John Edwards was wrong to not stand up for Dean but...

[usregimechange]

the public views him by and large as a reasonable person, many have been convinced by right wingnut propaganda (and the media whores) that Dean is insane.

Maybe it wasn't right for Edwards to not stand up with Dean but I think we can take this as a good indication that John is running for President in 2008.

[Radical Activist]

1. No, he wasn't wrong to not stand up for a dumb comment.

It was a stupid thing to say that pointlessly alienated millions of voters that we want to start voting Democratic. There's no reason for anyone to attempt to defend it.

[artr2]

3. Alienated who ?

Fucking republicans? Who gives a shit what a fucking brain dead republicans have to say. Your playing right into the fat fuck roves hands by even mentioning it.

[Radical Activist]

7. So you don't want to win?

Some of us think the idea behind winning an election is to convince people on the other side to switch over and vote for our side. I guess we should take your advice and never get another Democrat elected President again because its more fun to insult people. :eyes:

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

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

[Radical Activist]

6. Pretty weak comparison

Posting anonymously on DU is a far cry from being DNC chair and having a public voice. Get real.

[AntiCoup2K4]

9. Would Che be worried about keeping the REPUBLICAN vote?

My Cuban history is a little rusty, but I don't seem to remember him being all that concerned about what Batista supporters thought about him, Fidel, or the Revolution.

[Radical Activist]

15. Does Che have ANYTHING to do with this conversation?

Way to avoid the point!
Insulting the enemy is a good idea when you're trying to kill eachother, but not such a great tactic when you want to win them over to your side peacefully. See the difference?

[ultraist]

27. LOL!

"See the difference?" :rofl:

Apparently, they do not. Let's go ahead and alienate MILLIONS of voters by calling them all lazy and corrupt. What a sophisticated strategy. NOT.

Thankfully, Dean CORRECTED himself, once again. Sheesh. Reminds me of the rebel flag comment. I CRINGED when I heard him say that and held my breath until he APOLOGIZED.

[Radical Activist]

10. And Dean wasn't talking about right wing fascists who stole the election

He said "republicans" and a lot of people who sometimes vote Republican but might vote Democrat, will take offense to being told they have never worked a day in their life. Can you tell me how insulting the average voter is supposed to win elections? Can you?

[AntiCoup2K4]

13. Let's take a long walk off the "out of context pier", why don't we?

His reference was to the "leaders" of the Republican party. People like Bush Jr & Cheney, who literally have never worked a day in their lives, and therefore have no concept of what it would mean to stand in a line for hours in order to vote.

[Radical Activist]

16. He said leaders on CNN

but not in his other quote. That's the problem.

[ultraist]

29. He CORRECTED himself and said, I "should have said leaders"

Dean is a loose canon at times. Is this a SURPRISE to some?

Do you think we can win by calling VOTERS lazy and corrupt? It's simply STUPID to insult voters! Dean can insult the radical right wing as much as he likes but VOTERS who MAY VOTE FOR A DEM?

The whole goal is to WIN OVER VOTERS.

[Tomee450]

34. George Lakoff said

on C-Span that he was present when Dean made his remarks. He said Dean's comments were taken out of context, that Dean was referring to Republican politicians. This is just another attempt by the media to try to make Dean ineffective. Unfortunately, they are being aided by some Democrats.

[XemaSab]

14. He didn't say that they'd never worked

he said that many of them have never made an honest living, which is entirely different.

Please, if you're going to bash, at least get the quote right.

[Radical Activist]

19. LOL oh yes so different!

Ok, I didn't quote it exactly, but they are both equally insulting and have the same intent.

I have some friends who vote Republican and while I think they are misguided politically I know that many of them are hard working decent people. Why should I stand by Dean as he insults good people I know?

[XemaSab]

21. They're not equally insulting at all

"most Republicans have never held jobs" is different than "quite a few republicans are so wealthy they have no concept of a job you actually have to BE at, instead of standing in line at the polls for 8 hours."

Do you think it's ok for voters to stand in line for 8 hours? Could you take time off from YOUR job to stand in line for 8 hours to vote?

[Radical Activist]

22. oh nice bait and switch

but we both know that isn't the quote this is about.

[XemaSab]

33. Pardon?

Which quote are we talking about? And what was the context of the quote?

[ultraist]

30. In other words, these voters are lazy and corrupt. Ok, that'll win em over

LMAO! We need to WOO voters to our party, not DRIVE THEM AWAY with needless insults.

LIKEABILITY factor is important. How do you think the shrub won for fucks sake? On his intelligence? HA!

[Lone_Star_Dem]

12. RA, Just to clarify which version of his comment are you referring to?

Deans quote: "Republicans, I guess, can do that
because a lot of them have never made an honest living
in their lives."


AP's interpretation of Deans quote: Dean has said Republicans never made an honest living in their lives.

Or both?

[Radical Activist]

18. Saying "a lot" of Republicans have never made an honest living

is insulting to "a lot" of potential Democratic voters that we could be getting to swing to us in '06. There's no reason to stand by such a dumb comment that hurts us in the next election.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

23. I'm not jumping on you

I just wanted to make sure I understood your stance. The context of the statement was a vital part of understanding it.

For what it's worth, I think before any public statements were made by anyone in our party they should have spoken to Dean and reviewed the context of his words. If they still didn't agree they could have at least offered a qualifier as to the context and actual intention of Dean's statement.

[sellitman]

2. You can take this as an indication I won't vote for him now.

:grr: :grr:

[stepnw1f]

4. Edwards did not "Stand Up For" Dean

He criticized Dean according to NYTimes... but if you notice, the quotes are snipped.

[Ksec]

8. It makes Edwards look weak

and elevates Dean above Edwards.

I wish this party would stop worrying about what THEY are saying about us. If we did nothing but sit on our asses and whispered, theyd still say we were extremist insane people. Ya see it doesnt matter what you do or dont do, you are still the same. They will always call us names so why worry about what THEY say. Any party with their history of baggage shouldnt be given any dredibility to judge us. They are irrelevant, they dont count.

[Radical Activist]

11. How does insulting millions of voters elevate Dean?

Is that supposed to help us win in '06?

[Ksec]

17. Because its the truth

I believe people want to hear whats on a mans mind. I for one am tired of the hidden innuendos and hushed language as not to offend. I want the hard cold truth. Edwards has made a career out of saying all the right things and in my mind it makes him look like hes too perfect to be real.

[Radical Activist]

20. I have Republican friends who are decent hard working people.

I disagree with the politically, and I do know some other Republicans that are slimy, but I see no reason to stand by Dean as he supports good people that I know. What kind of jerk insults millions of people he doesn't even know?

Maybe he was thinking about his own family and elite millionaire friends he grew up with. They never had to work a day in their life, except out of boredome.

[markus]

24. For all of his populist bluster

this was one of the few dems who actually got to read the Patriot Act before he voted on it, and did so anyway.

While I recognize his is a potentially very attractive candidate, you won't find my sticking up for him this side of the nomination.

[Southsideirish]

25. It was a terrible, terrible blunder on his part which will not be

forgotten by all in the party who admire Howard Dean, and that is a lot of folks who, also, contribute. I will never give a cent to Edwards or any ticket he is on. Its a shame as he could have been a "contender" had he taken this "Two America's" idea and run with it.

[ultraist]

26. Dean RETRACTED his comment and said it was a MISTAKE

And Edwards should have agreed with that inappropriate comment prior to the correction by Dean? Whatever. Edwards was honest. He disagreed with ONE COMMENT of Dean's. Edwards does NOT have a history of tearing down Democrats.

But, Dean does has a history of sticking his foot in his mouth and the MSM loves to hype this up.

YAAAAARGH!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

28. And Edwards is "reasonable."

Cui bono? Who benefits from this? :think:



ETA: It's as clear as a map.

[ultraist]

31. Edwards was honest and Dean came out fine---good for the party in general

Dean should NOT insult voters. How stupid. Insult the leaders but for fucks sake, not the voters. Any candidate who has run a campaign knows this.

Dean flubbed and admitted it. He has now retracted his statement. Good for him! If the MSM can't get past that, fuck em.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

32. Link to retraction.

And, yep, everything's peachy.