What we can do to win Natioally, what we have to do.

[losdiablosgato]

I know some here will not like this but I have informally talked to a good number of people in my town on why what up to the mid 1980's was a pretty solid blue area now is red. Some may like it some may not, but I think it offers a really honest look at where we have gone wrong and have lost touch with many in middle America.

From Many I heard doubts down to abject disgust with the republicans and GW. But most said as bad as they are they do not think we are better. On economic areas of concern the majority of the people I talked to, especially the older ones lamented the fact that they believe the democratic party no longer has middle class and working class families interests at heart. Three pointed out the NAFTA was signed in to law by Clinton. To quote a retired neighbor of mine, a former teamster, "I was proud to work for Democrats back in the day, but now why bother." He went on further to say that Kerry did say he had a plan to bring millions of jobs to the US, but where were the details. "Not details, no plan as far as I am concerned." As for defense it is n=mixed ont eh war in Iraq, some for some against, a few think we need more fire power. But there is still a distrust of the democrats on national security. "Global test" was mentioned with disdain. Many in red states have not one single problem with America acting unilaterally as long as it is needed.

On social issues like health care, gun control, abortion, and gay marriage these do not go our way either. On health care most say it is to expensive btu they fear poor quality service and waits like in Canada and Great Britain if the government control it. We need a plan that addresses these issues and the cost laid out before we can move forward or there will be another series of commercial like in 1993 the blew away Hillary care. Gun control, I live in TX enough said right. This is one big wedge issue that we are losing and ned to take off the table a quickly as possible. It is over gun control lost and drug down this party in many parts of the country. That not only means stopping it on a national level but on a state and local as well. The NRA won get over it. I was told more then once about a vote in San Francisco banning guns next month with concern form people in TX. And do not even get me started Kerry's obviously half hearted attempts to appeal to hunters last year. I still cringe. It alone was a 5 minute joke at deer camp last season. Abortion more mixed, but the general consensus is that begrudgingly it should be legal but there should be a lot less of it. And as for gay marriage. There were a mix of issues here. Most are against it but would be ok with civil unions. But on at least two occasions the fact that gay marriage was enacted by judicial decision not by the voters was raised. And not positively.

In conclusion we have lost touch with the needs and concerns of many in middle America. At least that is how they see it. We can not expect to win a national election and start to undo some of the damage from this train wreck of a corporate controlled administration unless we do. And what happens if GW or a rethug in 2009 to 2013 gets to appoint supreme court justices to replace the liberals on the court. Keep in mind that in the past 33 years Democrats have controlled the Whitehouse only 12 of those years. How would you like it if the courts become a wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street, just like the Whitehouse. We need a moderate centrist, who is pro gun, and who will not dance around issues. Straight talk with clearly defined plans to help the working class. The trust the working class once had for Democrats is gone, if we want to win we need to get their trust again. And going to far to the left to fast will not do that. To put it bluntly they know voting rethug hurts them but they do not see that much of a difference economically and we are not in touch with their values. We need to meet them half way.

Sorry if this is somewhat rambling, but we need to change to get elected so we can start to change things.

[blm]

1. Kerry's been hunting a few times a year for FIFTY YEARS. The media LIES

and DISTORTS what these people think, just as the fascists intended when they set their cronies up to buy up most of the broadcast media in the 80s and 90s. Sad that any Dem would further their distortions, let alone ACCEPT them as fact.

You think this just "happened" in a vacuum? It was INTENDED to control the perception of those working class voters who they targeted with easily demagogued social issues like abortion and GAY MARRIAGE, to vote against their own economic interests.

That's why you heard hundreds of hours of airtime devoted to gay marriage and ZERO hours that discussed the cancellation of overtime pay for millions of workers.

If he never heard any of the details of Kerry's plans for jobs it was because the media EDITTED out most of Kerry's campaign speeches. You would have had to attend the speeches in person or watch Cspan coverage religiously to hear the uneditted campaign.

THAT'S the real world of the MEDIA INFLUENCE that Dems need to expose and deal with FIRST, before another election. The media's distortions allow the GOP to steal elections via machines, because the media makes things like exit polls not matching the results seem plausible with constant spin and falsified final numbers.

[napi21]

2. You're BOTH RIGHT! The middle class has given up on Dems.

They've given up on the Unions too! The Unions used to be a vry powerful group, and now they're almost gone! I don't blame the Dems for that, the Unions got too drunk on power and money, and instead of gaining more, they've lost it all.

As to Kerry and his hunting ad...I've lived in a family of hunters for 50+ years. I don't know if it was the filming, the coreography, or what, but he just didn't look natural. It looked like a staged shot!

I think the OP is correct that most people don't really care if the US adopts civil unions, but they get crazy when anyone mentions marriage. I'm sure it does have religion at the foundation of their arguments, but we can't just ignore that! If we dig our heels in and refuse to even consider any changes in our positions, so will the opposition, and WE'LL LOSE AGAIN!


The Dems MUST put forth specific ideas to fix the problems everyone recognizes exist, and must include details of how they will implememt them!

We can blame our problems on the media, the lies of the opposition, the lack of a spine in our Party officials, or what ever excuse you believe, or all of them, but placing blame doesn't win elections!

I do believe Howard Dean is moving in the right direction, but we all must work with him. We need to work on a way to work around the obstructions we know exist.

[blm]

3. Working around them doesn't work - working to EXPOSE the control WILL.

People won't like finding out that they have been targeted as fools to vote against themselves and their fellow working class neighbors.

[losdiablosgato]

6. They do not look at it as voting against themselve

A quote: "Money is just one issue, yeah maybe the democrats could do me better there, but with gun control, gay marriage, abortion they cancel that out. And they probably will not help us there anyway, they take money from the same corporate whores as the republicans." We have to start meeting htese people half way if we hope to win.

[blm]

10. Those issues are magnified by the MEDIA, not by real life experience.

.

[losdiablosgato]

11. That is not how they see it

And how they see it sets the field. Like it or not we need to get at least enough of their support to win. With out it we keep seeing a rethug get elected every 4 years.

[blm]

13. BULL. Expose the liars for targeting these people as susceptible to their

.poison.

And you are STILL furthering their lies when you accept them as "reality" instead of doing the RIGHT thing and using the truth to educate.

[losdiablosgato]

15. How?

How do you do that when they have stopped listening to the deomcrats? We need to be seen meeting them halfway or they will continue to shut us out.

[blm]

17. WTF are you saying? You're contradicting your other post BIGTIME.

You're saying we need to meet them half way and accept GOP positions on issues while at the same time you claim they say we're no different than GOP on economic issues?

What a bunch of hooey. Give in to them because they're dumb and easy for the GOP to lie to them is NO PLAN.

[losdiablosgato]

19. Keep telling them they are dumb and watch yourself get shut out

Like it or not we need moderates on social issues and an econmic agenda the addresses the needs for good jobs. ANd we need to come out with the plan for this and lay it out in clear concise terms or we keep losing. Period.

[blm]

21. Explain your plan to meet halfway the people who believe demagoguery from

a GOP media machine.

Funny that you have no problem with the lies and only want to reinforce and ACCOMODATE those lies from the GOP and are attempting to discourage Dems who believe the lies should be exposed and the truth should be told.

[losdiablosgato]

23. Lies, I am not talking about that

Try to turn off the elitism. Just becuase you are working class does not mean they are dumb. They KNOW the econmy is not going their way. They however no longer trust the democrats to work for them. The reason is not the media, it is they have not been for some time now. NAFTA, and a total lack of a plan from Kerry. He said he had a paln to make jobs but would not tell anyone what it was. To me and others if you will not do that as far as I am concerned you have no plan.

And for the forseeable future if you want their votes you WILL have to show them you are willing to meet them halfway on social issues and have a concrete plan to boost the economy. That may change or cna be changed, but that is the not way it is or most likely will be for the next 5 to 10 years minimum. If not enjoy watching rethugs get elected.

[blm]

25. Oh yeah, turn your back on NARAL and Human Rights Campaign, just to

meet the demagoguable halfway.

And my point about the media is that THEY Target these people as dumb, not me. I think they will vote for Dems with no hesitation if they are GIVEN ACCURATE INFORMATION by the media.

Like Kerry's detailed economic plan that you ignore just because the media was too busy with gay marriage to give the details any reporting let alone discussion.

WHY do you keep furthering false perceptions that were based in media lies?

[losdiablosgato]

27. I could not find details ofKerry's plan on his won website

[blm]

37. You never heard his economic and/or jobs speeches during the campaign?

How odd. The text of the speeches and the releases with the details of his plans were up at his website throughout the entire campaign.

[losdiablosgato]

39. I was never able to get a clear concise outline of his plan. Period.

[blm]

42. Many of us did...sorry you missed it. Try Cspan instead of corporate media

that thought it was more important to discredit Wilson as a Kerry campaign hack then give voters information that effected their everyday lives.

[losdiablosgato]

49. Thank you for making my point

Most people do not watch cspan. What would have been wrong with posting a clear one page outline of his plans on his campaign website? One saying I will do this, and this and this. Give your word that you will try everything to get something positive for the middle class adn then do it.

[blm]

51. I already said it WAS on his website. All his speeches and detailed press

releases were on his website throughout the campaign.

[losdiablosgato]

52. Spread in speeches and detailed press releases does not get the job done

Like I said a clear easy to follow outline say ion bullet form would have done the trick.

[blm]

54. The press releases WERE in bullet point form.

You really aren't trying to say you never saw them are you?

[losdiablosgato]

56. Where was one (1) with it all on it?

Most people do not have the time nor the desire in life to hunt for this info.

[blm]

57. HAHAH...write to the corporate media, please, sir.

.

[losdiablosgato]

58. Kerry could have had this done and posted on the home page of his website.

He did not.

[blm]

61. You're mad because it wasn't just ONE PAGE LONG w/bullet points?

Yet you already claim that you never saw it ALL when it WAS there and was two pages long.

And you also had an original complaint that Kerry never offered any details, while now complaining that there were too many pages of details and Kerry should have cut it down to ONE page.

HUH????? That doesn't strike you as inconsistent?

[losdiablosgato]

63. Let me clarify

The details were so jumbled up and spread out most people could not find them. He had the chance to tell in a clear easy to follow format his economic agenda as well as any other plan he had. He didn't. He lost. The majority of Americans want a straight shooter who will give them and honest answer, not a bunch af nuances and contradictions.

[blm]

66. HAHAHAH...who told the people that Bush was a straight shooter?

He never shot straight in his LIFE. And it was the media who told people incessantly that Bush was a straight shooter.

Kerry did NOT contradict himself in his economic plan. And you already said you never saw it in the first place.

[losdiablosgato]

68. To quote a co worker:

"It took alot of crap to make GW look good, but some how Kerry managed it." He came off that bad in middle America. We have to stop running Northeasterner if we want to win.

[blm]

69. Really? Anyone who said that after the debates is LYING.

And funny that you think Bush was the straightshooter in the campaign and Kerry was not.

[losdiablosgato]

74. So, they said it and voted that way

Kerry for what ever reason turned off a lot of moderate votes.

[blm]

76. So, his 10 million more voters than 2000 were all wayward liberals?

Do you have verification that moderate voters went more for Bush than Kerry?

[Zodiak]

80. I have to agree

Kerry did lay out an economic plan, and it was posted clearly on his website. No one in the media seemed to want to talk about it..all in favor of what Teresa said last or a comparison of how rich one candidate was versus the other. There was no substance to the media coverage of the 2004 election. It was all a football game, and many peple voted for no more reason than they root for a football team.

If you REALLY want a detailed plan, you should get the book that Kerry and Edwards published, outlining in waaay more detail than anyone here would care to read exactly the "missing" economic plan. The book was available for freee at all campaign stops and free for download on his website.

We live in times where one must learn to research to get to the truth. Anyone who does not does not need to be met halfway, and should not expect it. With citizenship comes responsibility.

This is not elitis; it is tough love.

[losdiablosgato]

7. The sad part is that many I talked to do not see that much difference...

between the democrats and the republicans on bread and butter issue. When the party was the party of the working class and the midle class it prospered. Many I talked to do not trust or believe in us any more. They see basically the same.

[blm]

14. Thanks to the media who twist every issue against the Dems.

You don't hear the progressive voices because the media doesn't WANT you to.

[losdiablosgato]

16. So, then we cannot win anyway

The only way to change thing is if we get into power. And love it or hate it a progressive dem can not win a national election dfor the forseeable future. A moderate can.

[blm]

18. Horsepoo. Expose GOP control of media and the voting machines and

Democrats will win no matter if they are moderate or liberal.

[losdiablosgato]

20. Most of the people I talked to do not believe that

They believe, and I mean truly believe the media is very liberal and that the voting is fair and on hte up and up. Keep shouting htat, right or wrong you will be shut out and labeled a crackpot. Sorry but there it is. Perception is reality.

[blm]

22. Reinforcing GOP lies is YOUR PLAN? Accomodating GOP lies is YOUR PLAN?

Gee...then we should just get rid of Media Matters and FAIR and DU and anyone whose goal is to hold the media accountable....they're just a waste of time in YOUR WORLD.

[losdiablosgato]

24. No, my plan is to show them we respect their values,and will help them...

economically. Look back at when the democrats ruled ing hte past 50 years it was only when we had the working clss firmly on our side. If they feel that you do not respect their values they will not vote for you.

[blm]

26. The EFFING MEDIA is distorting those so-called values. When gay marriage

and abortion are the balloons blown up by a 1000x in the Macy's parade, who's going to note the working drones marching below?

You are a blame Dems first type and ignore the lies of the GOP media machine.

[losdiablosgato]

28. To them these issues are of importance

Deal with it. Why they are is not going to change that fact.

[blm]

30. Have fun selling a platform changing party to our strongest Dem activists

who you have concluded must ADAPT to the perceptions of those who were lied to regularly by a GOP media machine.

I think you're the one not showing a shred of integrity in your argument or respect for the truth.

[losdiablosgato]

33. Truth is a three edged sword

There is what I think is the truth, there is what you think is the truth, and then there is waht the truth really is. I see the fact as this that we need middle class votes and working class votes in at least a few red adn purple states if we ever hope to win another national election. To get those anytime in the near future it will take moving to the center. Check your history since Truman the only democrats to win have run on a centrist platform. There is a reason for that. I firmly believe that if the middle is given a choice between amoderate and a conservative the will choose the moderate, but if given a choice between a progressive and a conservative they choose the conservative. Sorry, I don't like it either but there it is. Maybe in a decade or two things will change, but we do not have the time to wait.

[blm]

35. Uh...whether you noticed or not, people ARE wising up to the propaganda

machine, and are beginning to reject it.

Now is hardly the time to ACCEPT the perceptions that the same RW machine has fostered.

Now is the BEST time to use FACTS and show these people the respect that they WEREN'T being given by the RW propagandists.

Respect them by staying HONEST.

[losdiablosgato]

8. I could not have said it better.

We need new, fresh ideas that meet the needs and concerns of the middle class. And we need to be willing to meet them in the middle on some social issues. Either that or we get used to watching rethugs get elected every 4 years.

[losdiablosgato]

5. SO!!!

Perception is reality. We Need to first get them to give us some support before they will listen to our ideas.

[blm]

12. So we should just accept that BJs are WORSE than TREASON and FASCISM

because the fascists have convinced the fools that it is?

FUCK THAT BULLSHIT!

We expose the liars and tell the truth using FACTS! That should be EVERY real Democrat's plan.

Demagoguery is for liars and thieves and fascists trying to mask their true agenda.

[peacetalksforall]

4. You ask what can we do - we don't have to do anything if we don't fix

our vote.

All this talk is a waste if we allow Republican made voting machines, Republican programmed and coded software; if we use Republican paid techinicians, inclduing foreign ones from Russia or Israel or wherever. We can't allow Republican news networks run by the like of Jack Welch to pay for and consequently own polling data that they can manipulate or lie about and we can't allow Republican news networks to call the vote. We can't allow tax paid police to mis-direct traffic or hold it up. We can't allow Republican sympathetic election boards to mail, call, or speak in person that results in any deception about where, when, or how to vote. We can't allow boxes of ballots to be lost in a boiler room or trucked to another state. We can't allow unevenly distributed voting machines to the precincts. We have to replace election officials who have tainted fingers and mouths.

All your fine paragraphs and all the words and readings that you picked up from your neighbors is a big waste of time if we can't vote honestly if we can't vote honestly.

I suggest convincing them to address that problem.

Because we're just going to get another Dick and George and the PNACers, Federalist Society members, and the Tri-Lateral Commission who will continue with their plan to make slaves of Republicans and Democrats - the middle and lower class of R's and D's and Independents.

[losdiablosgato]

9. The best way to do that is get such overwhelming support they can't hid it

To do that we need to get the middle class back on the dems side.

[skipos]

29. How about we nominate someone who isn't a millionaire?

That would help us connect a little better with the middle class again. How about we nominate someone who can connect with the independents and disgruntled Republicans, especially in the swing states? I can assure you that someone from New England, especially a millionaire, especially a senator, will have trouble doing this.

[blm]

31. I can assure that THIS daughter of an electrical maintenance worker READS

and discerns the facts of an issue and doesn't rely on the RW media machine to tell her what issues are important to working class voters.

You people are AMAZING. You khave known DAMN WELL for years now that the media has been downplaying economic issues and keeping Bush and the GOP propped up to protect their corporate paychecks.

Then you turn around and point the finger in directions OTHER than the REAL one. It's not the Dem platform needs to change to accomodate the "values" of those who believe the demagoguery of the RW media machine....the RW demagoguery needs to be exposed to these people who are bereft of ACCURATE information from a news media doing the job it's supposed to be doing.

The plan to accomodate and accept the RW media machine lies because they have shaped these peoples' perceptions is NO PLAN. It's DISHONEST and depends on furthering the disrespect shown to them in the first place by manipulative RW propagandists.

Respect these people by BOTHERING to get them accurate information and FACTS. Expose the lies and those who have lied to them.

[losdiablosgato]

34. The world is often not what we would like it to be, it is what it is

That being said I have looked at this for a while and have come to the conclusion that for us to make any type of change we need to get elected. And we will not get elected without being moderate on social issues and progressive on economic ones.

[blm]

36. Yeah, and Clinton told Kerry to endorse antigay ballot measures. It wasn't

enough that Kerry preferred civil unions for now over the religious complications of gay marriage....no.....Clinton wanted him to EMBRACE the bigotted ballot measures. Kerry had the integity to dismiss that type of pandering.

And it all STILL comes down to the media. Media could turn a small sexual affair into an IMPEACHMENT of a president. The most gifted silver-tongued campaigner was diminished into an impeached president who was then scape-goated and blamed for 9-11. After 9-11, most of the country believed he was the reason.....because the media FOSTERED that belief and used lies to do it, while hiding the facts about Bush's negligence from the American people for FOUR YEARS.


So, it really doesn't come down to who's a centrist and who's a progressive when the media is going to distort you and your record and your platform anyway.

Except NOW, since Katrina, the majority have their eyes opened and are realizing they've been played.

And NOW is when you want to bend to the liars? No way.

[losdiablosgato]

38. Kerry lost, 'nuff said.

It is not the media that did it. I work in an office that is 50% African American. One of my above mentioned friends told me she was voting for GW because and just becasue of the gay issue. I asked why she mentioned values and religion.

[blm]

43. So. You want a million GAY voters to stay home?

.

[losdiablosgato]

48. Lets look at from two ways

1. Most will not, even though they may want Gay marriage, they will realize the civil unions is the best they most likely can do for the next few decades.

2. The moderate voters we will get will more then make up for it.

[indigo32]

78. My friend

Almost none of the politicians are talking about actual Gay Marriage, John Kerry didn't either, and it's still not enough. It will NEVER be enough.

We need to CHANGE THE FOCUS. We don't need to capitulate. CHANGE THE FOCUS. That is the answer.


Personally I know John Kerry had LOTS of ideas and plans. Noone was listening. We need a strategy to get our ideas out there. We DON'T need to capitulate on our core values which happen to include equality (GLBT Rights) and privacy (Abortion).

[skipos]

40. Millions of people voting for Bush has taught me that

many people's vote comes down to how they FEEL about a candidate, not necessarily the candidate's record.

[losdiablosgato]

41. That is a big part of it

But if the candidiate has a clear plan about how he or she will make the middle class better they will feel good about him. One of my biggest complaints about the way the party is now is that they keep hammering Bush and not say what we would do different enough. If you have better ideas the people will follow.

[skipos]

46. While some Dems do say what they would do differently, it

isn't very unified, and therefore doesn't get much attention in the media. Look at DU, the only thing everyone agrees on is that Bush sucks. But when it comes time to vote, ABB doesn't connect with many independents.

[blm]

45. Hundreds of media hours of "Clinton most corrupt" mantra never made

it true.

It's taken Clinton 5 years to get back any positive feeling from the overall public. Bush's incompetency in Katrina helped that.

[skipos]

47. I am not trying to be disagreeable or anything but

I am not sure what your point is.

[blm]

50. That the media tells most people what they know about a politician.

For example, Kerry was known in the public eye as being a charismatic speaker, then after years of being propagandized by planted media, the conventional wisdom did a complete 180 and he became "aloof" instead.

Lazy journos parroted the conventional wisdom. A reporter for USA Today said that after a year of following around all the candidates he was surprised to find that the want to have the beer with test was won easily by Kerry.

Another underplayed story was that all the service workers in Iowa were polled to find out which of the candidates treated them with the most respect and courtesy and Kerry won that contest, too, by a wide margin, and that was BEFORE the primary results. Media didn't think it was important to discuss because it didn't match their storylines already in play.

Like how Gore went from being an honest boy scout to a serial liar. The media did that.

[skipos]

59. One thing that Freepers and DUers can agree upon is that

the media has a bias. They just disagree who that bias is against. My opinion is that, in general, the media reports whatever they think people want to see. Sometimes that is baised one way or another. They covered Katrina thoroughly, because people wanted to see it. They covered the reheased "conversation" between Bush and the troops, because people want to hear about it.

The bottom line is that the media wants to make money, and they make money by covering issues people are interested in. If the media doesn't cover election fraud the DUers think they should, blame the fact that 90% of voters are "very" or "somewhat" confident that their voted will be counted accurately.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

Don't get me wrong, I think the media is pretty wimpy but, other than Fox News and programs like Scarborough etc, I don't think there is any broad, anti-Dem agenda.

[blm]

65. Media Matters would disagree with you. And so do I.

.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

81. Their bias is to report whatever is most sensational and will draw the

largest audience in the coveted 18-34 age group. Unfortunately, most people aren't very well-informed, so the Aruba-type stories draw audiences. Educating the public doesn't please advertisers, who just want warm bodies staring at the screen during their commercials.

[napi21]

32. Not a bad idea, but where are you going to find someone like that?

I would think you have to find somewon who was at least a Governor. Is there anyone who has actually been a Gov. and isn't a millionaire?

Most common people can't afford to go into politics big time!

The days of Harry Truman are gone!

[skipos]

44. How about someone who doesn't come across as upper crust?

Bush and Kerry are both millionaires, but one was from the south and pulled brush and the other was from New England and windsurfed. It's not hard to guess which one would connect more with the swing voters in the swing states.

I am not going to endorse a crappy candidate just because he may connect better with independents well. But any Dem candidate that is from a swing state we need to win, or a red state we are close to winning, should get an extra point when we are trying to figure out who to nominate. Any Dem candidate from a solid blue state should get a point subtracted.

I am still in the process of looking into Vilsack (Gov of Iowa) and Warner (Gov of Virginia) as potentially good 2008 candidates. I have liked Clark, from Arkansas, for awhile. While he doesn't have the experience in office as other candidates, I think that 1). being a General in a post 9-11 world would outweigh that in mind of many voters and 2). being a "non-politician" might actually excite people who are disenchanted with ALL politicians.

[blm]

53. And one risked his life to save lives of working class fellow soldiers

while the other was being flown around in Nixon's jet to debutante parties.

And one exposed the terrorists banks while the other was making millions of dollars off of them

And some of the poorest people I knew in California windsurfed at every opportunity.

It all comes down to what the GOP controlled media wants to emphasize, doesn't it?

How about exposing THEM first?

Because, even if you run General Jesus Christ, they will turn him into a coward with ethics problems.

Fortunately, Katrina has been opening more eyes to the propaganda machine and it hasn't been working too well for them lately.

[losdiablosgato]

55. Kerry's service raised one very disturbing question with me

I served in the army in Desert Storm. Any man that can get 3 purple hearts in 4 months with out missing a single full day of duty either is the luckiest bastard on the planet or is using small insignificant scatches to get out of theater. A sign of cowardness, this to was a source of jokes at deer camp.

[skipos]

60. Please tell me why the "GOP controlled media"

covered Katrina 24 hours a day for days on end? Why do they cover Bush's declining polls. Why do they cover Republican's unenthusiastic response to Harriet Mier's? Why do they cover Plamegate? Bush's rehearsed "conversation" with the troops? The regular death's in Iraq? Please answer each one specifically, I'd like to know what is in it for them.

[blm]

64. Why did they just START talking about Plame case when most of them KNEW

Rove outed Plame two years ago and chose to NOT discuss it much before the election and instead, allowed GOP operatives to smear Joe Wilson as a liar who was only working as a campaign hack for Kerry?

They had no choice on Katrina...the cameras told the story and they couldn't spin it.

They never told the truth about declining polls before the election. They only claimed Bush was "very popular president" no matter what.

They chose to not report or discuss tBush being wired at the debates even though a NASA expert confirmed it.

Katrina made some in the press lose their fear of Rove. When something CAN'T be spun, it - CAN'T - be - spun.

[skipos]

71. GOP controlled media

>Rove outed Plame two years ago and chose to NOT discuss it much
>before the election and instead, allowed GOP operatives to smear Joe
>Wilson as a liar who was only working as a campaign hack for Kerry?

The media didn't jump all over it because what happened isn't easy for a lot of people to understand. Again, why are they covering it now? How does it benefit the GOP? And don't tell me it is because everyone wants to know about it. Walk down the street and ask people what "Plamegate" means to them and they will probably have no clue, even though it is in the media.

>They had no choice on Katrina...the cameras told the story and they
>couldn't spin it.

Why didn't they turn their camera's off? Why was the GOP controlled media down there to begin with?

>They never told the truth about declining polls before the election.
>They only claimed Bush was "very popular president" no matter what.

Wow, do you watch the news? Everyone knew that Bush had about 50/50 approval rating, and that's what the media reported.

>They chose to not report or discuss tBush being wired at the debates
>even though a NASA expert confirmed it.

This is where it is pretty obvious that we aren't going to agree here. Bush was wired? He sucked so bad during that debate you would really, really have to be a conspiracy theorist to believe he was wired.

Really, we don't need to agree on this stuff. What I hope we agree on is that Democrats need candidates that can connect with swing voters, especially in the swing states. Personally, I don't think that means we need a centrist, but I am not going to freak out when we have a candidate that isn't as progressive as I would like. Personally, I think it would be nice to have someone who isn't a New England senator (we have bad luck with those lately) and isn't a millionaire.

[blm]

72. The GOP has its hooks in the CORPORATE OFFICES.

Do you not read Media Matters or FAIR or Daily Howler?

The control is quite often done in the production and editting rooms. It is also done in the bookings for the shows.

Katrina in REAL TIME made it impossible to SPIN for Bush.

I am shocked that any Dem would believe the media hasn't been biased against Dems at this point.

[skipos]

77. I read media matters but I also

watch the news and decide for myself. If I flip on the news for more than 15 minutes nowadays I will hear at least something about Delay or Rove or Bush's poll numbers or the staged satellite conversation or bad shit in Iraq and how Republicans have a lot of problems right now. The unfortunate thing is that I hear a lot more about Aruba or Michael Jackson or whatever the latest media frenzy is.

The only problem I have with people who talk about media bias or stolen elections is when that's ALL they want to talk about. Those issues should be talked about, but we should also talk about what WE can do to have better Dems running for office. WE pick the person who gets nominated, and WE can help do things to ge Dems elected. That's a lot of power and we need to use it carefully and intelligently.

[blm]

79. So you point out that NOW...long after the election...bias is against Bush

Or could it possibly be that they have no more SPIN left to keep Bush propped up now that the people saw for themselves that Katrina showed a naked emperor.

BTW....curious to know who you would consider a better Dem.

How was Kerry an UNintelligent choice given his unique record as a lawmaker?

[skipos]

83. I am not saying that there is a bias against Bush

only that the media is actually covering many events that don't make Republicans look good. Again, they what they think people want to see.

I am not saying that anyone is a "better" Dem than Kerry, just a more electable one. My feeling is that we need to nominate the most progressive, electable candidates available. As for 2004, I think most of the Dem candidates would have won the same states Kerry won. This election was really about ABB more than anything else.

I think Wes Clark, given his former-Republican status, could have won over disgruntled Republicans and independents. I also think he would have taken a serious chunk out of voters concerned about terrorism. If the Swift Boat Vets for "Truth" didn't exist, Kerry could have done the same. You might blame the media for that, but I think Kerry and his advisors handled it poorly by makeing his campaign about his service without confronting the SBVT head on. Even Kerry was pissed about following the advice of his team on that one. And maybe Clark would have been able to connect with southerners and swing voters enough to flip a state or two. As we see that is sometimes all it takes. He is from Arkansas, and that would sure help. New England senators have not worked very well for Dems lately, and I think we should be very cautious about choosing another one anytime soon.

Do I think Clark would have done A LOT better than Kerry? No, he had his weaknesses too. And going up against a wartime incumbent, no matter how bad of a president he is, is no easy feat. But by now Dems should know what many voters think we are weak on (terrorism, defense etc) and we should know where the most electorally accomplished Dems come from (the south). Southerners like Clinton, Carter and Gore have all done better in the electoral college than Dukakis, Mondale and Kerry. Amongst other things, we need to consider that.

There are other people I like (from the little I know of them) for 2008, Vilsack and Warner. I guess will have to see as it gets closer.

Full disclosure: I voted for Kerry, I worked for Kerry and I would do it again if he is nominated. I just hope he isn't.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

62. On health care, ask your friends

1) If they've ever had to wait to have a procedure done here in the U.S., either because they couldn't afford it or because they couldn't get in to see a doctor before next Fourth of July.

2) Educate them. Canada and the U.K. have very different health plans. Canada has private doctors but a single payer (like Medicare and Medicaid here), while in the U.K., doctors are government employees. Canada's health care system gets overwhelmingly good reviews from people who have experienced it. The British plan gets mixed reviews, many of which having to do with Margaret Thatcher's cutting the budget and outsourcing some of the non-medical functions.

However, I totally agree that the Dems have shot themselves in the foot several times over the past 25 years. They could have gotten away with being liberal on behavioral issues if they hadn't totally abandoned the working class on economic issues.

[losdiablosgato]

67. 2 things:

One none of us hae ever to my knowledge had to wait, and we are middle midle class. In housotn we have a very good series of hospitals. Maybe we are lucky?

Two, one of my neighbors and his parnter are from Canada. They have done nothing but bad mouth the Canadian health care system.

Just telling waht I heard.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

70. Well, try being a self-employed 55-year-old and see

what kind of health care you can afford: pay three figures a month for coverage WITH a $1000 deductible and only 80% coverage after that. I have to pay nearly $4000 out of pocket before I gain ANY benefit from my health insurance.

Meanwhile, my mother has to wait 2 months for a cataract operation, and she has good health coverage, between Medicare and the retirement coverage from my father's former employment. I helped her write checks last week (due to her eyes), and she was paying less than $10 each for procedures which, judging by the pre-insurance totals on the bills and my deductible, would have cost me hundreds of dollars each.

I'm glad your friends are so lucky in your health care. Some of us are not, and it has to do with age, occupation, and geographical location. These disparities should not exist and would not exist in a CIVILIZED country that cared about something other than macho displays of military might.

By the way, what kinds of Canadians would move to Texas anyway? Must be wealthy Alberta conservatives.

[losdiablosgato]

73. No they are both nurses, better pay here.

One problem in Canada, is the the pay for medical pros is a lot better south of the border.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

75. Probably true, and nurses usually get health coverage from their employers

so they'll never have to leave potentially lethal or troublesome medical conditions untreated or fail to have necessary tests because they don't have a couple hundred extra dollars lying around.

[Zodiak]

82. There are some points on which I agree

Gun control is a losing issue with more than red starters and the middle class.

People are not getting information from Democrats. (I, however, would contend that it comes more from the media than it does Democrats..the plans are there).

Democrats have become far more pro-corporate, especially in the Reagan era (and it has gotten waaay worse since then). I would get on board with a Democratic agenda that promotes the poor and the middle class.

On all of the other issues, I would have to disagree. There are some positions that are not on the table for compromise. Equal rights being chief among them.

I agree with the dissenters from the OP that it is a combination of the media and the laziness of voters that the Dems find themselves in the position that they are in now. I also agree that it is not our job to pander and condone this behavior by pretending to agree with it. You either get the truth or you do not, and we are now in the majority in a majority of states. I cannot think of a worse time for us to adopt this strategy.

Beware anyone spouting rhetoric as if it is incontrovertible truth. No one knows what the right strategy is to win...we can only guess. (I have my own opinions, and it doesn't involve undefined "moderates") Claiming that one "knows" what is good for the party without stating that it is opinion seems presumptuous to me.

A liberal might not win in Kansas, but progressives and Democratic populists scare the hell out of Republicans. Neither progressives nor populists are pro-corporate, but I can think of a whole slew of Dem "moderates" who are.