US Dems too confident in the final victory. Keep united - a warning from Italy!

[demoleft]

I see from many threads and posts here that the Primary Elections are causing struggles and divisions in the Democratic Party.
I worry about that.
Though it is common during the Primaries, I would not go as far in the struggle as to lose sight of your common target: to win Presidency and put Reps out of office.

In 2005 we, Italian progressives, had a similar situation.
This is what happened in Italy, the world's political laboratory where every Mr.Hyde may come to life...

Berlusconi's centre-right government was at the lowest rates of popularity. Italy was not growing. There was uncertainty about the future and wide dissatisfaction with the rightist coalition - and the failure of the Iraqi mission was already clear.

Centre-left had been winning in all the regional elections.

Months before 2006 Prodi's coalition could count on a 5% at least of advantage over Berlusconi.
The papers rejoiced in it - I mean: they rejoiced in provoking the centre-left allies, collecting irritating statements about the future.

Berlusconi & Co. started provoking the left allies - in any TV program: on foreign policies, on ethics, on welfare. They wanted to highlight divisions and provoke mutual dissatisfaction in the left coalition.
The former PM finally made unexpected declarations about tax cuts - just some days before the vote.

Polls were all for Prodi. The centre-left coalition was too confident. The leaders started to discuss about the future - and lost sight of the present, which is fatal for a politician's credibility.

Prodi finally won with just a +20000/25000 votes! Berlusconi had recovered 5% in just few weeks - thanks to communication and to hostility in the progressive coalition. Our government was born (and is at present) feeble and weak.

You Dems don't make this mistake. It's a common one in sport: when you are on a playground and think you've already won the match - that's the moment you risk more to lose.

BUSHers are strong, they have resources. A good brilliant Rep candidate may appear more reliable than a Dem one - if the latter has given away too much energy in defending herself/himself from allies.

Remember always you haven't won yet. Don't move the target from Republicans to allied Democrats, don't waste energy: keep united.
You have to elect a good Dem President for the good of your Country and for the good of the world.

[cui bono]

1. In other words...

IMPEACH NOW!

[demoleft]

2. All that can be done against these ones. No mercy. n/t

[Perry Logan]

3. If we could only get this through to the Hillary haters.

They love to say they won't vote for Hillary. They actually seem proud of themselves for their intention to send the country down the tubes. It's a triumph of the Republican slime machine.

[ellacott]

4. Also the Obama haters and the Edwards haters and the Biden haters

You all only look at your candidate and don't realize that the same division is evident with other candidates.

I am so discouraged when I read the stuff that's being posted about our candidates.

We have one of the best field of candidates that we have had in many years. Many here spend so much time fighting against the "other" candidate instead of higlighting positive things about their own candidate.

I can see this primary season leaving some scars that will jeopardize the unity of the party.

I'm amazed how we eat our won and then pretend to want the Dems to win.

That's what I got out of the OPs post.

[cui bono]

8. You mean the Republicans that will come out in droves to vote for her

if she wins the primary?

I don't think they'll care.

[plusfiftyfive]

9. I will vote for Hillary

If she wins the nomination after winning many primaries. I prefer someone else in the primaries, so, I will work with you after the nomination to convince Hillary haters otherwise.

I do NOT intend to see ANY Dem final candidate lose the election!!!!!! Never again!

[CTyankee]

5. Buon giorno, demoleft!

Ringraziarla per il suo messaggio. È importante!

[demoleft]

13. Buon giorno, CTyankee!

E grazie!

:hi: dall'Italia!

[CTyankee]

25. Grazie, anche, Demoleft.

Amo l'Italia. Sono stato a Roma e molti luoghi in Toscana ed Umbria. L'anno prossimo andrò alla Riviera ed a Milano. Dove Abrruza è?

[demoleft]

29. We're on the Adriatic coast, south-east.

Here it is, geographically: http://www.innovating-regions.org/network/whoswho/regions_search.cfm?region_id=3

Some good news and pics (though the website is not that cool): http://www.regione.abruzzo.it/turismo/en/index.html

Some Americans are buying houses and villas in the nearby of the National Park of the Abruzzo. I heard we have also an unknown person (a US woman, they say) who funds the Park. But as she is not known, I have no details.

Just to say that the discovery of this region is a real experience for many US visitors. Mostly, because our Parks are historically inhabited by humans, they're not only wild. So culture adds to nature (history, religion...)

You should come, in one of your visits!
:hi:

One more link to old pics: http://www.regione.abruzzo.it/museum/index.html

[CTyankee]

32. Wonderful, Demoleft. I now see you on the map!

I want very much to visit the Adriatic Coast of Italy, after I have finished my art tour of Northern Italy. I still have a few more towns to visit!

I love the smaller cities and towns of Italy. I also love the bigger cities for their history and culture (I will also be in Genoa next May). Eventually, I will go to your coast. Tell me, what is your major cuisine in Abruzzo? I want to eat the foods that are special to each area of Italy that I visit! What towns or cities should I try to visit?

Thanks for your post and your links. I am "in love" with Italy and with your beautiful language.

[cobalt1999]

6. The republicans have the exact same divisions and fight going on.

Of course, this is a forum for democrats, so you don't see the flip side. It's not like they are all united behind one candidate either, and the states moving their primaries impacts the RNC and it's leadership.

Not to worry, we still kick ass in 2008.

[ellacott]

7. It doesn't matter what the repubs are doing

We have to look at ourselves. I honestly don't think this is the best thing for our party. We can debate without debasing.

[plusfiftyfive]

10. Exactly!

But we need to discuss, be open, and talk issues, not personalities.

[ellacott]

14. Very true n/t

[ProudDad]

18. Unless they can engineer another "Pearl Harbor" in time (n/t)

[polichick]

11. And none of this will even matter if our votes aren't protected...

What assurances do we have that the good ol' USA will have a fair and democratic election in 2008? The constant debate about which good Dem candidate is best seems like as much of a distraction as the latest goings on in Hollywood.

[ProudDad]

19. The U.S. never has had clean elections in the past

why should we think we'll get them now when the stakes are so much higher?

http://www.amazon.com/Ballot-box-13-Johnson-contested/dp/0899500935

Election fixing, election theft -- time-honored USAmerican tradition...

[polichick]

22. "You get the government you demand." Julia Reed

Americans would rather turn politics into entertaining soap operas that use their collective energy and power to demand a true democracy that serves the people. It's all about distraction ~ even here.

[BenDavid]

12. There is a lot of difference in being

over confident and being cocky....Over confidenence would imply the Dems are taking for granted they will win in 08 without having to do nothing more then half ass campaigning.....They the Dems are not, but they are being cocky. When you know you have the better mesage, the right suggestions and the right solutions then one could be cocky, and thus all Dems walk with an air of confidence and put forth their message and work twice as hard. This I see in HRC's campaign as well as Edwards, and Obama has gone way past cocky to being as I like to call him, "hotdog" without the mustard....

I do thank you
Ben David

[madfloridian]

15. Tell that to the Florida Democrats

Who are trying to bring down the chairman who was trying to bring some organization and discipline so we could actually win.

Sometimes we keep voting for Democrats in Republicans' clothing until we end up with Bush Dog Democrats who will let Bush continue his war and go on to attack Iran.

[AX10]

16. I agree. We should be pragmatic and unite to win this thing next year.

Italy could not afford Don Silvio for another 5 years and the US cannot afford Neo-Conmen for another 4.

:hi:

:kick:

:dem:

[ProudDad]

17. The problem is that unlike in Italy

and other actual Democracies, our vote doesn't count unless it goes to the ONE WINNER...

We don't have proportional representation.

We have the two-right wings of the Big Business party supplying all but very few Congresspersons (Kucinich is one) and one Senator (Bernie Sanders - Socialist) -- (lie-berman doesn't count -- he's another republican in drag)...

The others are corporate capitalist stooges first and foremost...

Our viewpoint is IGNORED unless we drink the Kool-Aid (tm) supplied by our corporate capitalist masters...

I wish we COULD elect a good democrat...

Unfortunately, since our elections are the private property of the corporate capitalist masters, we don't get the chance to vote for one...except in the Primaries...

[CTyankee]

24. I think it is interesting that we HAD the chance to have parliamentary style government

when our republic was founded, and rejected it. I haven't done any research into it, but it would be a good thing to know, historically, why our founders did not do so.

Any insights here?

[ProudDad]

26. My guess

Too democratic.

Most of them were as worried (or more worried) about the "mob" (read 'We the People') as they were of Kings...

[CTyankee]

27. Well, as I understand it, the founders were not fond of direct democracy, which of course we do not

have (excepting the referenda that our western states seem to like so much). And it is my understanding that the Electoral College was a device to placate the slave states. Time for a change to that!

Would our democracy be less or more stable if we had a more parliamentary style government?

[ProudDad]

30. I don't think "democracy" can EVER be "stable"

that's not the function of "democracy". There's no such thing in life, on Earth as "stability". Change is the natural state. So the question isn't "stability" but rather how do we as a society manage change?

I think that an ideal "democracy" would be a system of governance that gives every person the opportunity to affect policy and manage that (inevitable) change if they wish to make the effort to do so.

The system we have in the U.S. denies that opportunity to large sectors of "We the People". It was structured to perform that function of denial and does it quite well...especially in the area of the economy and distribution of the nation's wealth -- we have the two right-wings of the business party when it comes to economic justice.

The primary impediments are anti-democratic institutions such as the Electoral College (designed to placate the slave states -- you're right), the lack of proportional representation (the bare majority gets "representation" no one else does) and the financing of elections by the least democratic of institutions -- the corporations.

It is time to change the structure. I'm afraid that it won't be changed in a positive direction though.

The Empire has passed its zenith and is in decline...

That's the least likely period for positive, substantive change in Imperial process.

[madfloridian]

20. I agree with your basic premise, demoleft.....

But this time we have people we voted for just so we could win in some areas who are going to give Bush everything he wants to continue his war and attack Iran.

People are like me are in a terrible quandary. The leading candidates are being too hawkish as a rule, our Democrats are willing to continue Bush's war....and they are not going to speak up on the health care crisis here.

[ProudDad]

23. Not to mention the root cause of those symptoms

the corporate capitalist dominance of all USAmerican economic and political life to the detriment of the Peoples of the Earth...

Only a couple are talking about that... Kucinich (and the socially horrible Ron Paul)

[demoleft]

28. I know you're suffering from this but what's the way out of this trouble?

You'll have elections and you know how dangerous it would be to have another Rep President with oil companies connections and all the Bush's stuff.

A popular activist reaction against the Party may lead to further divisions and skepticism. And then to what advantage - at the eve of Elections?

Madfloridian, I've had experiences like that in Italy. Poor Representatives elected just to overcome the opponents - who were more dangerous - and, frankly speaking, a PM like Prodi whom I don't like in the least, and a government that has failed on working policies and doesn't make life easier to those like me who work just once in a while as collaborator and are considered just like all the others employed - we pay equal taxes, don't have reductions for medicines, don't have any help.

I am poor, Madfloridian, and my centre-left government doesn't help me.

Whom would I vote for next time? For Prodi. Because I have no alternative except Mr. Berlusconi.

What would you do in my shoes?
I try to cry out loud what's unjust in my coalition. I'm very often unheard. Politics have its ways.

But I have to choose the best choice for me and all my fellow citizens.
That's what US Dems have to do now: choose a President who gives a better chance to many than a Rep one.

I know it's hard, but the alternative is tragic.

[ProudDad]

31. Ah, my friend

sounds a lot like bush and Gore in 2000...

I feel your pain...

[AtomicKitten]

21. Hopefully we will choose a candidate --

that will inspire that unity.

pace su terra