If the campaigns were smart, they would hire their own bashers

Like Dean? Make sure most criticisms of Dean come from a Bob Boudelang type character - silly, illiterate bashes that turn most people off. Like Clark? Blanket DU and other forums with easily debunked attacks and smears. Isn't this all in the Art of War and The Prince?

Clark's debut was interesting - every possible attack, from the thoughtful to the outrageous, was posted over a three days period. Half of the bashes were just silly, which tends to blunt some of the legitimate criticism.

We're going to need to use negative tactics to beat Bush and the corporate media in the general election, that is, unless the PNAC types have decided Bush is just too incompetent and they need to get a "moderate Democrat" who shares most of the Republican's viewpoints.

and then they complain about hundred and some post bashing threads that they themselves have inflated to that size.

I wish there was a way to elevate the level of discourse here. I've got about 20 people on ignore who honestly, I'm just not interested in what they have to say. Not particularly because of what they say, but HOW THEY SAY IT.

I've supported Dean to date. But is he perfect? Far from it. I want to talk about his problems - did I make the right choice? Is someone better suited?

Kerry, Clark, Gephardt - these are good guys who I'd certainly vote for. And are they perfect? No. So let's talk about their problems, too.

But please remember they all possess good points as well, that are equally as important.

For God's sake, leave out the petty childish element of this. Sometimes I've got to wonder, are we on the elementary school playground? My candidate is better than your candidate, naa naa naa naa naa.

These are all good men, and they are all Democrats who would serve as president well. Again, none of them are perfect. But let's keep their mistakes in perspective.

And most importantly, what I'd really like to see is people telling me the positives of their own choice for president. So often, while I'm reading yet another thread posted by the same person bashing the same candidate for the same thing again, I ask myself, if only they put this much energy into telling me what's good about their candidate.

only correction I would make is that they may well be volunteers as opposed to on the payroll simply because the big money is not in the bank yet.

that never occurred to me. Really, things would make a bit more sense this way. Because it's baffled me how someone could be so obsessed with dissing someone that they'd keep it up morning, noon, and night. It's unreal. So if some of these people are plants, it would at least make a little sense.

seriously. They had to neutralize anti-military bashes coming from certain groups, so they did it with gusto, and now we're all sick of hearing it.

Well, if the Clark campaign is smart, that's what they did, otherwise they just got lucky.

he knew that the Clark juggernaut needed to get roughed up upon entry. But to be fair, Clark seems to have gone out of his way to create baggage and bulls eyes on his major body masses. It has been pretty easy for everyone to snipe at him.

agree ;)