though hes a bad guy. Tax cuts give you back your money. Now we are in the position of haveing to explain the complexities of why it isnt JUST your money and why paying for the expense of a civiliation and maintaining a society is a good thing. I could go on but I think you see my point

In my opinion, these two things are the reason we lose, though lets not forget that before this we won three presidential elections in a row as far as the popular vote is concerned. As for the smart dumb thing I also know some intelligent conservatives, it amazes me. Usually the arguements of compassion are not persuasive to them. I have to say I dont see much in their positions that really stand up to anlysis and moral scrutiny. Then again thats how I see it

[AP]

67. Dems are so confident they're right they think they don't have to work...

....hard to get people to vote for them.

Republicans know that on ideas alone they'd lose every time so they work much much harder to win elections.

[Lexingtonian]

68. Transitional times

The changes involved over the past 50 years are simply overwhelming to most average people.

Republicans took the reactionary side in the 60s and, as the Modern Age has put more and more psychological pressure on the people who can't/won't/don't mentally adapt, the politics of being a reactionary become more and more bizarre and inhumane relative to reality. But a lot of people, increasingly so with age and lackings of insight and information, simply can't overcome the prejudices and 'beliefs' and dogmas about how the world is supposed to be that they were taught.

Democrats have not liked taking the side of progress and solutions to the dilemmas of the Modern condition. Despite being 'smarter' a lot of Democrats can't overcome a latent conservatism- internalized near-obsolete dogmas about how the world is supposed to be- within themselves either. There are a lot of Americans, however, who from age or insights gained no longer even see how the pre-Modern American culture is at all plausible or desirable or even imaginable in the present.

So we have a country that has a Democratic Party that is constantly in the throes of its conservative impulses and despairs on the one hand, thrashing about with ideals overly detached from reality on the other. Only some of its people see the essential problems and what the (often painful) solutions are that have to be embraced, and even fewer of them see the comprehensive whole.
And there is a Republican Party that primarily works to exploit the reactionary sorts, the sheep that are easily fleeced, but that finds historical purpose in a kind of negative sense: in finishing up all the essentially pointless historical conflicts with external enemies and fighting down the absurd sort of political radicals domestically.

It's ugly but, in perennial American style, utterly comprehensive arguments. Nothing is left unsaid, untouched upon. Nothing is sacred in American politics, ultimately.

Republicans simply have a great structural advantage in the racial and age composition of the electorate. Their problem is the necessary hypocrisy and corruption that kills them when they run moderate (see Bush Sr.) and the way they go over the cliff when they run radical (see Bush Jr.). So they have to swerve back and forth between the two and still lose all their most honest, Modern life-adapted, voters over time. They know their job is to bankrupt the Old, pre-Modern, systems and establishments- and they are doing a very effective job of it, unfortunately. 'Creative destruction', though lacking the creative bit, indeed.

Democrats are in trouble every time they try to cheat on the role given them. Every time they swerve conservative and give up the push for progress in the name of grabbing power they get trounced. Simply being hardassed and reasonable and assertive in the name of progress gets respect- and embraced (ok, at times rejected due to denial) if/when it's clear they understand how to deal with the pertinent dilemmas of the Modern condition, have the answer figured out.

[zann725]

112. They DO have a 'greater structural advantage.' They're control freaks.

That's why they're so 'wedded' to Religion and the Military and Intelligence organizations...whose central agendas are to control their members (who then are programmed to make it their duty to control others around them...if necessary, through fear, terror, lies...and the universal human need to "belong."

The last of which accomplished with the trend of 'designer name clothes' which began in the mid-70's, and hastened the end of that 'counter-culture' by the wearing of Designer jeans and other apparel which signaled "belonging" to the elite Establishment. Interesting, when you think about it, that they began by "branding" jeans which were the epitome of the counter-culture.

Also interesting, that from that era was also the popular "Member Only" jacket...which Shrub still prefers to wear.

It's all about structure and control...which Dem's in their progressiveness, compassion toward human rights, and an openness to change and new ideas...are therefore weak on.

[Raster]

69. First of all, our election infrastructure is controlled by the g.o.p....

As Joe Stalin said, “It does not matter how people vote - who counts the votes is what matters”. Do you really think in this last election that we got the crap beat out of us? People didn't stand in line for hours to vote for bush. Every rational, sane, thinking person, even some republicans, know that it is highly unlikely george w. bush won the election fairly. Every indicator other than the final vote count says bush did not win. We will never have a fair election in this country as long as the election itself is out-sourced to the republican party.

Two, control the media, control the message. The Amerikan media are currently working overtime trying to ignore the ugly truth about Amerikan elections and the carnage in the middle east. And what is sad is that many people know their information is sanitized and actually prefer it that way. You know, the "my beautiful mind..." thing.

[Piperay]

72. Lying, stealing and being

mean and rotten seem to come naturally to them and are harder for Democrats to make themselves use as tactics, that's why they keep beating us.

[Crunchy Frog]

74. I think the Republican leadership is smarter

and gutsier than the Democratic leadership. It's Democratic voters that are smarter than Repug voters, but since smart people are very much a minority in this country, that doesn't do the Democrats much good.

The Repugs seem to have a more realistic grasp of human nature, and a more cynical willingness to exploit it. They understand how to push people's buttons and trigger their passions with very emotional wedge issues. They have a much greater understanding of the principles of marketing.

They have also put the intense and long term work into building up an ifrastructure of think tanks, "experts", columnists and reporters, and media outlets. They have invested the time, money, and work while the Democratic leadership has simply coasted.

They know what they want, they understand the principles of power, and they use that understanding to get what they want.

They have no limits to what they are willing to do to get what they want, and I wouldn't want Democrats to sink to that level, but I would at least like to have Democrats who understand this facet of Republican behavior and will try to take some steps to counter it. Most of our Dems don't even seem to have a clue as to what they're up against when dealing with the Repubs.

I don't know what needs to happen for the Democrats to get some really smart and savvy people into leadership positions, but we sure don't even seem to be trying to do it right now.

[mtnsnake]

79. For any smart Republicans, it only proves one thing

People are smart in different ways.

Not everyone who's smart in most ways are smart in all ways. Some people are smart in physics or politics but couldn't figure out how to replace a pane of glass. Yet they might be smart in knowing who to vote for.

Some repukes might be smart in some ways, too, like rocket science for example, but they're not smart in knowing what's good for people, and they're not smart when it comes to knowing right from wrong.

[zulchzulu]

80. If you owned the corporate media and 30% of voting in US...

...with electronic voting machines owned by Repugs, you'd win too!

If you can control the message in the media and cheat on the vote, you have a very solid case for "winning" elections.

[moondust]

81. Very destructive minds.

Weaponized psychology.

[American Tragedy]

85. The Democratic leadership severely overestimates the American electorate

and I believe that with all of my heart.

There are some intellectual conservatives, but they are very rare, and not nearly enough to win an election.

[zann725]

87. Even if we could (wrap our minds around)...

Dems are NOT sociopaths by nature, and try as we might, we're playing by an entirely different set of rules.

Ironically, WE are the "compassionate" ones with morals and values. How to deal with those who are not, yet pretend they are?

For now I think we need to "stand our ground, and not back down" on this Election Fraud issue. They've pushed us to the wall, and still we haven't fought back substantially until now. If we back down on this, seems like we may never be able to. ONLY if we win this, can we begin to plan how to deal with Repugs in a whole new assertive way on a day-to-day basis.

[The Straight Story]

89. PR - we are seen as the wackos and 'fundamentalists' of the left

Anti-Christian, pro-tax, communist, anti-business, pro-gay, pro-abortion, and so on and so forth.

We are seen as the party that wants to rid your town square of a manger scene and take christmas carols out of school while favoring abortion and teaching fisting in schools. Sounds wild? Well the folks on the right I have known see us as that - why?

The avg person sees less wrong with a christmas display then they do abortion and gay marriage, they see less wrong with the ten commandments than they do transgender rights - we push in a progressive way to bring rights to all people while they see us as pushing to eliminate rights of a community to simply display a simple christmas message. We are portrayed as the party that wants to include some while excluding the majority.

PR - we need to work on that heavily (just my humble opinion).

[Oddly Stevenson]

91. The immovable object

If someone is convinced of something, and have been convinced that any source of information that might change their mind (i.e., the "liberal media") cannot be trusted, how do you change their mind? Fox, Rush, etc. will never expose them to something they don't want to believe, therefore, they can just ignore these things, characterizing them as suspect, propaganda, or outright lies.

An example of a recent conversation I had:

Me: Dwight Eisenhower's son voted for Kerry.

Con: Well, that's his son.

Me: He had voted for a Republican president every election his entire life, until this election.

Con: Well, I'm not sure I even believe that.

Me: He wrote an editorial in the paper. You should try reading the paper sometime.

Con: Oh, I don't read that liberal rag.

The final assumption is that, to a lot of Republicans, if the truth doesn't appear in the right place, it isn't the truth. And the places they get their "truth" from omit, or distort, a large part of the story. The Republican I most frequently find myself arguing with just doesn't seem to understand that, while any legitimate news organization may lean one way or the other to a degree, there is a marked difference between the New York Times and Newsmax. It's hard to believe anyone could think otherwise, but there a lot of people who do.

[spooky3]

92. I think you're right, but I can't figure out why it's true.

The only thing I can come up with is that some people--even some who are very bright and well-functioning in many aspects of their lives--want so badly to believe in a certain world view (often influenced by their religious leanings) that whatever they believe becomes true. Facts don't shape the belief; the belief shapes the facts. Thus, you can present facts all day and gain nothing, because the desire to cling to false belief drives them out.

[Q]

93. Perhaps it's because of this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1452072

[quaker bill]

94. Because republicans are prepared to do whatever it takes

How many lies did we catch them in?

Did it matter? Absolutely not. They have a very high threshold for embarrassment.

Dean lets out one "war whoop" and Democrats are mortified. We have a very low threshold for embarrassment.

Clinton gets some attention from an intern. We are mortified.

Bush orders prisoners to be tortured. No big deal.

Repugs act to repress the vote. We are mortified, for them it is business as usual.

Bush lets corporate execs into the Whitehouse to write the laws. We are appalled, for them it is "good public policy".

Beginning to get the picture yet?

They understand that these "fine points" do not actually matter. We continue to obsess on them none the less. You can see it here. We scurry about trying to pick the flawless candidate and platform for 2008, sorting out the "fine points". They, on the other hand, will settle on an image and run whoever is convenient.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

95. Republican success story: based on greed, ignorance and ideology

The Republican Party will do anything deceitful to win and they are very good at covering their tracks or spinning it when caught. They have used wedge issues based on racism/prejudices, religious fanaticism, fear and greed to appeal to all levels of our social strata. They own enough influence in the MSM to frame and disseminate any information that will advance their cause without the informatin being vetted for facts and truth. They don’t back down and never surrender or apologize not matter how unethical their behavior or position. I live in a low-rent conservative redneck area that voted 65% for the idiot and I know how truly ignorant, sanctimonious, hypocritical and most importantly racist these people are they hate with a righteous passion that validates their lives and the repugs know how to appeal to this nescience. A prime example was the mailings in West Virginia that stated the democrats would take away their bibles and allow same-sex marriages if elected. I know it was effective in swaying these angry people’s minds which want to be reassured that their hatred and twisted fears are justified by some formal part of our society. The RNC admitted they did this mailing and did not apologize while the MSM dropped it without a significant ripple. I beleive there are three things that drive the Republican success story: greed, ignorance and ideology or a combination thereof wrapped in the American flag with the cross of Jesus going on before.

[opihimoimoi]

96. The Pubs take LIE CHEAT STEAL DENY DESTORT DIVERT to new Heights

The Propaganda machine they have built is awesome. over 59,000,000 victims and they don't even know it.

[coreystone]

98. An Independent Who Voted Straight Democratic Ticket on 11/02/04

I have been reading this thread for awhile, and find that there are many passionate comments being posted.

In 1968, the war in Vietnam was well in the progress of polarizing the populace of this country. I had a “1-HS” deferment as I was in my senior year in high school. President Johnson had made his decision, and announced to the country that he would not seek a second “elected” term. It was a very turbulent year for the United States. Martin Luther King was assassinated, as was Robert Kennedy. I can remember how disappointed that Hubert Humphrey did not distance himself from Johnson on Viet Nam. Even going into the fall of 1968, Vice President Humphrey still would not back away from a “loyalty” which he perceived he owed to Johnson.

During the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, “The Chicago Seven” (background: http://search.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.jsp?query=The+Chicago+seven&page=1&offset=0&result_url=redir%3Fsrc%3Dwebsearch%26requestId%3De0046f0afba325%26clickedItemRank%3D2%26userQuery%3DThe%2BChicago%2Bseven%26clickedItemURN%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.law.umkc.edu%252Ffaculty%252Fprojects%252Fftrials%252FChicago7%252FAccount.html%26invocationType%3D-%26fromPage%3DNSCPTop%26amp%3BampTest%3D1&remove_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.law.umkc.edu%2Ffaculty%2Fprojects%2Fftrials%2FChicago7%2FAccount.html) and many were in the streets of Chicago in protest to the Viet Nam War and other social issues.

Attempts to Move the Convention from Chicago to Miami

http://search.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.jsp?query=Mayor+Daley++++1968+Convention&page=1&offset=0&result_url=redir%3Fsrc%3Dwebsearch%26requestId%3De0046f0afbb7ed%26clickedItemRank%3D3%26userQuery%3DMayor%2BDaley%2B%2B%2B%2B1968%2BConvention%26clickedItemURN%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww-cgi.cnn.com%252FALLPOLITICS%252F1996%252Fconventions%252Fchicago%252Ffacts%252Fchicago68%252Findex.shtml%26invocationType%3D-%26fromPage%3DNSCPTop%26amp%3BampTest%3D1&remove_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww-cgi.cnn.com%2FALLPOLITICS%2F1996%2Fconventions%2Fchicago%2Ffacts%2Fchicago68%2Findex.shtml

“Many Democrats were eager to move their national convention from Chicago to Miami, where the Republicans were to hold their nominating event. Democrats were concerned not only about the possibility of unruly protests, an ongoing telephone strike in Chicago threatened to cause logistical nightmares. The television networks also lobbied to move the event to Miami -- TV and phone lines already were installed at the Republican convention site. In addition, because of the phone strike in Chicago, television cameras would be limited to the hotels and the convention center -- new phone lines were needed to cover outside events. Any footage taken outside this area would have to be shot on film, which would require processing before it was broadcast.
Mayor Richard J. Daley would not let the convention leave Chicago. He promised to enforce the peace and allow no outrageous demonstrations. He also threatened to withdraw support for Humphrey, the apparent nominee, if the convention was moved. President Johnson also wanted to keep the convention in Chicago and is rumored to have said "Miami is not an American city."

I remember all too well the anger which was broadcast during that convention of the “faces” of Mayor Daley with support from the “mainstream” Democratic leadership. There were many who attempted to fight against the “tyranny” of power, such as Senator Ribicoff, Senator Eugene McCarthy, Senator George McGovern, among others. But, the Johnson machine, the Daley machine wouldn’t allow for it.

Nixon had a plan!!! He didn’t tell the American people what the plan was, but, the American people, Republican and Democrat wanted a plan that was better than the 30,000+ American soldiers who had died up to that time. All the American people perceived in Humphrey was the more of the same. We did not want to lose a war. Nixon had a plan!! Secretary of Defense McNamara, as we have found out since, KNEW that the effort was doomed to fail. Yet, he kept LYING to the American people.

I can’t tell anyone how disheartened I was to watch Richard Nixon take the oath of office on January 20, 1969. It wasn’t that Nixon was smarter, it was that Democratic party allegiances; personal power; and, many other attributes of politicians had taken a priority over common sense, or any other notions of Thomas Paine (the 1700‘s one).

President Johnson knew he was gone after Walter Cronkite had distanced him from a rationale approach to deal with the Viet Nam issue, and is on record for that comment.

I certainly do not believe that Republicans were “smarter” during that campaign. I do believe that the Democrats were so entrenched with the “cognitive dissonance” which I have read previously upon this thread, that they couldn’t see the forest through the trees. Lyndon Johnson, and “the Great Society” was such an inspiration for his notions and those of JFK (the original one), that he will be viewed by history as a victim of his own “cognitive dissonance” and power, not his lack of intelligence.

“An intelligence test measures what an intelligence tests measures!” That is pretty close to the “introductory definition” of intelligence in any Psychology book. So perhaps rather to spend any more time on a “Stanford-Binet” test, or anything else which is culturally skewed in its measurement; unscientifically ignoring the “early stages of development” of “reading” to a child, or the many other event and influences; completely ignoring the plethora of variables which have never been included within the “official” definition of intelligence, perhaps we should move on to so many aspects of the “psycho/social” elements which allow people to have a different viewpoint.

Without offense, this has been the most rational post I have viewed on this thread:

4. Republicans keep beating the crap out of Dems because...


 Of posts like this. The elitist attitude turns many, many, many voters off. Saying 51% of the country is "ignorant" and "stupid" pisses off moderate/centrist type voters.


Only to be countered by a “power” driven response:

“People on DU keep getting tombstoned because of crap like yours”

I call this IGNORANCE!!

[coreystone]

100. Also, a very big problem with civics classes and the MSM!!

:-)

[unblock]

103. because "smarter" is a handicap

not only is anti-intellectualism rampant in this country, particularly in politics, but "smart" people often overthink, or just plain think instead of doing.

the process of thinking is not politically attractive in the tiny sound bite era. people like a decisive man, a man of action, a man of principle. saying things like "we need to wait until the evidence is in" sounds like "i can't up my mind and i'm stalling for time".

banana republicans do think, but they've figured out how to do it AND just what to think about.
while we research and dig for facts and evidence, the think tanks build the pseudo-intellectual fodder for the politicians and the media to trumpet in support of their cause.
while we debate policy choices, their tacticians strategize about how to build the case for their conclusion.

our side does virtually NOTHING when it comes to marketing. we put our candidate up there all by his lonesome and let him explain our side's point of view and then we whine about how it wasn't quite the perfect speech.

one smart guy cannot compete against well-oiled machine of millions of people, no matter how smart the one guy is.

we need to start ACTING like a TEAM. that has far more of an impact than being smarter ever will.

[eg101]

105. gop has social and economic rightism. Dems has only social leftism

The democratic party cannot address its base on economic issues as strongly as the GOP can address its base on economic issues. Thus, in unspoken sort of way, the Democratic party comes across as a hollow party.

[hinachan]

106. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups

In a nutshell, this explains why the Repukes keep winning. :mad:

[wellst0nev0ter]

108. Why Do Republicans Win? It's Not That Hard

While Democrats try to appeal to the rational, better angels of the voting public, Republicans are better at getting people to hate us. They appeal to the emotions rather than the intellect. Through organized message-mongering they associate Dems with weakness, lack of faith, irresponsible government, and so on. Catch phrases like the "death tax" serve a purpose, and it's not to inform.

In order to win, Democrats must HATE Republicans and convince other people to hate them as well. We already tried treating Republicans as our opponents and that will never measure up to tactics of using pure enmity. And please, if the Democratic commentators are going to take a tough line on Republicans, DON'T act apologetic - hate them and make people despise them. Republicans own the government so ANYTHING that goes wrong it's their own responsibility, remember that.

[VioletLake]

109. I don't think that we should promote hatred though.

Hate is an emotion that gets out of control too easily.

I think it's enough to expose their leadership & its ideology as immoral and unethical. It's a good idea to leave room for duped republicans to defect to our side.

We don't have to become like them to defeat them.

[wellst0nev0ter]

114. I Know, But We Do Have To Cross Some Lines To Get Our Government Back

And that means we have to associate visceral feelings of hatred with Republicans. There's no use going to the ref and saying the other side is playing unfairly, you got to do what it takes to win or step back and take the beatings.

[VioletLake]

128. I appreciate your commitment...

to defeating the republicans and I do sympathize with your feelings. It's a fine line that we're forced to walk every day. Sometimes I feel like abandoning myself to hatred, or despair, but I don't because I can't survive the betrayal.

In my opinion, most of us here have already crossed the only line we need to cross. The commitment to defeat another human being - by itself - is something that an ethical person shouldn't take lightly. We can win by fighting like them, but that approach will probably just add to the damage that's already been done to what it is that we're fighting to save. (It can even backfire on us by helping them paint us as the villains.)

We're not just fighting to get our government back; we're fighting to save it from degenerating into an institution without moral and ethical constraints. The republicans would like nothing more than to drag us down to their level. The "moral high ground" is still worth quite a bit, and I wouldn't abandon it for the world.

The fight is primarily about morals and ethics; it always has been. (Keep your eyes on the ball, friends.)

You say that we have to associate visceral feelings of hatred with republicans. If we can show people (the ref) that the republican leadership is immoral and unethical, we will achieve the essence of this aim in an ethical way. It's important to target the right people and leave a way out for people that don't deserve such harsh treatment.

The real villain here is the republican leadership. We win by taking it out. It's smarter than trying to take out 60 million of our fellow citizens. (Keep your eyes on the ball.)

[IwinULose]

116. Some of them are smart...

and some of them are complete idiots. Just like any other assemblage.

Intelligent people do not follow political parties, they follow ideas.

[GOPBasher]

120. Lots of stupid people in the country and black box voting machines.

[opihimoimoi]

123. Smart people are outnumbered by willfully ignorant ones

15% of us are illiterate

25% are a literate

thats 40%

15% are hardcore Pubs, mind stolen by the Pysops brainwashing unit.

10% actually gain from the Bush policies.

10% to 25% are influenced by their church leaders to the point of voting Bush.

this kinda explains his "59" million votes of which many were stolen, and on the Dem side, too many were supressed and thus, never counted.

Its hard to win against stacked decks and the Pubs LIE CHEAT STEAL then they DENY DISTORT and DIVERT

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

124. Here's the formula:

"Rove did it again. He's scum. He doesn't care who he screws, all he cares about is winning. He's not a genius, he's just a pig without a conscience and a lust for the kill."

"Yes, he sure is a pig."

"So what WE need is OUR OWN Rove. We need a guy that can beat him playing his own game. A guy like Carville, who will actually COMMIT to a victory. It seemed that near the end of the election things became one colossal joke to Carville. He seemed to have a lot of fun "bitch-slapping" Tucker Eskew on "The Today Show," but I also had the feeling that he was waiting for Bush to screw up so badly that he'd do the most damage to himself."

"OH, I wouldn't want to SINK TO ROVE'S LEVEL."

Which, as we all KNOW, is music to bloated sack of pig excrement Karl Rove's ears. There's nothing he likes better than a victim who has moral dilemmas regarding the manner in which they will "fight back." Such behavior allows him to continue to define the playing field, continue to define the rules, and continue to open his bag of dirty tricks with NO FEAR OF CONSEQUENCES.

Guess what? Bush DID screw up. He lost ALL of the debates. Remember the "Furious George" meltdown with Charlie Gibson? So what happened next? Rove started making phone calls, and Bush "won."

So we need a GENIUS to step up and tell us how we can BEAT Karl Rove WITHOUT "sinking to his level," because as long as he is on the battlefield, we WILL do battle with him. The option of taking the moral high ground and not "sinking to his level" is UTTER HORSE SHIT.



That opinion is submitted respectfully, of course. There are a lot of "non-sinkers" out there, and I respect their opinion too. The grass roots movements and the Bruce Springsteen concerts are great, motivational, and inspiring.

Given that, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO TO BEAT KARL ROVE? We have four years to plan for the rumored Rove-fueled candiacy of Bill "Cat Killer" Frist.



We need to stop "high-fiving" each other over our "moral superiority" and decide how we are going to prevent this man from setting up shop at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

[VioletLake]

129. I appreciate your commitment too, B_E_B. :)

How will playing by Rove's rules keep him from continuing to define the playing field & the rules?

We're defending the rules that Rove & Co. are destroying. We can't claim to be defending the rules as long as we're breaking them. That's what they do, and that's what makes them liars and hypocrites. If we also become liars and hypocrites, we will have abdicated the only real advantage that we have.

This is about more than just regaining political power. There is so much at stake here that it's a bit overwhelming.

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

130. You're right, it's extremely overwhelming

And the issue is that Rove and his ilk, including Karen Hughes, MUST be dealt with in some manner. So how do we do it without breaking rules, becoming liars and hypocrites or worse?

The LAST thing we should have to contend with is a candidacy in 2008 from Bill Frist, driven by Rove. I would rather see Giuliani or McCain. I imagine a Frist presidency would make George W. Bush look like Big Dog in comparison. Seriously...I don't know what we can do, but what we NEED to do is have the solidarity in this party to soundly defeat any attempt by Frist or Rove to continue "the good works" of George W. Bush...and also any intention to "take it to the next level."

:toast:

[VioletLake]

131. If you can agree that we've identified the problem,

we're on our way to solving it.

How do we do it without breaking rules, becoming liars and hypocrites or worse? This is the question that we should all be thinking about.

I have some ideas that I'm working on that I'll share sometime in the next few days.

:toast: