Something the Deaniacs (and Kucinich-heads) need to realize-

Not everyone is as angry about Bush as they are.(and no, preaching them "the truth" about the BFEE isn't going to sway very many people). 6% unemployment also means 94% employment
Most people are not willing to accept that the POTUS, any POTUS would allow something like 9/11 to happen- Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence...hard evidence, not an extraordinary game of connect-the-dots.
Gore's endorsement doesn't mean very much to very many people.

Granted, there's definitely a very large amount of anger to tap into in the left side Democratic Party, but nationwide, across all races & income levels- it just isn't there...yet.
and it's hard to "fire up" people who aren't particularly angry with a lot of political fire-&-brimstone...you're more likely to scare them off, getting yourself labelled a nut-job. Calm and cool, level-headed reason and intelligence
will get us much further with a mostly-satisfied audience

oops- on edit, fixed some math...

people don't like Bush. i've seen it and heard it.

and i've been talking my lips off for months and nobody's called me a nutjob...in fact, i've gotten over 10 people to register Dem who were not registered

plus, calling people Kucinich-heads is uneffective.

blegh.

p.s. Your math is bad.

the only way we can possibly win is by being prissy, bland as oatmeal, and supportive of this Very Popular Wartime President - this is the ONLY strategy for winning.

nice blazing saddles salute....

:evilgrin:

about Bush allowing 9/11 to happen. He is plenty angry though and I think he should be. He's been on the front lines watching the erosion of progressive ideals in our government for the past three years.

I don't recall too many progressive ideals in our government since FDR. Do you?

Leaving aside your innocent math error, 6% unemployment does not mean 96% employment.

There is also chronic unemployment which the official numbers do not report.

Then we also have people that are working two part-time jobs at minimum wage with no health care who are not reported.

By the way, I'm a "Deaniac" and "Kucinich-head" and proudly so.

It is about defending our rights and the Constitution that Bush is out to shread. The economy sucks anyway and we are sinking in a world of debt and a falling dollar. If in fact the economy were fine, we should not be talking like the worst president in history is going to get elected.

Has anyone ever thought that the great disinformational campaigns by the government might extend to penetrating the Internet. Some of this pure crap is by paid USG employees. The guy did not win the first election and now he added war criminal and a hundred lies to his resume plus one huge, huge, debt by his Wealthfare programs for the rich and internationally corporate.

He is not going to carry Florida this time for sure as he did not the last time even after the purging of the voter roles.

Does anyone think those are * votes?

n/t

Who else has even had the nerve to call for an end to the War on People Using Drugs? It is the drug wars that started this insanity of yielding our freedoms. It is the Drug Wars that changed "Save the Rain Forests" to poison the rain forest and everything in it.

Kucinich is for instant runoffs. Most people do not realize that most elected offices can go to someone with just the largest minority. There is nothing more American than majority rule and the reason our America has eroded is because the powers that be can control two parties and cannot stand the idea of a third or fourth party that would require real representation.

Kucinich is for withdrawal from NAFTA and the WTO. These are instruments of industry that now brings us Nazi America.

Kucinich is for national health care. We will need it now that all the pollution is allowed to increase. Just look at how dangerous mercury really is and what is happening as we speak. Now more that ever the individual should not fear because the government failed to regulate the pollution.

I could go on, but Kucinich is the only one talking sense. Screw the media. They are herding your thoughts with all the disinformation you can tune in to or stand. I am anybody but dickhead Bush, but I am positively excited about the message Kucinich delivers.

No one is asking that everyone have the same level of dislike for * that people like me have. However, to suggest that only 6% of the population is suffering while the other 94% are fine is preposterous.

People are unemployed, underemployed, and holding several part-time jobs just to try and make ends meet. And that does not include those who have lost health insurance coverage.

When a country LOSES 3 million jobs not only are those people affected but also their families and friends. When a country LOSES 3 million jobs, it also greatly affects those young people entering the job market for the first time. It takes 130,000 new jobs each month to keep up with the population growth. The talking heads of television were trying to spin a 57,000 gain last month as a major accomplishment.

We need one candidate out there to start hitting this issue hard everyday. Right now there's just too much noise in the field. It will happen because there is a sense that things just are not right in this country.

3 million jobs. Good jobs. Manufacturing jobs. Tech jobs. :hi:

This country is going to hell in a handbasket. The only rational response is anger, in my opinion.

unfortunately, the majority don't see it that way in their opinions.

is YOUR opinion.

HUH?

even after 9/11 when he was at his absolute peak, Bush's re-elect numbers have never been above mediocre. We don't win by running a traditional campaign, imo, I think we win by challenging Bush all the way on many issues and not just the war. You speak about 94% employment but many people are getting by having to work two jobs just to make ends meet. Many people who lost good paying jobs under Bush have had to take jobs where they make much less than they once were. More people have become uninsured under Bush--over 44 million all together. Poverty has been on the rise. The budget deficits will eventually lead to higher interest rates and a slower rate of growth.

Lots of issues out there besides the enormous foreign ones which we need a candidate to vigorously challenge Bush on--preferably one who didn't side with Bush on the tax cuts, Leave No Child Behind (woefully unfunded), and the war.

nuff said

I'd really like to see something to back up a claim like that, because I've never heard it.

most people i know dont have health insurance and the ones who do haave crappy ones.and how many more seniors will be affected be medicare regutting bill

"most americans" suddenly becomes "most people i know"...apparently you don't appreciate the extremely massive difference between the two...

can I put you on the list for an "I told you so" on Nov.3?

and if you have been paying attention to the news pre saddam news medicare is being ripped part and last i heard alotta people are on it

are the hard Working unemployed that now have no chance of good paying job future, and no unemployment.

I do use calm, cool and level headed reason and intelligence and manage to convince most that I meet....to bad the same can't be said of your post :eyes:

I know that Kucinich won't win, but I still support him because he represents me. I will NOT support someone in the primaries who I feel I have to compromise on...I will do that in the general because Anyone is better than Bush.

it's not meant to be duragatory...It takes up less space in the subject line than "Kucinich supporters"...or would that be name-calling too?
:eyes:

but hey I will admit that Kucinich-head isn't that bad...but coupled with your post I personally didn't like it

peace

you can't please all the thin-skinned people all the time, I guess...

its not, but when taken in the context of the rest of your post (which is rather arrogant I must say) it does become one. Perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to judge and make assumptions about large groups of people, eh?

and no, I'm not being thin-skinned, I just find useless threads to be dumb

I'm sorry that my thread topic isn't as world-changing as you're used to. :eyes:

but don't discuss anything, use poor points and half insults...yet you think Kucinich and Dean Supporters will be called nut-jobs?

come on

Go and figure that out, my friend. And figure out that even at 80,000 new jobs a month, we're not even creating enough jobs for those new to the work force. Knowing that, do you wonder why those percentages appear so low?

...millions are woefully underemployed, toiling away at jobs that don't pay enough to live on for one person let alone a family. Seems to me that having to work two or three jobs just to keep your head above water as an "employed person" just might make a person a little bit angry.

I have a neighbor who is an assitant manger at targe she says most new wemployees are laid off middle aged people. Hmm leaving a cushy job with lots of money to wearing a uniform ane name tag while being bossed around by teenaged supervisors enough to make me angry

I saw the vice president of some manufacturers' association defending nafta, and a woman from Public Citizen's Tradewatch, discussing NAFTA.

During the half hour or so I watched, at least three Republicans called in to complain about it.

This isn't just about jobs. That's a big part of it, but not the whole thing. You are apparently buying the propoganda and forgetting about the record bankruptcies, foreclosures, and increasing levels of homeless families.

Also, you throw out 6 percent like it's based on reality. Check that again. Those figures are based on what?

Teevee can be very convincing, but don't let it completely eclipse reality.

Thanks, I'll stick with Kucinich, the only candidate who has a chance of getting votes from a wide variety of voters.

Way to try the bushista scare tactics, but as the woman from Public Citizen said this morning, you're not talking to elves. We don't just get our news from teevee and 'mainstream' newspapers.

It's the approximate number that's been tossed around lately, and I was justrying to point out that by far far far far, more people are working than not.

would 30% unemployment be acceptable too? That would mean 70% employment, far, far, far more people employed than not employed, right?

pays $17 under bush, the average new job created is $14.50 an hour. So some of those who are employed are now earning less money, all the while many Wall Street execs are looking to make $12-17 million christmas bonuses this year.

the current administration.

First your math is questionable, second you have not covered 'every' important issue in this election third, this isn't about anger, it's about change.

Buh bye :hi:

the current administration?

call it anger...call it change, either way I definitely don't get much sense, or see any evidence of the majority of the electorate clammoring for it, that's all.
Here at DU and other left-wing sites, sure...Among my own circle of friends, most definitely...Throughout my family, not really- the in-laws are bigtime repukes, and even my retired unionist father felt that the Lil'Dictator(my term not his) was right in going into Iraq...and we're not even from the south, or have any military history.

I hope I'm wrong, but my gut and my head tell me that Dean is the wrong candidate for this election.

names to get their attention.

Now, about that unemployment figure you are touting up there. 6% UNEMPLOYMENT does NOT mean 94% employed, it means 6% receiving benefits and even if it meant 94% employed, it would NOT mean GAINFULLY employed.

As far as your 9/11 comments are concerned, I am not quite clear what you are referencing...you leave a bit too much to be assumed. Either way, it is CLEAR this admin was IGNORING the advice they got on terrorism prior to 9/11 and have worked very hard at covering up their incompetence in the matter. I think there are plenty of questions regarding that on BOTH sides of the aisle.

It's "Kucitizen." Not "Kucinich-head." If you must have a label, get it right. Then we'll be more likely to think you've spent enough time following Dennis and/or his supporters to know if we should be called nut-jobs or not.

but not known by the handle "Kucinich-heads" that's your baby alone.

Or the thread posters? :hi:

See, this is where I have a problem with the "Dean isn't electable" crowd. Do they really think, "let's get rid of Dean, then Joe Lieberman or Dick Gephardt will then defeat Bush."

Why? How?

If you're not upset; i.e., angry, about the way Bush is running the country, why would you go to the trouble to go down to the polls and vote against him? Just to insure jury duty? Nothing better to do that day?

I await a convincing argument that Dean or Kucinich getting the nomination will get in the way of a Democrat who will actually defeat Bush, not just lose by a smaller margin.

Glad to meet you here.

I agree with what you write. It's called motivating the base.

This is why we lost the 2002 midterms. The activist base of our Party was pissed off at the politicians in our Party who'd betrayed us.

The Republicans know how to motivate the base of the party. Democrats need to remember how.

And welcome :toast:

I am with you, waiting to be 'convinced' that the biggest/strongest grass roots campaign this country has ever seen can't defeat *.

uh, hold on there bucky, Dems are 50% of the population. If were out of touch its only the right wing that disagrees with us. Not America.

but we make up more than republicans (independents, non-registered voters etc, but there are more registered dems than any other party).

minor point but you know :-)

I agree with Dick Gephardt that George W. Bush is a "miserable failure" but he and Kerry and Lieberman have had ample opportunity to "fire up" the base. They have achieved miserable results.

And I have about as much confidence in their ability to beat our national ball and chain as I do in said ball and chain ever rejecting another tax cut for those making over $300,000/year.

Dean or Clark. I'd be proud to vote for either one and will campaign for them in Florida. Liberation starts at home.

the Democratic party gains votes. So let's make sure ABC keeps him off /sarcasm

Have you considered that maybe we're the most effected by the lackadaisical fight that the Democrats have put up as an opposition party? You say there isn't anger across all races and income levels, is it possible that it's just your race and income level that feels so comfortable with the way things are and the way that they're heading?

This reeks of another of those "listen to the sensible Democrats" posts. Well, no thanks, been there done that and have little to show for it.

Sure, while one is talking about the corporate takeover of our country and its government there is the possibility that the tone might get a little more angry. That is not what the campaign or the candidate is about. That is what you are allowed to see if you are not a loyal junkie of CSPAN.

Dennis Kucinich wants to govern based on the reality that bloated military spending for senseless wars and trade agreements that award companies for abusing workers, environment and fair markets are connected to under-funded schools, crumbling infrastructure, unemployment, under-employment and the social and economic inequality that we have in this country. Every policy is based in realism and shifting priorities to what is best for the people. More importantly, they are based in positive change, not anger at where we are.

If you care to look into it, he is a remarkably positive person that has a lot of faith in us as a nation and what we can accomplish to make it better if we choose to try. There is frustration involved in trying to make people see that we need to look further than what CNN or ABC or NYTimes tells us and look at what's really important. So many people are looking at a horse race when they should be talking about what we can do to turn around the mess we're in. Then it becomes about marketing instead of ideas, about how the same message can be packaged to look fresher this year. He has an urgency and anger when there is good reason to be outraged; actually that's a little more fitting than angry, outraged. That's what most people wind up seeing because of soundbiting and editorial license.

Besides, how angry is a Dept. of Peace? **smile**

won't work though.

We are angry. We've BEEN angry since 2000. We've been way too nice and polite for way too long which is costing us seats in Congress. Not to mention the White House and in the next Congress probably the Judiciary. So, why don't we just twiddle our thumbs and thank them for being so reasonable and promise to be the good little citizens we've always been. No way!! Enough is enough. I'm mad as hell and I'm not taking it anymore. Neither should you.

But I realized all I needed to all on my own.

and no, preaching them "the truth" about the BFEE isn't going to sway very many people

Most of the stuff on DU I have read about 'bfee' is from Kerry supporters. I guess Kerry himeself agrees with you, and therefore chooses never to even drop a hint?

can go hide under their bed.
Why would you want to silence truth tellers?