Is Kerry running to lose?

Is Dean the only Democrat with balls today? Gore certainly thought so and that's why he endorsed him. Gore also wants Democrats to win. It seems like Kerry doesn't. I'm sick of seeing one rotten game after the other played against the good will of the American people by The Bush Crime Family just to witness Kerry roll over and play dead once more. Why isn't Kerry echoing Dean in exposing this unelected fraud for yet another fake terror alert? Don't they realize the damage these phony alerts inflict to the already precarious New York City economy, for instance? People are losing jobs, lives are being destroyed.

Instead, Kerry distanced himself from Dean's comments. Now we learn that these threats are 4 years-old. Why isn't Kerry frying Bush? And why isn't Bush being impeached for waiting this long to warn Americans. I'm absolutely sick of Bush and I'm starting to think Kerry, another Skull & Bones member, is just acting out one the smartest lies ever put on by a candidate in US history.

From the Independent:

With an eye to possible criticism from Republicans, the Democratic candidate, John Kerry, felt the need to distance himself yesterday from Mr Dean's comments.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=547432

Otherwise, hes sunk.

The unfortunate arithmetic in America:

Idiot + Perceived as strong on terror > Good Man + Perceived not as strong on terror

...how it could be interpreted as being 'strong on terra' to help Bush* cover his trail of lies and deceit? Kerry or anyone else who turns a blind eye to this corrupt WH becomes complicit by default if they don't speak out against it.

- This isn't a demonstration of strength....but of weakness. Kerry is perceived by many as too AFRAID to confront Bush* head on and correct the record for the public good.

He has people to that for him. Most people do not believe that bush was AWOL and no matter how often or how loudly we shout it they are not going to change their minds. Kerry needs to stay away from this one. No commenting is not the same as covering up. Having Kerry attack bush will serve no useful purpose. It won't change the minds of the Republican base and it won't attract the undecided voters. He needs to stay well above the fray.

I'm sure Kerry wants nothing more that to proclaim his contempt for that worthless lying piece of shit in the white house, but he's not going to change any minds by doing that. All of us who want him to do this already have our minds made up. And that's why we have people like Dean. We need people like Dean. He is a very important part of this campaign IMO.

You didn't tell me you were a Dean-person. *sob* ;)

j/k

:P

But he is a very important part of our fight.

There, I'm afraid, is where your theory falls flat. Yes, Dean's candidacy excited people, but not enough to win once the votes started coming in. For some reason, be it media bias against telling particular truths or simply that the voting public at large doesn't care for him, Dean's methods were not able to win it for him in the fishbowl of a primary. Why would they win in a general election where the stakes and media biases are present on a much grander scale?

Dean should definitely continue to do what he is doing, but with the media and/or voter climate right now, it isn't clear that telling the uncomfortable truths is the road to political success. Now, you can say 'screw that, it's more important to tell these truths' but personally I find removing Bush more important at this point.

Dean lost because, after Gore endorsed him, the corporate media saw him as the real threat to Bush and started a vicious campaign against him. If the media had presented Dean as what he really is, a man of principles with the people's interest at heart, not Haliburton's or Heinz', Dean would win in a landslide.

Because the media will NEVER portray the Democratic candidate as who he/she really is. Witness his latest comment about terror alerts--of COURSE they 'may' be politically motivated. No one with half a brain would disagree with that sentiment, yet a scandal is constructed out of it.

If anything, the outrageous bias would come down even more heavily in the general election. And your theory about how Dean lost is just that--there is rarely a definitive way to work out the one true cause of an electoral loss or victory, because there are often too many factors at work to determine that.

Incidentally, the Kerrys own less than 4% of Heinz in stock and do not exercise any control over the management of the company.

If they were really believing what the media told them, they wouldn't have been anti-war to begin with. For reasons that are never explained, many Dems ignored the media when it came to war, but listened to the media when it came to who to vote for.

:crazy:

Which I've always thought to be a very odd concept, since electability is such a fuzzy concept

so could you explain why Kerry, who won the support of most Dems, should follow the example of Dean, who did not win.

There's nothing in my post that says Kerry should follow the example of Dean.

I could come up with a reason if I wanted to. But I didn't suggest that now did I? Maybe I would like it if Kerry followed Dean's example, maybe I wouldn't.

I didn't say though, now did I? So until I do, ask someone else to explain why.

Kerry should go by his convictions -- if his convictions are different than Dean's, and since they are, he should do what he is doing.

****
It is a different question regarding whether electability is the standard by which to judge actions. That question would influence my judgment about what I think my ideal candidate should do.

Can you see where I'm going with that idea without my spelling it out?

I thought that when you refuted jpgray's argument against the OP, you were supporting the OP. I should not have assumed that your comments were related to the OP.

And yes, I see where you are going

Why can't you just admit you too were duped by this hand-picked agent of Rove's?
Jeez. I don't know who's better at killing threads with logic: you or Iverglas.

the meme "Dean is not electible." Kerry, Lieberman, Gephardt, and other Establishment Dems parroted that meme.

A lie said often enough sounds like the truth and the Media moguls, who backed Kerry's campagin after Dean said he favored breaking the Media monopolies, helped Kerry by constantly repeating that inane meme.

This is another reason why I have no respect for Kerry and his ilk.

They didn't believe the media when it was pushing for war, so why did they believe the media when it pushed against Dean?

Kerry wasn't horrible on the issues, but he certainly to my mind was not as correct as Dean on the Iraq situation. But again, it's so hard to figure out exactly WHAT was the big characteristic that turned the election to one candidate.

Dean might well have won. As I have often said, and will continue to say....Iowa chose our nominee all by itself. One small state.

Sorry, but I never got to vote for Dean when it counted. Neither did the people in NY and CA. Last I heard we have pretty big populations.

Iowa choose our nominee.

If candidates were measured by the quality of their platform, in my view Kucinich would have won. But these kinds of imaginary scenarios don't really count for much. Candidates, if they want to win, have to make use of the current political system. The way IA and NH build momentum for a candidate is part of that system.

It is just wrong. It can be changed.

When a team loses a football game, they don't blame the game itself. If he could only be appreciated by a primary system that doesn't currently exist, he was doomed to failure anyway. I don't believe that's the case--I think Dean was capable of rising above the limitations of the system, but he just didn't quite pull it off.

.

Kerry should really join the GOP if he wants to win.

Or at least try and appeal to Repubs because he knows the GOP is actively, and in some cases legally removing Democratic voters from the rolls.

Screw trying to change the facts and screw trying to reach out to democrats because there won't be many left if the GOP continues with its plans.


Your logic allows you to conform to the ABB platform while hoping your guy gets the most votes without having to promise those damn liberal anything to win.

Maybe it was the 'play to the system' part.

If you want a candidate to 'play by the rules', or within the system then Kerry should have run against Bush in the GOP primaries.

The system has been corrupted to the core by the corporate elite and the Repubs. Does an honest decent Liberal candidate need to lie, cheat, and steal to compete.

Are you saying that Kerry should say what he needs to say to get elected, then govern as he sees fit?

Do you suggest that Kerry send his henchmen out to say the things he can't, all the while avoiding the serious issues he differs with Bush on?

If thats the case not only is Kerry proving the RW talking points, he sets us all up for another 4 years of this farce that is US politics.

(Like a track athlete that knows his entire competition on the track is using steroids, he can complete honestly and cleanly but he will never win. If he decided to take them to win so that once a winner he could change the system, he would loose all credibility.)

All candidates compromise, and Dean is no exception. He compromised on Vermont's environmental integrity when he made deals on regulations with large corporations like IBM and others; he compromised on the ideal of equal rights because he supports civil unions over marriage for gays--this doesn't make him bad, and it doesn't even make him unique, but it does show that he has compromised himself to the system in order to be elected and do some good. There is no black and white measure of this, where there are white hat politicians who never compromise and black hats who are fully compromised, so to speak. That is a silly way to view the world, because no politician will ever meet that standard if you are viewing them objectively.

Get serious.

Alienate the very people he needs to win? The outcome of this election will not be determined by the Democratic or Republican base. The election will be decided by independents and those with little interest in politics. Kerry has to tread lightly. Other Democrats like Dean and Gore are the attack dogs. That's as it should be.

without directly being tied to him. The RW has people all over the place spouting truly crazy ideas (see my "Kerry self-inflicted wounds?" thread) so having Dean out saying not only what turned out to be true but just out there it good for Kerry. He doesn't have to endorse or negate what Dean said but he wants him out there much like how neither Kerry nor Clark killed off the AWOL story-they let it go on.

Dean is attack dog while Kerry is trying to attract undecidedes. He can't do that by appearing too extreme. Also he does not want to run a negative campaign. The true Dems are already in Kerry's corner. He does not need to fight for those votes. He needs to fight for the votes of people who may not agree with him on every issue or who may lean more conservative. That's what we need to keep in mind.

the campaign, letting Dean and Moore and others take the heat for making statements. During his speech, he polished very nicely what was said by others.

What do you want him to do? Jump everytime Bush does something? Don't you think people can figure out this scam for themselves without Kerry having to stick his foot in it?

What if a bomb goes off after Kerry puts his mouth in it? Goodbye victory.

the election? And there's the Kerry soundbite being played over and over claiming there is no reason for an alert, that it's all political. Can anyone claim with 100 percent certainty that there won't be a terrorist attack, or a "foiled" terrorist attack, or even a "suspicious" plane crash whose cause is unknown until AFTER the election?

Seems to me Kerry is playing it safe, as he should. The question of political motive is out there without Kerry having to push it.

but unfortunately he's continuing to behave like Republican Lite.

Dean is the reason Kerry is the nominee. Dean energized the party and the rank and file. But he and his organization were naive about what it would take to win the primaries. Among other things, bringing in thousands of out-of-state volunteers was the wrong strategy. Kerry knew enough to organize local people on the ground who actually turned out the vote for him.

Keep in mind that Kerry did not speak out against the war until Dean had been hammering it for a while. Kerry will not win the election by assuming that all the Democratic base will automatically support him and he must try to take the extreme right away from Bush. He should be appealing to his core, and reaching out to the progressive/liberal voters across the country.

Dean said he stood for the Democratic wing of the Democratic party. I'm still not sure what wing of the party Kerry represents.

I half-jokingly threw that theory into the pot when Dean was still in the race, that Kerry's Bones membership may just be so he'll get in the race and lose, so Bush can take the presidency. Now I too, am beginning to wonder.

Kerry is beginning to look like yet another democrat who won't defend himself, or differentiate himself seriously from Bush, especially in the area of war, and even the corporate tax-cut thing he's putting forward. It seems that corporate tax-dodges are a problem, so what does Kerry propose? A tax cut for corporations. I must admit, I'm flummoxed at his lame attempts to win votes. This whole idea of a "clean" campaign is ridiculous too.

As far as Dean goes, I couldn't help but notice his voter support disappearing in exact syncronization with the media intensifying its attacks on him. It is clear that the media really has the power in choosing the candidate, as Kerry was all but lost. They got tired of Dean telling folks they had the power. They demonstrated who really had the power, and that would be ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, FOX, CNN, and other news outlets, who started the intensifying the Dean ravaging just before the Iowa convention, then played the infamous scream a few thousand times, just to finish him off, a metaphorical twisting of the knife after their initial backstabbing. And the democratic voters hive-minds complied heartily, dispensing with their free will, and going along with the media's choice. So, we don't have the power after all, unless of course we turn off the television, or perhaps just listen to what the television is saying, and do exactly the opposite, better yet, turn it off and make decisions from the political web sites, and what the candidate says. What a concept. Like I said during the campaign, whoever the media seems to be supporting, we should run screaming in the other direction. But it's too late now, they got what they wanted.

outsource.

How hard is that to understand? And in what way is it Bush-Lite? Sounds pretty damn simple and smart to me.

Just trade one Skull & Bones for another if he wins.

Just trade a Repuke for a Repuke Lite.

I'm feeling that I was conned into sending Kerry my hard-earned money.

He'll just keep us in Iraq, won't reduce the deficit, and will NOT stop the flow of jobs overseas.

God am I stupid.

Both are much more likely to suffer under Bush than under Kerry.

This is about ME. Let ME repeat that: this is about ME.

Kerry has shown himself to be a waffler, repuke-lite, no balls, no difference!

Forget the polls, forget the majority of Democrats, forget all the insignificant issues such as the environment, the Supreme Court, etc.

We've been duped!

This must be true because I keep reading it on Democratic Underground!

Wake up and smell the coffee. Rove hand-picked this loser to run against Bush!

:)

but it looks as if you may have been. You seem to have bought Roves propaganda hook line and sinker......

That Kerry was just a stooge of the DLC (as described in post #23)?

I wish someone had warned me sooner...

He's being sarcastic

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

n/t

attack Kerry from the left, attack Kerry from the right. . .that is Rove's hand picked strategy. . .it is all about dividing Dems and keeping repugs in power.

:)

Sorry, not interested in keeping Repugs in power.

;-)

:toast:

Take the base for granted. Bank our votes. Move right.


PUKE!!!!!!!

Do the Republicans? What makes them believe that what is going on is good for the country and the future of the world? Ask them . Don't be afraid to talk some world politics with them . I hope our base is strong enough. I see it growing , but we all should be sounding off to everyone about all the shady deeds and outright bald face lies given out by this bush administration. Sorry but I get fired up. I hope we all get that way when we are being led by the hand and placated . How we get suckered in by fear and lulled by smiles and winks . Just give me the facts! But if you do you won't be making so much profit Exxon, Haliburtin? Sorry - Rambling. Please talk to 3 Repubs today and mention Saddam and the Over 900 lives it took to get him . Mention Chaney and how he has pushed corporations to disregard pollution control since his Reagan days and went duck hunting with Scalia and is lining the pockets of Haliburtin. Mention Afghanistan and how the Tali ban are reforming. How the poor on the Pakistani border have sent there children to ha-mas western-hatred school.Is that still going on? Mention that if we do make gay marriage illegal how will they express their frustration? Mention that we fought against the church of England and if we have to we will fight against the church of America. Mention that abortion was illegal and so was alcohol.It won't work. Mention how cutting taxes on the over $200 thousand crowd is not a crowd and are they in it?If we are on this world alone and almost everyone else is our enemy except England. What fools are we! Have a memory longer than 2wks Remember Vietnam yea it was wrong okay - get the point. get out there

had me going for a minute

It really seems that Kerry is trying to play it safe by staying on message and Dean is too pointed for most voters. I feel that the strength of any argument is in reason, but I guess that rational is what loses the right wing's attention and draws them to sensationalism. Dean could anger the R-Wing but It could also open their eyes to what is going on in the real world.We should make Dean as visible and audible as possible and keep Kerry hitting on the major failures of Bush's policies . There is enough for everyone to take their turn.Don't you agree?

Dean, and then an attack were to occur? And the minute our ticket said anything like that, many of us are convinced, an attack WOULD occur! Our hopes of winning would go up in the smoke of whatever target was hit.

No, I think Kerry is showing admirable restraint in the face of being baited.

Still, given that every time we begin to rise in the polls, here comes another terror alert-and they DO tend to bump Bush up-something needs to be said.

Enter Howard Dean. He can say the things we would all like to, especially I am sure John Kerry, because he has no official position in the Party. I saw Dean on 'Hardball' last night, where he laid out the case against Bush using terror for political gain in superb fashion...and he was even able to plug the point, time after time, that with the lies about WMD in Iraq taken into account, a PATTERN of prevarication has emerged.

It will be interesting to see what happens the next time we get a bump in the polls. If another alert is forthcoming, the stage will be set to turn the GOP trap they laid for us, back on THEM!

They will answer the most ridiculous statement of the president and his dirt bag buddies. By the way some people on this board need a lesson in what is real and what is not real. If Kerry went off half shot and criticized bush on the new terror alert it there could have been repercussions. Let it play out and the president looks bad They are trying to bait him. Howard Dean is a good person but would never have been elected president.

I was a Dean supporter, but I am glad it is Kerry running today. Howard is helping the Party immensely with what he is doing for us, and I at least, will not forget it.

I still think Dean had the best program, and I still believe an anti-war candidate would be up in the polls by 20 points today, if we had one running.

But if Dean had run, eventually they would have tricked him, and tripped him up. He has grown as a politician, since the early days of the primaries, and someday, who knows?

I plan to vote for Howard Dean every time I get a chance, but this time, I am glad it is Kerry at the head of the ticket...this thing could get messy.

It would be great to see, but when will the radio talkers be held accountable for their blasts. Each show should have consumer's labels " HAZARDOUS TO DEMOCRACY"

conglomerates need busted up into no more than 5% ownership units, etc...

We have a lot of work to do, and worse, can't even begin, until we start to win.

is accuse Bush of holding valuable information for 4 years and jeopardize the safety of Americans. He isn't even doing that.

...been privy to the intelligence briefings where the information was discussed.

To combat terrorism, and that with Kerry as President the terrorists will have the upper hand because the Democrats don't know how to fight terrorism....or something to that effect.

Lets let this thing play out-if we can get the public asking questions about the timing of these alerts, which is EXTREMELY SUSPICIOUS, we may have cooked Bush's goose.

The main thing is to get them stopped from using these alerts to kill our upward movement in the polls.

Just remember, our leadership knows everything WE DO, and probably a whole lot more.

NT

And Mr. Dean appears to be providing Mr. Kerry political
cover on the left, which Kerry is making some use of.

People need to take valium and calm down. This is going to
take a long time, it's not a one shot, pick the perfect guy,
and go back to playing video games kind of deal. Whomever is
in the White House, we are going to have to keep holding his
feet to the fire for years to come, it's up to us, not some
politician.

happens and then say JK is weak on terror because we would have ignored those warnings and let this attack happen. He is doing the right thing.

November 3rd...If something happens or Bush captures Osama, then what cards does Kerry have left to play? I think he's doing OK with this issue...However, I do htink he should start downplaying the capture of al Qaeda operatives at this late date. They should have been captured months or years ago. Now, we have other problems that trump Osama capture.

a snip from one of yours to highlight how badly Kerry jazzed things up WRT answering the 87 billion question, as you did a good job of succinctly summing it up

Hey! We're all human. We have our good days and bad days. Nobody has the perfect answer all the time...Monday morning quarterbacking is easy.

based on how horribly they've handled some key questions, like the 87 billion one, and it raised points by other people, including some very strong ones that I don't know what I'm talking about

may be, but look at how the press has been treating him since the speech, and how they've still been loathe to come out swinging, the lack of support for Dean a prime example, even though he's a HUNDRED fricking per cent CORRECT

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2129788

EDIT: can you say Dugorekis?

...included on whatever was learned that sparked the NYC warnings as part of his official duties; I have no idea what he saw and he cannot talk about it anyway. If he abused his security clearance and talked about the findings I would not be interested in voting for him.

Mustn't turn off the swing voters.

a lot of progressives instead. and I am SICK of being taken for granted.

He is trying the moderate tone for you and all of us. We see what wrong with Bush's America . We are Democrats. We are listeners and we will not ignore you . Get tough . Get strong for Kerry for all of us. We are here for you.

I feel so used by this "liberal" candidate that was foisted upon us by Rove and the media. I just feel stupid that I didn't see him for the liberal he is. Maybe I was projecting something more progressive onto him, you know, HOPING that he'd somehow be different than Bush.

What a dunce!

I'm so sick of seeing pictures of Kerry rallies where tens of thousands of people show up when I KNOW that none of those thousands are as progressive as I am. It's just a bunch of unenthusiastic moderates who wait for hours for Kerry to appear.

Talk about know-nothing sheeple... They've had their own wool pulled over their eyes!
When George is elected maybe they'll wake up.
Morans.

Calm down! The simple fact is that the general population is moderate. Extreme leaning candidates will not fare well. Just look at El Busho. He ran as a moderate conservative, and once elected moved to the extreme right. That has not gone over well has it? He came out of 9-11 looking like re-election was a given. That momentum carried over to 2002 then slowed and ultimately stopped. The man's gone too far to the right and it's costing him now. To rant and rave because a candidate doesn't openly lean your direction is really...well...silly. This is an all or nothing dilemma my friend. We either accept the political process for what it is, and play the game the way it must be played; or we vote for the Ralph Nader's of the world and complain for another 4 years.

You probably haven't seen my tongue firmly planted in-cheek.

Welcome to DU!

I have been a reader of this forum for a couple of years. Thanks for the welcome. Glad to be here!:toast:

Even if Kerry may not be perfect Get it straight We have to change this Administration . The Principles we share are bigger than one man. We have to set things back in the correct direction. Greed and power is not our motto. Fear is not in our books . We have seen the last 3 years. Even if what you say has a shred of truth. I see the people around him and I see you and me and I see a better future. Be strong . We the people.

the swing voter is a myth as grand as Osama.

If the democrats and Kerry were truly worried about losing the swing voter they would mobilize and motivate the 50% of eligible voters that do not vote.

Period. End of story.

Swing voter pandering = Con job managed by the corporate elite to maintain the status quo.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/04/politics/04terror.htm

That's why Kerry isn't jumping all over Bush* and Ridge right now.

He's playing it very smart - and seems to be making the right decisions.

On edit: There are already plenty of people asking about their honesty in this. McLellan was asked at the press confernece today about it. Just asking the question tarnishes this administration.

There's no need for Kerry to risk looking vitriolic and partisan - and looking like he's using terrorism for political purposes - while Bush* only wants to protect us.

as attack dog right now. Kerry made the point of saying that he's going to take the high road in this election. It makes sense to let others do the more visceral attacks on the administration, and it is quite common in election years. Cheney plays this role for Bush, but Edwards will not do it for Kerry. This is why Dean has "balls". He has nothing to lose.

I feel Howard is true to his convictions . He is the bulldog.Kerry must make best use of it. I would love to wake up this nation too.
But it's so easy to be brought down when you put your honesty out there in an excitable way. Right Howard? AAAARGH

Kerry is just letting Dean fill his role while taking the higher ground.
Dean has nothing to loose saying things like that and meanwhile Kerry can benefit from Dean saying what has to be said.

Its a win/win situation.

<sarcasm off>

Fercripesake, he's sticking to the high road and letting surrogates like Dr. Dean do the dirty work. What would you have him do - get labelled a conspiracy nut and tank his candidacy??

Think about it - you never hear Dubya floating the hard-edged stuff. He has O'Reilly and Gillespie and other surrogates to get their hands dirty for him. It's about time the good guys figured out how this works.

Most comments say "but what if"....We need to stop letting them set the terms, and we need to stop being afraid of how "they" will make us look.

We need to define the terms.

We need to frame the debate the way WE want it framed.

It's the Kobayashi Maru, for all you Star Trek fans...

Isn't that what the whole thing is about? They said "War will help the economy"
I said " War is only waged when you aren't smart enough to defuse or dissuade. It's an embarrassment of stupidity."
They said: 'Give the Wealthy a tax break it will help the economy.'
I said "Giving to the rich and taking from the poor is not who we are."
They said: If we don't strike hard and fast and first we will be decimated"
I said" Know your enemy."
You say be like them.
I say, "Use our unity, message, and intelligence, and courage to make the change that's coming"

I'd never advocate "being like them." I'm saying we can learn some good strategy from them.

twisting other people's words

Any attempt to define the terms is met by an endless onslaught of spin that turns even the most reasonable statements that go against pundit scripts (i.e. 'the terror alert *may* be politically motivated') into a liability for whoever states them.

I agree that people attributing near superhuman abilities to the GOP to explain every Kerry decision as a brilliant tactical move are a bit silly, but there is a point to be made about how little ability we have when it comes to defining our message for ourselves. Others will do it and never give us the chance.

There's no hope for us.

<sarcasm off>

Recognizing a problem is important--many of the above posts seem to pretend that if we jsut speak the truth we win. It isn't that simple.

But I'm sick of seeing people here posting the hand-wringing hopelessness of our situation. If we're trying, we're at least trying. We're bound to make SOMETHING stick. Look what we did to get F911 on 900 screens when it was only supposed to open on 500.

And I think it's safe to say that most of us ALREADY recognize the problem without getting it hammered into our skulls every third post.

And if anything I said sounds like 'give up, don't try' that's not at all what I'm trying to say. We need to start getting rid of our deficits when it comes to defining the terms of the debate AND in media coverage. While if Kerry came out guns blazing we would have an interesting battle to see if he could hold his ground and win, I don't blame his campaign for playing safe because the danger of being crushed by hostile media is real. I think some believe we have to draw a line in the sand and fight things out as soon as possible, and others think we first need to consolidate power and slowly swing things our way. I don't know which is right.

"Some believe we have to draw a line in the sand and fight things out as soon as possible, and others think we first need to consolidate power and slowly swing things our way."

So true. But I don't think it has to be one way or the other. I think we need to be smart and strategic and do whichever is called for by the situation at hand.

But do I think the surrogate strategy is solid. We can't have the candidate getting down in the muck. He has to look "Presidential." So what if it's someone else bringing this up in his name. It gets said and the candidate gets innoculated. Even the DNC is waking up to this. See this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2153660

Unfortunately.

This is at least the third by my count.

If Kerry "is running to lose" he sure isn't doing THAT very well (50 - 43).

have you heard of something called the 1st amendment?

I am glad Kerry is ahead and I'm voting for him. But I do have my suspicions about his ability to counter The Bush Crime Family.

delete dupe

often don't realize that the Constitution only prohibits THE GOVERNMENT from engagin in censorship.

"But I do have my suspicions about his ability to counter The Bush Crime Family."

And I have my suspicions about how some progressives spew nothing but RW talking points.

I find it extremely frustrating that he has to sit there and take this shit from *, but he can't question the alerts because if he does, and god forbid, there is an attack, he's toast b/c then he looks horrible. It sucks I agree. But that's why there are folks like Dean out there helping him out.

I felt like yesterday went okay--there was lots of play in the news about the timing behind the alerts, old info, etc... At the very least the doubt about the alerts was spread far and wide.

I just keep reminding myself that Kerry is playing to the middle.

He simply suggested they might be so. I really don't care if Kerry says anything, but I think other Democrats should not be so shy about backing Dean when he is right.

By saying things that Kerry can't get away with saying now that he's the candidate.

They are getting the message out that this admin plays games with America's security and the guy that has the LEAST to lose is taking the MOST risks....it is a healthy mix of turning the tables on Rove and Realpolitik.

Keep it up and we'll run out of wedgies...
I swear, between you, Sangho, and others this place will just turn boring!
(Did you ever see the way Iverglas can clear a room with her logic?)

;-)

She's just as "progressive" as anyone else here

:-)

cardigan sweater and sensible shoes? Progressive my ass...

:-)

..that people don't get it.

It is extremely important that Kerry has people like Dean out there as the "bad cop" while Kerry remains above the "fray." Why is that true? Because that is the game that Rove and republicans have chosen to play. We have to accept that they are playing that game, and play it better. No matter how much you want it, having Kerry come out and say point blank "bush is a lying fucking failure, who was AWOL and spent half his life drunk and high" will do nothing but alienate all kinds of people. It really doesn't matter how therapeutic it would be for some of us, that doesn't make it the right thing to do.

What you do instead is beat Rove at his own game. If you think Kerry's campaign didn't want Dean to make the comments he made I believe you are strongly mistaken. In fact, expect more of this kind of stuff in the next weeks and months. That's politics. And like it or not, we have to play the game at least as good as the other guys if we want to replace the other guys in November.

I do believe it is possible to play the game without selling your soul to Satan. It is possible to use the system without becoming part of the systemic problem. Let's hope Kerry can navigate that road deftly.

Let them do what they're doing, and try not to glean facts from the interpretations of the media. It's all spin and interpretation.

Dean has NO chance of winning. The BEST he could do, is support Kerry, but I suspect that is not much of an option either.

Someone, Please, put a stake into this one's heart once an for all.

Ten years from now, people will be talking about the Kerry presidency, and for some God-Forsaken reason, someone will bring up DEAN!

If Dean passed away tomorrow, the faithful would be waiting at the grave for the Reurection!

:shrug:

I say let's put a stake in people who get all negative about Kerry... that ain't Dean! :eyes:

..he's merely a weak, mealy-mouthed excuse for a Democrat. "Look at me! I'm John Kerry. I served in Vietnam. I talk incessantly about the need for security. I never criticize the president or anyone else for hideously unjust policies that screw the nation's poor. I spout aphorisms about a "bright tomorrow" and other maudlin bullshit meant to help solidify my position as Republican-lite. In short, I'm a clay pigeon, just waiting for the president to shoot me down with negative advertising."

act presidential this early in a campaign.

John Kerry is convincing people he can be president,
and that is all that matters.

We can make him do what we want him to do once he's
sitting in the office.

Look on the bright side. Kerry didn't tell Dean to
shut up, did he?

He can't come off the least bit "divisive" or "mean spirited."

When you are leading the game, you play defense and play it safe. Kerry is doing exactly what he needs to in light of the next 4 weeks worth of 80 million dollar propaganda hits the Repukes will splash all over the place.

Don't give them anything to use and they will be left with bible thumping and anti-gay rhetoric.

...while Dean made all the fiery statements, and look who won the primaries. Kerry is doing what he sees as a winning strategy. Harping on every Bush fault would only make Kerry seem strident and fanatical. Let Bush continue to destroy himself with his own extremism and incompetence.

But most people in this country are being lied to and manipulated by they media. They take everything that's on the news at face value; they don't notice when there are huge, gaping holes in the stories the media feeds them.

Even many Democrats fall for it. Even some Democrats here fall for it.

What can he do? Dare to say something bold and risk it getting taken out of context, twisted until it means the opposite of what he means? All he can do is play it safe. It's better for Dean to be the bulldog ripping at Bush's jugular than it is for Kerry to do it.

war on terrorism and the only way he can do that is by telling the truth about who the terrorists really are.

in advance, I've read.

And Kerry will get to Washington. Dean will be HHS secretary.

Honestly this is standard practice. The nominee always refrains from attacking, rather he lets a surrogate perform this function.

What is different is that the Veep candidate typically does the attacking. But Edwards is to pretty for that. Dean is unofficial 3rd wheel of the Kerry campaign now. He is the primary surrogate for attacking Bush.

The reason is simple. Dean has already been stereotyped as an emotional, energetic powder keg. And he has proven his ability to get the choir singing. Why waste the congenial grace of John Edwards when Dean can serve the same function?????

This is especially critical when you contrast mad-dog, foul-mouthed mumbling Cheney vs the congenial southerner Edwards. The contrast is really dramatic. And that contrast will be amplified in the South. The contrast between these two is like night and day. there is no sense in transforming Edwards into an attack dog.

Don't worry, the other surrogates will be hard at work. Dean has gotten TONS of coverage making his accusation. And for once, the press is backing him up with heavy coverage of the moldy intelligence information that lead to a terror alert that didn't even raise the threat level.

Kerry is by no means the perfect candidate. Perhaps if I were going strictly by the issues I would be supporting Nader however, Kerry represents our best chance at victory in November thereby avoiding four more years of the current criminal despots who are in power. Consequently I feel it is of great importance for us all to unite in our support for Kerry...the stakes are too high for anything else. After all would you rather be right or be president?