Ralph Nader and Howard Dean's Satanic Pact

[Brian_Expat]

or something.

You're not going to win the Nader and Dean supporters by attacking them, insulting them, berating them, and then decrying them when your preferred candidate doesn't get their votes.

The reason the Democrats keep losing is because elitists like the Kerry campaign insist that they're the only choice, they brook no dissention, they label all their critics in the party as "leftist loons," they dither on key issues like the Iraq War, they tell us to "get over" their most egregious votes, and then they make no effort to move back to the center from the right.

Then they attack their critics as stupid and tell us we have no choice but to vote for them (and mention that we're stupid yet again), and then state plaintively that "they don't understand" why we're not all psyched to boost Kerry and therefore must all be right wing Republicans.

Advice to the DLC folk: get a clue.

[molly]

1. Get up on the wrong side of the bed?

[meegbear]

2. So it's OK to attack, insult and berate Kerry supporters

The reason the Democrats keep losing is because elitists like the Nader and Dean campaigns insist that they're the only choice, they brook no dissention, they label all their critics in the party as "DLC and DNC loons," they dither on key issues like the Iraq War, they tell us to "get over" their most egregious votes, and then they make no effort to move back to the center from the left.

Then they attack their critics as stupid and tell us we have no choice but to vote for them (and mention that we're stupid yet again), and then state plaintively that "they don't understand" why we're not all psyched to boost Nader or Dean and therefore must all be right wing Republicans.

Funny how it works this way too.

[adadem]

4. Thanks for saying that.

Hit the nail on the head.
:hi:

[Brian_Expat]

7. Except the posts of the moment aren't saying that.

It's all about how:

1) Me and people like me are bastard Republicans since we didn't like Kerry;

2) How we're creating all sorts of problems for the Democrats by supporting things like equal rights and voting rights;

3) How we should just all sit down and shut up;

4) What freaks and liabilities to the credibility of the party we are;

5) How we should have no role in the campaign at all;

6) Why folk are so confused that we're not all gung-ho over Kerry.

Can you find the contradictions?

[meegbear]

13. How about

1) Me and people like me are bastard Republicans since we didn't like Dean or Nader;

2) How we're creating all sorts of problems for the Democrats by not supporting your candidate; you can vote for anybody you want

3) How we should just all sit down and shut up; people here have been saying how Dean is gonna win big time and the others should drop out

4) What freaks and liabilities to the credibility of the party we are; no comment

5) How we should have no role in the campaign at all; a person choice to endorse a candidate is their own - but as I said a few months ago in a post, it's one thing to walk up to the table and say "here's my candidate" and it's another to say "here's THE candidate" which is what Dean people have done here.

6) Why folk are so confused that we're not all gung-ho over Dean or Nader. If someone says they don't support Dean or Nader, they are the ones who get the wierd looks.

I found the contradictions.

[CWebster]

8. So vote for your centrist preference

Don't expect us to stoop. We prefer to vote against Bush and what he represents, not vote for candidates who supported Bush.

[Brian_Expat]

10. I'll hold my nose and vote Kerry if necessary. . .

But I won't do it enthusiastically, and I won't hesitate to criticize Kerry during the election. Those two things amount to TREASON to many die-hard Kerry fans.

[mobuto]

11. So vote against Kerry in the primary/caucus in your state

but you'd better vote for the Democratic nominee in the fall, because he'll be the only one who can beat Bush.

Nader's reaction, when he can't get everything he wants, is to take his ball and go home. The end result of that is that he gets nothing.

You may not like Kerry but you have to agree that he's infinitely better than George Bush. He may be far from perfect, in your eyes, but even a highly imperfect candidate who can actually get elected and make a difference is better than a perfect candidate who has no chance of even breaking 5%.

[Brian_Expat]

12. I actually don't agree with your premise. . .

You may not like Kerry but you have to agree that he's infinitely better than George Bush.

Since Kerry supports most of the Bush agenda (look at his votes in the past several years), I'm not so sure he'd be all that different. Examining the actions, rather than the words, is informative.

[mobuto]

22. Kerry does not support most of the Bush agenda.

Sorry.

look at his votes in the past several years

Done that. Kerry's votes in the past several years give him an ADA rating of 93 and an ACU rating of 5 - that's better than Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Pat Leahy, or just about anybody else in the Senate. Aside from Barbara Boxer and Ted Kennedy, you're not going to find a Senator who's more liberal.

You may not agree with Kerry on a lot of issues - I respect that. But you're kidding yourself if you think a Kerry presidency would be even remotely like Bush's. Don't make the best the enemy of the good - vote for the Democratic nominee, whoever he is, because that's the only way you can possibly remove Bush from office.

[PVnRT]

17. Thanks for proving his point

n/t

[edzontar]

21. Yes, it is. Because you need us, but we don't need you.

Funny how that worked out.

At the moment, too many of you are carrrying on like crybabies and posting threads endorsing election fraud, etc, to be taken seriously or treated with anything other than scorn or pity.

I am going to vote for the Dem nominee, but don't care if it's Kerry or Edwards.

But there may be popel you actually have to work to get to support you, and I'd suggest that you try a little more carrot and lot less stick if you actually want their VOTES.

[Loonman]

3. It must be cool to be an "outsider" trying to defeat an incumbent

It's hard to defeat an incumbent as powerful as Bush from the inside, let alone being a fringe candidate.

[SaddenedDem]

5. How right you are!

And you might consider your comments as you berate, belittle and bully those voters your say you are trying to win over.

Ooooops!

[Brian_Expat]

9. I'm not supporting any candidate this election. . .

. . . as far as I am concerned, I don't have a candidate in this race. I may hold my nose and vote for Kerry, but that's not how you get a base to defeat a powerful Republican with an energized base and an agenda.

[union_maid]

6. Um..regarding the Nader voters only..

In 2000 I was insulted and misrepresented in dialogue with those people. "You moderates" was a popular one. "Blind party loyalist" was another. They got shrill and hysterical when anyone tried to explain the difference between our system and a parliamentary one. This is all way before I started to hate Nader. I still admired the man and was just explaining why, regretfully, I couldn't vote for him. The hate didn't start until fall of 2000, but it's forever. Nader can never take back the events that he contributed to, not that he wants to. His organizations do better with their fundraising during Republican administrations.

This time around we might as well come out aggressively. Maybe some people will wake up. Appeals to reason don't work with them.

I certainly would never in a million years lump Dean voters in with Nader voters. If they become Nader voters, however, that's different.

[Iverson]

14. impermissible message

Sorry, Brian_Expat, but browbeating is a moral imperative here, as is giving the right wing what they want until they cry "uncle!"

Clearly, anyone who doesn't respond to browbeating with unquestioning obedience simply isn't liberal enough. Or something like that.

[Kahuna]

15. What are you talking about? Kerry is hardly the demon..

you portray him to be.

[emulatorloo]

16. Brian - you are entitled to your opinion, but calm down first

It is simply **irrational** to say "elitists like the Kerry campaign insist that they're the only choice, they brook no dissention, they label all their critics in the party as "leftist loons," they dither on key issues like the Iraq War, they tell us to "get over" their most egregious votes, and then they make no effort to move back to the center from the right.

Then they attack their critics as stupid and tell us we have no choice but to vote for them (and mention that we're stupid yet again), and then state plaintively that "they don't understand" why we're not all psyched to boost Kerry and therefore must all be right wing Republicans."

The Kerry Campaign doesn't say any of this, and is far from elitist and doesn't label anybody "leftist loons." Why don't you call the Kerry headquarters in your town and ask them your questions and make your charges?

On the other hand, there may be a *few* people on DU who say these things, but they are in the distinct minority. It has been my experience that most of the visible Kerry supporters are quite willing to engage in lively debate in defense of their candidate.

[mmonk]

18. I'm not DLC

but a protest vote this year sets us back, not forward. That's my CLUE.

[maddezmom]

19. If some Dean supporters want to vote Nader in the GE so be it

Some Dean supporters still will still vote Dean in the primaries, so be it. Some have decided to support Edwards, so be it. Some will decide to vote for Kucinich. And some may support Sharpton. So be it.
It's your vote, do what you will with it. Won't hear me complaining about it. Clark supporters were accussed of wasting our vote and time on Clark, so I know how it feels.

[mmonk]

20. Aren't we talking about the general election?

That's where wasted vote comes into play.