My very conservative, racist dad says he hates Bush now

[yurbud]

and he says all his relatives in the Midwest who voted for Bush regret it. He went on and on about what a nitwit he thought Bush was and how he couldn't imagine someone that stupid rising to that position of power--then he said he wanted to find Rush on the radio and that Arabs can't be trusted because of that hair gel plot.

He kind of had a pox on both your houses approach to politics now, tarring the Democrats with the same brush.

I think there's a way to rope these people in, but the bland, Hallmark approach Democrats prefer won't work.

There was a reason both the GOP and DLC wanted to squelch Howard Dean when he ran for president--he was on the right frequency, and if he had the microphone long enough, even the lizard brained racists might have listened because they do notice that their income is declining, debt is increasing, and the people they send to Washington are making it easier to ship their jobs overseas.

If you could combine the passion and plain speaking of Howard Dean with the ideas of Byron Dorgan on trade, the Democrats would be on to something.

Or they can just stick with being the business party without religious nuts, which doesn't exactly inspire you to get off the couch on election day.

[acmavm]

1. If the dems could borrow a little of whatever it is that makes the repubs

rabid campaigners and lets them get their message out, we'd be a hell of a lot better off right now.

But that's only PART of the problem. The MSM is not reporting the what the dems do say, or if they do they put their own little negative spin on the message.

We HAVE to overcome the lack of media coverage. Even if it means taking to the street corners and delivering the message ourselves.

[yurbud]

3. Get Joe Trippi in charge of media strategy

[RamboLiberal]

10. Hate to disagree - I think Trippi is highly overrated

and one reason Dean imploded. Of course it didn't help that the MSM seemed on a mission to destroy Dean. If I wanted to attract the male white vote that goes Repub one person I'd get is Mudcat Saunders - he knows how to connect with Southern, NASCAR, NRA, voters.

[napi21]

22. NO NO NO! Joe Trippi is one of the reasons Dean lost!

Joe's a nice guy, and if using the internet as a funding source was his, he did extremely well! But Howard was a real novice at National Politics back then, and he needed someone toguide him through the landmines. Joe didn't do that!

Have you listened to Joe on his recent TV appearances? I bet you didn'tor you would never have suggested him for any kind of strategy!

[yurbud]

28. which Democrats do you think do a good job of navigating landmines

without going so far as to say absolutely nothing?

[napi21]

31. For a relative newbie to national politics, I can't answer that.

There really haven't been any national candidates that I can remember that rose to the mainstream national spotlight withas little political experience as Dean did. As tonavigating landmines, I think Carvel did a pretty darn good job for BC. I don't know who is working for Ned Lamont, butwhoever it is seems to be doing very well too!

Think aboutTrippi's record though. Hewas the main handler for McGovernif I remember right. That sure didn't turn out too well now did it?

Again, Joe seems to be a nice guy, but he just doesn't havewhat it takes to be a star!

[Skidmore]

54. Get Mark Crispin Miller on it.

Forget Joe Trippi.

[Skittles]

14. um, acmavm?

people like Karl Rove are able to do things that would turn a decent person's stomach - THAT is their secret

[acmavm]

15. You confuse me. I went through this small thread and in no one's posting

except your's did I find a reference to KKKarl and his tactics. I spoke about getting out the democratic message and how to break through the barrier put up by the MSM and get it to the people.

Where did you get anything in relation to KKKarl Rove out of not only what I posted but out of this entire thread?

[emcguffie]

43. Karl and the media. that's it in a nutshell.

It's the media. They control what everyone in this country sees, hears and thinks.

Do we think Kerry is a bad campaigner? Shit, yeah! Why? Because the media tell us he is, that's why!

We just don't know exactly how long they've been pulling the strings so completely.

There was a time when it wasn't like that. I know I didn't have a televisiobn for seven years, once. And when I got one, and saw the news again, I was utterly flabbergasted by the change. It was not news, it had become infotainment in those years.

[Skittles]

67. "whatever repugs do to get the message out"

they use that disgusting puke piece of shit Rove to get their "message" out...my point was we need to find away to get our message out without participating in the garbage that makes Rove and his lapdog media tick.

[yurbud]

19. figure out what they do that's not immoral and borrow that

lies, personal attacks, scapegoating minorities, military chest-thumping for its own sake and all that should rightly be off limits, but direct, unapologetic disagreement with your opponent shouldn't be.

[emcguffie]

42. You knopw, you've got it there.

I stopped posting on DU because I nobody would talk to me about that. We need new media, basically. The old media are all corporate owned and corporate controlled. We DO NOT get the news.

People who blame Gore and Kerry are wrong, because there is no way we can know what it would have been like had the news covered them at all fairly. They didn't. They didn't cover Dean fairly, either. They worked together to destroy his campaign, or he would probably have won, I think.

So I think we need a new daily newspaper, but I don't know how to do that. We would need some people to work together and write a plan and go after funding. A paper that would remain privately owned. Perhaps a cooperative.

Nobody would ever answer. I don't even know enough about business to know whether or not, if you own such a newspaper, can you prevent yourself from being bought out? Not unless you sell shares, is that right?

Just asking....

[acmavm]

53. How old are you? If you're young you wouldn't be familiar with the

old independent rags that small outfits put out in the 60s. I have one surviving copy from 1968. It was called the Omaha Hippie Survival Newspaper or something like that. I'd have to find it. It was immensely popular back then, and it was very very radical. And you could find a copy in every 'head' shop, record store, passed out on street corners, etc.

It would take money and dedication. And they'd have to be free, or very cheap.

All the young people read them. They were all over college campuses and in the bars.

The thing that made is possible back then was the fact that the young kids, college kids, were involve very strongly. And the reason for that was the draft. They had a big stake in fighting the government and its Viet Nam war policies. They could see through the lies just like they can now. But unless they hotfooted it for Canada, or went when their number was called, they had to resist.

That's why we don't have a draft now.

[WCGreen]

2. He's probably just not going to vote....

Which is really a vote for us....

[acmavm]

4. I agree. That wouldn't be a bad thing.

[yurbud]

5. Karl Rove and Diebold will make those people magically appear

as having voted.

[acmavm]

6. That's when we need our party officials to be vigilant and demand

the ability to verify the votes. A trail of some kind. Paper votes or a paper trail. And the honest effort to check the results.

[yurbud]

16. Kerry said he was doing it in 2004 then folded.

[blm]

23. Kerry did what ANY nominee would do, trusted the Dem party infrastructure

when the Dems heading the party said they were on top of the voting problems.

They were not and did not spend their four years countering the GOP tactics and did not believe in machine fraud, so they did not bother to secure the machines BEFORE the vote.

If it was Kerry's domain then, I guess you will accept the Dem party waiting for its next nominee in the spring of 2008 before it exerts any effort against the RNC machine organizing every day to suppress Dem votes and finding new ways to cheat Dem candidates. Because then it will be that nominees's problem THEN, not the DNC's today.

[sendero]

36. Yadda..

... yadda, yadda. It WAS Kerry's job, it WAS Kerry and ONLY Kerry's great opportunity to stand up and be a hero to this country and HE FUCKING WASN'T UP TO THE TASK.

End of story. And thankfully, also the end of Kerry's presidential aspirations.

[blm]

37. So you believe the Dem party should do NOTHING about securing votes, since

it's the presidential nominee's job to do so.

That's the bottom line logic to your post whether you realize it or not.

[sendero]

47. No...

... I think the person who got pissed on should have taken a shower and then raised hell.

Kerry couldn't raise heck.

[blm]

48. WE - and every Dem VOTER - got pissed on while the DNC aimed the dick

for the GOP. They had FOUR YEARS to counter the RNC tactics and instead they got away with even more while telling ALL Dem candidates on the ballot, including Kerry, that they were on top of things.

Kerry DID the job the nominee is supposed to do. You use him to absolve the DNC and the party operatives who were IN CHARGE of securing the votes BEFORE the election. AFTER the vote is too late and blaming Kerry for something he had no control of without ANY evidence at hand the day after the election is a giant COP OUT by those with an agenda concerned with getting rid of Kerry that supercedes what needs to be done now.

And whether you realize it or not, as seems to be the case, YOUR LOGIC means the nominee is in charge of securing the vote, so the Dem party infrastructure shouldn't be held to account and need not lift a finger now until the nominee starts to direct them in the spring of 2008.

[sendero]

49. You know..

... I'm just tired of hearing all the damn excuses. Your talking points evolve over time but you stick to them like a political consultant.

The ONLY PERSON, THE ONLY PERSON who was IN THE PROPER POSITION to stand up FOR THEMSELVES after being CLEARLY WRONGED was JOHN KERRY.

Spin, spin, and spin until your head falls off, you will not change my mind nor the mind of the huge numbers of us who watched him FOLD LIKE A PAPER NAPKIN, who listened to all the morons around here talk in the subsequent 2-4 weeks about how he was "working behind the scenes" and who saw clearly THEN AS WE DO NOW a man MORE INTERESTED IN PRESERVING HIS CHANCES FOR 2008 than in doing anything that might be a real media fight with real risks. Just as with the Swiftboat debacle.

I see the pattern, and if you can't you don't want to. The day for milk toast candidates is OVER. If you cannot FIGHT, you will NEVER WIN against the Republicans, and rank and file Dems are sick to death of losing for no good reason.

[blm]

51. And when Dem votes are stolen again, it will still be Kerry's fault and

and the candidate for congress and the senate whose votes were stolen.

You wanted Kerry to continue in court when he had NO EVIDENCE to do so because the Dem party had no set up process for securing the machines BEFORE or AFTER the vote and never countered the vote suppression tactics the RNC worked on for four years.

And the BOTTOM LINE to that way of thinking is that the Dem nomination needs a warning label - You are responsible for every aspect of the campaign and the three and a half years we, the DNC, have been in place, is YOUR responsibility, too. If we didn't do our job for the three and a half years waiting for our next nominee, well... that's your problem, too. Now, sign here.

[grasswire]

8. here's the trick, then

Democrats must not give Republicans someone to vote AGAINST. Republicans would turn out en masse to vote AGAINST Hillary or Kerry or Gore or some others who have elicited strong negative feelings.

[sandyd921]

39. Doesn't matter who we put up

IMO no matter who we put up the repukes will create or manufacture reasons for the sheeple to vote against him or her. They've done it countless times no matter who the candidate was. Just take a look at what they did to Max Cleland. What do we need in candidates? To start, people who have real convictions and a real message and who will hammer it home no matter what they throw at em. That plus scrupulous efforts on the part of Dems to closely monitor the election process, a paper trail, etc. is our best hope. Looking for candidates who won't offend the conservative core should not be part of our strategy. I'm also not convinced that a massive outpouring to vote against Hillary or Gore or whoever will necessarily materialize again to the extent that repukes hope or that Democrats are afraid of. There's been a lot of water under the bridge and perceptions of the repukes have changed. A lot may stay home, but that's OK too.

[countmyvote4real]

7. BUT is he still registered as a viable voter in your state?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

9. I think a jimmy carter type would do it.

plain spoken, intelligent, non-offensive, country-rooted, type. Not someone who
who trashes the Idiot - but offers alternatives.

I think you should be proud of your Dad. My husband's parents are
still hanging in with *. Last weekend, they went on and on about
how he was "working" on his vacation in Crawford.

when I ask my husband how anyone with any sense could still like
this war criminal, he says that there is a certain segment who know
he is a fool but would never admit it because they in turn have to
admit they were wrong.

[yurbud]

25. Do they know when he bought that ranch in Crawford?

[tech3149]

11. From my viewpoint as a tired old Boomer

I had no trust in government or politico's since 63. My wake-up call came in March of 03. I knew Junior was nothing more than an empty suit, a front man, before he ever got selected. I'll say that for me, a centrist "no-stand" will have more negative influence than someone that I don't totally agree with. In 2004, I could have stood behind any of the Dem candidates because they spoke to my beliefs on most points. I rated the candidates then based on who would do the least damage or do the most good. That made my ranked choices Kucinich, Kerry, Gephart, Clark/Dean, Graham/Braun. For me, the passion and "plain speaking" should be joined at the hip. I find it hard to trust anyone that can't state their views in understandable terms. I don't mean simple black/white reasoning, but a logic that can be supported by results. I think my ranking follows what I think most important and that would be foreign and domestic economic policies and their effect on the lowest income ranks of the country.

[yurbud]

26. 'can't state views in understandable terms' usually means they

don't want you to understand.

Oddly, they can explain some pretty complex issues fairly clearly and accurately when they feel it is in their interests to do so.

[OneBlueSky]

12. the Democrats should just attack BuchCo full on . . .

a no-holds-barred assault that focuses specifically on their illegal actiions under U.S. and international law . . .

by staying away from the personal (and, God knows, there's plenty there) and basing our attacks solely on strong legal principles, we'll win over a whole lot more people than if we go after "President Stupid" . . . and maybe even win the war . . .

(they already know he's President Stupid) . . .

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

13. "he couldn't imagine someone that stupid rising to that position of power"

Well, um, he did it through people like your dad VOTING for him!! Sheesh!

So if you ask him if he had his vote again, would he vote for Kerry? If not, then WTF is he going on about?

[yurbud]

27. yep. It amazes me now that people are just seeing that when even in the

primaries, to me, Bush seemed like Dan Quayle without the self-awareness of his own stupidity.

But that 'would I have a beer with him' test seemed to trump actual qualification.

It's too bad people on the right don't use that same criteria when they choose a doctor:
'Hmmm...he's pretty damn smart and has saved a lot of lives, but he's black, gay, went to Harvard, and I think that was a picture of him at the Eyeful Tower in FRANCE on his desk. He's probly a commie. I better stick with Doc Jethro and the leeches fur ma cancer.'

[Seabiscuit]

17. So by now Bush is too conservative and racist for your dad, or not

conservative and racist enough?

Or is it that Bush is just a lot stupider than your dad ever imagined?

[yurbud]

21. it sounds like he figured out Iraq wasn't a threat, or if it was, we don't

need to occupy it until the last drop of oil is sucked out as the Bushies are planning and at least half the Democrats seem to agree.

[NewJeffCT]

18. He'll still vote Republican in the fall

At best, he'll sit out.

The RW media machine is so effective at demonizing anything left of the far right that many will still vote Republican as the "lesser of two evils" - I know a few Republicans who were like that in 2004. Didn't like Bush and liked Kerry at first... but, then with the Swift Boating & all the focused talking points, they ended up holding their noses & voting Bush.

[yurbud]

20. My dad was like that about Clinton. Couldn't vote for an adulterer but...

was one himself.

I guess enough people noticed that to vote for Bill anyway.

[EVDebs]

24. V

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1940784&mesg_id=1943680

[TheFriedPiper]

29. Cowards vote Republican.

Push that theme.

Make them see that the Republicans are reactionaries and scared into panic.

Make them see that weakness is voting for big govt to protect them.

Voting Republican says "I'M TOO AFRAID TO LIVE IN THE HOME OF THE BRAVE!!!"

[yurbud]

32. I like that. Think of variations too like 'live free or die'

[timontheleft]

63. or "Give me liberty or give me death"

that one's been around a loooooooooooong time. Means just as much today as it did then.

:dem:

[Radical Activist]

30. This is why I like Edwards.

He talks about economic issues, has the right position on trade, and knows how to connect with voters in the South and Midwest where the party needs to gain ground. That's a good model for the growth of the party. The moderate/corporate Democrat approach is exactly what you describe in your last sentence and I couldn't agree more that it won't move people into our ranks.

[yurbud]

33. Edwards, Dorgan...who else is right on economic issues?

[Radical Activist]

34. Durbin, Feingold, Kennedy...

there are a lot of them but naturally the corporate media doesn't like to give them as much coverage.

[yurbud]

35. We got Air America and Pacifica. Got to build on that

Al Franken is going to leave Air America to run for the senate, but he would be more valuable behind the microphone than sitting through committee meetings (unless he is thinking of ultimately running for president).

[mnhtnbb]

45. I think Edwards makes sense for 08, as much as I disliked him

for ganging up on Dean in 04. But Edwards is a smart guy. He listened to Dean and recognized that he was on to something. Then he figured out a way
to package what Howard was saying a little more sweetly.
Too bad he wasn't at the top of the ticket in 04.

[Radical Activist]

46. I also wish

he had been at the top of the ticket in '04. Although I'm not sure what exactly you credit Dean for doing to influence Edwards. Edwards always had a better grasp of economic issues, had a better stance on trade, and was more effective at delivering a populist message. He was wrong on the war but Dean wasn't calling for a quicker withdrawal than Edwards.

[mnhtnbb]

55. Dean was against the war from the start.

[Radical Activist]

61. OK

If that's all you mean then I don't think Edwards has been taking ques from Dean who still hasn't called for a quick withdrawal like Edwards has. At this point, Edwards has a stronger position in opposition to the war than Dean. If anything, Edwards learned from Kucinich, who he has a relationship with, and who called for a withdrawal from Iraq during the primary when Dean was still saying we should stay there for several more years.

[timontheleft]

64. "always had a better grasp of economic issues"

That's because he was "the son of a mill-worker" (in case you hadn't heard :) )

It's amazing how people from modest beginnings can relate to the "average American" (this should be obvious to anyone). That was B Clinton's biggest strength as well. IMHO that single characteristic is our biggest hope for change.

[blm]

52. Why? You think the media and the voting machines would have decided to

become fair and secure if only Edwards was at the top of the ticket? Did Bush best Kerry in some way I never saw or did the media and the vote rigging help him every step of the way?

BTW - You know how many national security type Dems complained that Edwards needed to be replaced by a VP who also had strong experience and security creds?

The whole idea that someone else WOULDN'T have had the media protecting Bush or would have had a great DNC team securing the machines so there would be no stolen vote is absurd. They were ALL stuck with the same circumstances and now we are all much clearer about what those circumstances entail.

[mnhtnbb]

56. Swiftboating the VP candidate might not have been so important;

Edwards is a much more engaging speaker than Kerry. There would have been more focus on Edwards. Up from mill worker, yadayada. It's tough to know, but Edwards just might have played better in the south than Kerry, that damn yankee, ever had a chance of doing.

[blm]

58. Edwards is engaging in small doses and the 2004 race has improved his

overall skills, but try to be accurate in your recall - When Edwards tried to deliver that one tough line at his convention speech it fell flat.

And "engaging" can also be used by the media to spin a lawmaker into a person of LESS gravitas, as even Jon Stewart has done to Edwards very unfairly, more than a few times.

And I don't buy the southern strategist crap - they spew BS about the south so they don't deal with the REAL problems that don't pay their DC mortgages - the GOP control of media and voting machines.

The strategists LIE for the bigger paychecks they can get from steering the party to the center.

I saw with my own eyes that the strategists lie about Kerry and other Northern Dems.

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/local/15262695.htm

[mnhtnbb]

60. Pardon me, but I live in NC. Local Republicans who supported

Edwards for Senator were pissed when he started running around chasing the Dem nomination for President in 2003. BUT, he did take the SC primary.

I am not an Edwards fan. I liked Dean. However, I'd take Edwards over Hillary in a heartbeat.

[blm]

66. I live in NC, too. I am fine with Edwards - I just don't think it serves a

purpose for Democrats to believe southern strategists who lie about northerners and dismiss election fraud as they have been doing.

[Cha]

38. That's great news! lie-berman

is the poster boy for the bush "Hallmark card".





lieman: "Be still my !"

[Lusted4]

40. The best way to show them the light, is

to convince them to get an alternative view point.
Suggest to him he might like to listen to lets say, Jerry Springer or Tom Hartman etc.
These people have to draw there own conclusions. And they will, when they start hearing the facts.
If you push them to hard or are combative with them, they will not hear the message.
It is to painful to realize you were wrong when it is being pointed out to you. He is signaling he is ready to listen.

[timontheleft]

65. EXCELLENT POINT!! nt

:dem:

[BuyingThyme]

41. You've hit on why the Pukes use the "Dems hate" talking point.

They have to keep people like Dean from speaking honestly and passionately.

[Snotcicles]

44. Dear Dad

I will always love you. Always.
Respect is a different matter. If you ever wish to have my respect you must pull your head out of your racists, bigoted ass.

[SpiralHawk]

50. When the republicons trash honorable US Veterans, as they have done over

and over and over, it grates against the sensibilites of patriotic Americans in the Heartland and elsewhere.

I know I am sick of it. And lots of people I know and talk with the heartland are sick of it, too.

The republicans should just SHUT THE FUCK UP and stop denigrating our US Veterans -- and stop chipping away at their benefits as well.

the republicons demonstrate that they have no honor and no respect when they Trash Talk our Veterans.

[begin_within]

57. But he's still conservative and racist, right, so then what has changed?

It seems like a lot of conservatives are fed up with the Bush-Cheney administration and want something different, but that doesn't mean they are going to be willing to vote for any liberal or Democrat... They're still conservative and they want conservatives in power.

[The Backlash Cometh]

59. This is a toughie. How do you get through to them?

At this point, I would try the opposite of what common sense tells me, because common sense doesn't work with them. So here's my plan. What do hardcore Republicans fear most? They fear what they ridicule and they ridicule Liberal elitest. "Elitest," when you boil it down, is someone who is too overeducated to do blue-collar work. So what they fear, is someone smarter than they are. What they fear is someone who can prove to them how incredibly dumb they really are. So, what you do is enlist Jeff Foxworthy and his silver tongue and try to find a way to talk to them in a plain easy way that will help them understand that yes, Bubba-jo, you need to back away from the NASCAR fumes because you really blew it this time.

[rucky]

62. I wouldn't worry about trying to win him over.

I encourage my RW relatives who gripe about Bush & Dems to just not vote.