Is Dean a polarizing figure?

Does Dean evoke strong emotions, negative or positive feelings in people?

Is there anyone that doesn't have a strong emotional response to the man Howard Dean?

Is Dean like Hillary Clinton. You say the name and people are emotional about it?


:kick:
J4Clark

but I'm going to ignore them.

eom

Please, everyone remember that we are all after the same goal, to get rid of bush*. Let's debate our candidates in a thoughtful and constructive way.

I don't see him that way at all.

As far as everyone else goes, well, it depends on how the media pigeonholes him. Hillary was pegged as 'controversial' from the get-go. I still don't understand what about Hillary makes people so upset.

One case that comes to mind on the negative side is prone to obsession, jealousy, and self-hatred with a severe case of "What happened to my candidate-itis?" Most prominent side effect is loathing of Dean supporters. This person wallows in their despair by trolling Dean threads making nasty and unproductive comments.

Warbling, extremist ideologues on both sides hate him.

To me that says he is doing something right.

Because Dean really is a good candidate, but his supporters really do an excellent job of alienating supporters of other candidates. I'm not talking one or two (nor all, of course), but many Dean supporters have pissed me off into disliking him more than I really should.

It seems a lot of energy is misdirected away from Bush, and bent upon dividing the Party into a "you're with us or the terrorists" mentality.

I am being totally honest. People around here know me. I can feel myself withdrawing my enthusiasm from Dean. He is still my second choice, because he is closest to Kerry's positions and I'm not so bitter as to back someone else out of spite. But that second place is getting further and further away.

one way or another as far as my supporting kerry or not! They just are.

to the influence of others.

Needless to say,
The president was correct
Whatever it was he said.

-Donald Rumsfeld.

<>

I agree with you. But, in my case it's Kerry who's fading into the distance because of the anti-Dean shit I've seen from some people here lately.

And, I'm not talking about debating the issues. I'm talking about dropping into a Dean thread to make some sarcastic comment that's bound to start a flame war. It's making me want to stop playing defense and come out full bore on Kerry. It's obvious that you are in the minority, since you seem to be one of the few who is actually willing to post pro-Kerry stuff and defend him in good faith without the childish crap.

Looks like we are in the ditch, and if there's no sign that it will stop, I'm taking the gloves off.

Because I'm not going anywhere.

I don't understand it. The major anti-Dean people are not really pro-anything. Some Kerry people get pissy - blm, Feanorcurufinwe, and even myself - but we are here essentially to debate, not to destroy. But there are people here for whom that cannot be said. If you think they have no positive contribution to make, then JUST PUT THEM ON THE IGNORE LIST. It will make everything a lot friendlier around here. Because it is definitely getting nastier - and it really, really doesn't have to.

and we see where that's gotten us. This is on a much smaller and more hospitable scale, but the premise is still the same. Propaganda must and incorrect facts must be actively countered. Differing opinions should be used to open up a debate on those opinions.

IMHO, it's best to read what other folks have to say, even if one strongly disagrees. Then voice that disagreement to start a debate.

Politics is about changing minds. Whose minds will be changed by putting opposing opinions on ignore?

And, even though you slam Dean and us, his supporters, that's not driving me away from Kerry as #2. (Note, your slams are pretty much well within bounds, IMHO. There are some other Kerry supporters whose attacks need to be toned down though.)

Politics, everywhere, is just awful, IMHO. But, democracy is better than war. At least we are *saying* bad things about one another and our opponents' candidates and not shooting and blowing them up (most of the time).

Personally, I've been trying to tone down some of the attacks on other candidates from Dean supporters (except on Lieberman, I've given up on trying to plug that dam). I hope you'll do the same from the Kerry end and lead by example.

Ever since I got here. But after awhile, you realize that you are not as influential as you'd like to be.

As for Lieberman, I've actually defended the puke. I'll tell you why. Because it leads down a very dangerous path of intolerance for the opinions of others. I mean, how are we supposed to connect with radical Muslims if we can't even admit that a centrist Democrat is not the anti-Christ?

Is the candidates themselves. Nothing their supporters do or say is at all indicative of the candidate his or herself.

I don't understand it. The major anti-Kerry people are not really pro-anything. Some Dean people get pissy - but we are here essentially to debate, not to destroy. But there are people here for whom that cannot be said. If you think they have no positive contribution to make, then JUST PUT THEM ON THE IGNORE LIST. It will make everything a lot friendlier around here. Because it is definitely getting nastier - and it really, really doesn't have to.

A certain someone with T.V. as the initials no longer raises my ire. But my point is that MANY Dean supporters are getting nasty these days, not just the regular suspects. And I truly believe this is a reaction to these anti-Dean people and one in particular.

I always try to make a point of clarifying that I speak of a few Dean supporters, but alot of people around here don't take the time to distinguish between profoundly negative "pro-Kerry" people and Kerry himself (or me for that matter).

I don't want to put Dean supporters on ignore, because I believe they are generally decent people and I hope to make them comfortable with Kerry as their #2 choice. If I get a nasty anti-Kerry post, you might notice that there's a good chance I get nasty back (like polpilot's unnecessary flaming of the "Kerry's Letter Home" thread). But I leave it there, and don't take it into other conversations. I am not anti-Dean, although I admit there are parts I find less appealing.

My hope is that we create a climate were Dean and Kerry supporters, not to mention Kucinich, Edwards, Moseley-Braun, etc. can talk rationally about the differences in the candidates and have some fun. I don't see the point in coming back here day after day just to knock someone else's candidate. That shit will eat you up inside (pardon my French).

I guess that's my point. We should be having a good time - because some Democrat is going to knock George on his ass. We can debate who should do it, but why all the pissy negativity? We're here to inherit the Earth. We should be partying!

It got negative because months and months ago, Dean supporters were content to post articles and news about Dean. In some cases, these articles cast Kerry in an unfavorable light and the discussions were not "Pro-Kerry" so to speak.

So, seeing this, and needing a strategy to counter it, what do you think would have been the logical thing to do? The logical thing would have been to set the record straight in a civil manner in the Dean thread, and then endevor to post positive news about Kerry - in it's OWN thread! This is what I see you doing, and you may notice, that your opinion is respected by Dean supporters here (as far as I can tell).

But, what happened? Did pro-Kerry threads start popping up like daisys all over this forum? No. What popped up were baseless Dean attack threads, and an effort to marginalize Dean supporters by calling them "misguided," or "groupies."

Are there trolls on both sides? Yes. Did a lot of Kerry folks squander an opportunity to build up their guy and instead spent it tearing down Dean? Yes. Can genuine Kerry supporters like yourself change the tone around here? Yes, but you need to stop blaming the Dean people, and start working for change from within your own camp at DU. Once that happens, we can move forward with a productive discussion.

Until then, I'll be defending my guy (as always), and thinking that anti-Kerry (or Candidate X) threads may be the best way to distract anti-Dean trolls.

You're right, it does not have to be this way. But, that seems to be the way the Kerry camp here wants it.

Instead of putting people on "ignore," how about letting the troll threads troll their way off the screen? If its a thread worthy of debate, even if controversial, then it should be fine. But I don't see why we can't at least let dumb ass threads on all sides die a quick and soggy death.

I don't know. I'm trying to come up with ideas to make this place better without making it too strict. But it seems all my ideas end up in that direction, and so never work.

As do I. Check your inbox in a few minutes.

Hillary is a polarizing figure nationally, but not among Democrats. Dean? Too soon to tell. Most Democrats don't know much about him yet, let alone the country as a whole.

It appears that I'm personally polarized by him.

the republicans and whores will demonize whoever that turns out to be, and a lot of people will obediently hate whoever they're told to hate.

I think in the long run we need to
stay positive about Dean and Kerry.
These guys aren't the bad guys.

If Clark wins, he will win on his
own merit. Celebrate that.

It is probably
not productive to insinuate things
about other candidates. I used to
bash Dean a bit, but I made a mistake.

DU'ers are smart folks. When they see
more of Clark, and if they like him,
they will make the switch. If they don't...
well there is nothing we can do about that.

In the long run we gotta defeat Bush.

Stay United, defeat Bush!

Your post just took my blood pressure down to "normal." Thank you for posting this and being so forthright about your "mistake."

I appreciated your Pro-Clark statement because it was not prefaced with anti-Dean venom. Thank you! This is a great example of the direction we can take this forum.

:toast:

It would serve him to have nicer people working on his campaign.