ABB is a vote for survival but not a vote for change

[For PaisAn]

A vote for Kerry or Edwards may be a vote for survival but ABBer's lose me when they say " Let's get any Dem in and THEN work on change".

There is an axiom in negotiation that goes like this " The value of services is greatly diminished after the service has been rendered."

In other words, if one of these Dems get in come November there will be no incentive for them to change the status quo. We will be rubber stamping a spineless way of doing politics. Real change would have to be negotiated BEFOREHAND. Or they would have to lose and thereby come to realize that their way of doing business doesn't sell with us.

A vote for Kerry or Edwards will most likely save our country but it will NOT facillitate real change. So I'll likely vote ABB in November but please don't tell me it's anything more than that.

[MurikanDemocrat]

1. That's a good enough start. It sure beats the alternative.

[For PaisAn]

5. I agree as long as

we call it what it is.

[MurikanDemocrat]

24. I don't happen to agree that restucturing the Party is the priority

of this election. I don't even think it needs to be a priority the minute a Democrat gets in to office. There's so much else that needs to be cleaned up.

Nor do I believe the selection of Kerry would be settling for just any warm body that happens to be a Democrat. He is more than qualified to be a good president.

[For PaisAn]

28. I was just clarifying the ABB argument

Many have posted that AFTER we get a Dem in THEN we can push for change in the Democratic Party. I don't believe there will be any motivation for the Party to change AFTER they get in.

I'm not saying that changing the Party is or is not a priority of this election or the minute a Dem gets in. It just shouldn't be used in arguing ABB.

[kalian]

2. I still have my doubts....

that voting a dem into the WH will bring about ANY changes whatsoever.
IF the incoming dem pardons shrub or even praises him...then we
know that we have been had.

[jansu]

12. I have big doubts, but it is about the Supreme Court replacements....

They are all old, and cannot possibly hang on another four years. I believe they had "Buyer's Regret", since they said in 1999 that four or five of them would retire, if a Republican became President. They installed him, and they have not retired! Thankfully! Look what Bush has done in placing two judges, in the recess period, that he could not get through the Senate. Can you imagine what will be done, to place one or more Justices? And, this would have an impact on us and the world for 40+ years. We can not survive that! Keep your mind on this and then we must become the burr in the saddle of whomever is elected. Don't quit then. And, start working for the right people getting into the local, state and Congress.
I believe it is this important.
http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_5160.shtml

[For PaisAn]

16. Agree

I'm in no way equating the Republicans with the Democrats. Just doubtful how we can effect change in our party after the fact. It is doubtful we can be a "burr in the saddle of whomever is elected" after they get in. We no longer have a representative government.

[drthais]

14. probably not big changes

but I believe our first goal
is to stop the bleeding

[movonne]

3. This is probably true but we MUST vote Democratic and save

our country and maybe even the world.

[boobooday]

4. We need a real democrat

And a real democratic congress!

It will take years to get the policies of this country even back to the center! Another "centrist" president will hardly be able to make a dent.

http://www.wgoeshome.com

[mzmolly]

6. There will be change, but not the kind of change we desire ... quickly

I agree with your larger point though.

[For PaisAn]

9. Clarification

The country will be saved but there will not be change for the Democratic Party or how politics are "done". Some seem to believe that after we get one of these Dems in we will then demand that they change their ways. I don't see that happening. There will be no motivation for them to change

[Paulie]

11. How can they save us if they won't change?

So, there will be some change. We just pray it will be enough to save the country.

[girl gone mad]

7. I agree.

ABB, but experienced enough to know I'm being used.

[Brucey]

8. Many, many individuals would notice the change.

Jobs, civil rights, environment, health care, social security, international relations, and economic policies would change, as well as appointments and resource deployment. Many people would notice the difference if a Dem was in the WH. Many would feel better, be happier, feel that things were at least moving in a decent direction.

[expatriot]

10. If we ever want to change, we must first survive!

e

[sadiesworld]

13. Taste is not the first priority of the starving.

[saltpoint]

25. Jesus, Sadiesworld --

-- your post is succinct and right-on. It pretty much blew me away.

I don't know what you do for a living, but they definitely aren't paying you enough.

Thank you for that post. Strictly top-drawer.

===
edit: typo

[buddhamama]

15. agreed-survival

it is a start. i wish more people would focus some of their "nader" attention on House races, because we need to win those too; if real change is what we seek.

[babzilla]

18. some people are

http://www.blogforamerica.com/

Sunday morning call to action

"I will not run as an independent or third party candidate and I urge my supporters not to be tempted to support any effort by another candidate. . .. You have the power to take back the Democratic Party and make us stand up for what's right again." -- Governor Howard Dean, M.D., February 18, 2004

I believe that every person has the right -- and duty -- to use their vote and voice for whatever candidate they support. I also believe that your greatest power -- and it is a great power, if you use it -- is within the Democratic Party.

I believe that in one week you can send a shock through the system by demonstrating how serious you are about taking back the soul of the Democratic Party -- you can, in one week, recruit and identify 100 new Democratic office seekers inspired by Dean.

There are at least three things you can do to help make this happen:



Think about running yourself and research local options

Call/email at least one person who has impressed you and ask them to run

Identify open races at the state/county/congressional district level and share them with your local group and this blog.

Power lies in action. Fill the thread with your action. I give us until noon next Sunday -- I know of about 30 so far, and would love guest blogs from anyone who fits this category (Dean-inspired office-seekers)(send to [e-mail]).

Lets get some wings on the old donkey!

[Monte Carlo]

17. No incentive? What about '08?

Maybe I'm alone in thinking that Kerry and Edwards are more than totally lazy and self-serving, but I think that in office or out of it there are great reasons for them to enact real change. A re-election campaign in 2008 is one of those things.

[For PaisAn]

21. I don't see it that way

If Kerry or Edwards get elected doesn't that say to them that the current Democratic Party is acceptable to us. What is their incentive to change? Again, I wasn't talking about change for the country, I was talking about change for the Democratic Party. We will be sending a message that the status quo is OK. I stand by the axiom in my original post.

I will vote ABB but I will do so with realistic expectations.

[slinkerwink]

19. you are absolutely correct on that---we can't let the DLC remain in power

so support any progressive Democratic organizations like TruthandHope.org!

[saltpoint]

20. A vote against the incumbent in 2004 --

-- is a vote against the extensive list of atrocities he and his administration have committed against the Bill of Rights, our relationships with our allies, our reputation as a constitutional democracy, as a world citizen in the community of nations.

It's a vote against Bush's near-constant smirk. His smirk tells the world that he is in this at the most superficial level while his handlers are in it for profit. Cheney. Perle. Rumsfeld. The whole crew.

ABB most certainly is more than a vote for survival. Real change in institutions comes after someone is at the helm, not before. Unfair, yes. But that's the reality.

[For PaisAn]

22. Agree & disagree

"Real change in institutions comes after someone is at the helm, not before."

I was not clear enough in my original post, real change for the country but NOT real change for the party.

[saltpoint]

23. I hear you. I was just thinking of examples like --

-- the civil rights movement. There were visionary voices out there before the mid-60s, no doubt about it. But several of them wound up with a bullet in their skulls or were savaged by police dogs and Klansmen (listed in order of sentience).

Johnson got the bill signed after arduous wrangling with Congress. He might have been able to do it before joining the administration and rising to the presidency, but I really doubt it. He had to use the clout of the system to alter the system, so to speak. It took an inside job.

Institutions and history are too damned slow -- I bet we agree there -- but they also punish people who try to rush them (that's praphrased from a Bryce Courtenay novel on apartheid).

[Nashyra]

27. After the Dems take over the Wh

Those of us who want real change and want to redfine the Dem party or move it back to the left or for those who want it to stay in the center, it takes the same amount of committment and effort when the cameras of the campaigns are turned off, hard work before, during and after the campaign. So if you want "real change" keep your money, time and effort going to your cause and be glad that there is even a remote chance that it will work because the Dem will be in office. 4 more years of * is unacceptable and it guarantees that there will be no change and not a "chance of change" when the courts are packed with the RW.

[saltpoint]

29. We agree.

And I think Bush is on his way down. They have a lot of money but no moral authority with voters these days. Iraq's a mess, the economy's wobbly, and he just keeps on smirking like an idiot monkey.

This November belongs to the Democrats.

[DrFunkenstein]

26. What About Health Care And Renewable Energy?

I'm sorry, but I think you are being a little melodramatic. Kerry would create major overhauls of our health care system and the way we produce and consume energy. When the CAFE standards start shooting up, maybe you'll change your tune at the gas pump.

[For PaisAn]

31. Again

I am not being melodramatic. I was not saying that Kerry or Edwards would not improve the country. I was stating that expectations of change in the Democratic Party AFTER a Democrat such as Kerry or Edwards gets in are unrealistic and not a good argument for ABB.

[progressivebydesign]

30. I agree wholeheartedly...

The problem this year is that people are so desperate to remove Bush & Co., as they should be, that they are settling for what they believe is a sure bet... Kerry or Edwards. I understand the mentality, because things have been SO bad for 3 years under Bush. In less drastic time, Dean or Kucinich, the real change candidates, would have had a chance at it. People are frightened and cautious.

It's like owning a home with termites. The first thing you have to do is make sure you get rid of the pests before they destroy your home completely.... if you leave one termite, you'll lose the house eventually. After you have done that. THEN you can work on replacing the wood that has been eaten, and hell.. maybe you can even remodel later on.

These are extraordinary times. Bush is not just a bad president, he's a global disaster that is destroying the country, and perhaps the world. As much as we desperately want change.. real change.. right now most people would settle on stopping the destruction.

[For PaisAn]

33. Absolutely

I was just trying to point out that expectations of change in the Democratic Party AFTER a Democrat such as Kerry or Edwards gets in are unrealistic and not a good argument for ABB. It actually clouds the ABB issue instead of promoting it.

[kaitykaity]

32. If Bush gets another four, we won't survive.

That's the whole point of ABB. And yes, there's that much at stake. The damage Bush has done is that serious. The damage Bush would do as a lame duck not worried about re-(s)election would be that much worse.

[For PaisAn]

34. My revised Subject Line:

"ABB is a vote for survival but not a vote for change in the Democratic Party".

Many here at DU have posted, in promoting ABB, that once we get a Dem in we can then push for change in the party. I don't see that as a realistic expectation. This was the point of my post, nothing more, nothing less. I really need to learn to be more precise.