Why bashing Democratic candidates is a bad idea

[PatSeg]

I've raised this issue in numerous threads and I think we'd be wise to promote our choices without throwing dirt at the other dems.

Thinking ahead to the general election, I can picture republican strategists recycling our own rants and using them against our nominee. I figure, let them find their own material. I don't think we should do their job for them. I can hear them now and what I'm hearing could be taken right off of these threads.

[Adelante]

1. Trust me, they don't need us to do their oppo

There is nothing known or expressed on DU that even approaches what the GOP will sling.

[BOSSHOG]

2. I think you are right

The republican slime machine will not use the amateurish attempts of "liberals" to bash each other. They scoff at our attempts to do what they do so well.

[11 Bravo]

3. Why bashing Democratic candidates on DU is a bad idea ...

It's against the fucking rules!

[Grandrose]

8. Well..... there's a whole lotta rule breaking going on!!!!

I have resorted to "Ignore" it's gotten so bad! :grr:

[Catchawave]

20. I stopped using my "ignore" feature......

all my threads just contained "ignored" instead of comments :rofl:

I did a poll trying to raise the bar, but the overwhelming majority wanting to keep 'on trashing....so 2002 votes will be with us through next March :cry:

[Vincardog]

4. ARe you suggesting we let candidates that do hold opinions diametrically opposed to ours

go unchallenged? That is undemocratic.

[ellacott]

6. Why can't you oppose the position without bashing?

That's what has me so puzzled here. There are some very intelligent people here but when it comes to opposing candidates they get in the gutter just like the freepers.

[Vincardog]

9. Whom are you talking about when you say 'you'? and Please define BASHING,

Who said "I just tell the truth. They just think it is hell?

[ellacott]

11. Like I said

There are some intelligent people on this board. I won't bother to give you my definition because in my opinion it's pretty obvious. Judging from your question you see more nuance.

[Vincardog]

14. Do you have a point or do you just like to have something to say?

[ellacott]

15. I made my point

[PatSeg]

17. And they often dish out

the sound bites that come straight from the MSM.

We obviously all have computer access. People can do some research and come back with verifiable info to substantiate their criticism. Generalizations don't convince me and opinions based on hearsay aren't persuasive.

[PatSeg]

16. There is a difference between informed debate

and bashing. I have read things that do not belong in a debate - more the kind of politics heard in a local neighborhood bar after the third or fourth round of drinks.

[rusty quoin]

5. Well I don't like that one guy,

Lieberman. Oh yeah, he's in the Joe party.

[AtomicKitten]

7. The Angelides vs. Westley primary was a blood bath.

And we Californians now have Governor Schwarzenegger to remind us of it.

[Milo_Bloom]

10. What if you believed...

That there are candidates in the field who would do significant long term damage to the party and thus, to the country?

What if you believed that having another capitulating candidate in office would only lead to an even MORE radical GOP rule just a few years down the road?

Clinton did a lot of good, but many of the problems we face today can be dropped on his doorstep. Being poisoned by China is a result of the free trade agreements established under Clinton. The Media consolodation is a result of policies allowed by Clinton. The Iraq war was allowed, in part, by Clinton as he handed them tons of ammo from his speaking out against Iraq in 1996/1997.

Clinton gave in over and over again and allowed the right wing of the GOP to seem less crazy by comparrison.

We are in the situation we are in today BECAUSE Clinton gave way too much when he didn't have to, in the name of remaining popular.

If we do this again and put someone in office who is going to capitulate and give in whenever there is a risk to their popularity, we are going to end up even further to the right in the very near future.

What if you believed with all your heart that putting John Edwards or Hilary Clinton in office would simply lead to Bush Part III in 2012?

[ellacott]

13. You were very articulate in your opinion yet there was no bashing

I wish more people could do that.

[PatSeg]

18. Likewise

Those kind of comments can spark an intelligent debate.

[ellacott]

19. Very true n/t

[peace13]

12. Every time I see a thread title with the words 'Dem bashing' in it

I can't help but think that if the Dems did what they were elected to do and brought the troops home there would be no need for Dem bashing. Please do not say that they can't bring them home because that is not true. They control the floor. They can support de-funding this debacle and bring the troops home. End of story. Peace, Kim