ok, let me try this again

got a wierd message on my origal post so if this is a dupe, i apologize....what is up with the dean haters here? my message is, whomever you may support...kerry, gephardt, graham...more power to you...where is your energy? dean has energy and it seems to really bug alot of you, instead of insulting dean supporters, why not use that very energy (and money, by the way) to strengthen who it is you may be supporting? my solumn vow is that i will support whomever gets the dem nod...that's it.. no question..for now i support dean..so what? show me how your candidate is better...this does not have to get ugly

I personally like Kucinich for policy and Graham for state pride.

how old are you, anyway?

but there are plenty of Kerry haters around here, too...

As much as I liked Bill Clinton, he put through a lot of conservative programs that were really bad. The Welfare Reform Act and the Telecommunications Act were disasters for America. Republicans, up to that time, would not have had the courage to put those through. Dean makes Clinton look like a left-wing radical. I see Dean as finishing the job of turning the Democratic Party into the Republican Party and of destroying all the good the Democratic Party has done.

and why is that energy not there?

I basically think that energy is not in a lot of these other campaigns because the supporters are keeping one eye on the other candidates. One main thing that I've noticed about Kucinich and Dean supporters is how focused they are on their particular candidates campaigns. I've pledged my support for John Kerry (I agree with him on most of the issues (Iraq vote aside) and I also like his debating skills and his military record). However, I'm still hoping for Al Gore to enter the race, I really like Bob Graham's voter turnout and gaining momentum, not to mention his geography, and I'm a big fan of Sen. Biden and Gen. Clark. The main problem that Gephardt, Lieberman, Kerry, and Graham have right now is that their voters, for the most part, are currently undecided. Whichever of them finally can break through the pack (I still think Graham and Kerry have the best chance to do it) and join Dean (the candidate to beat, IMHO), will gain a lot of undecided voters.

I also think that Dean is too conservative. I support Kerry or Graham (I like them both), and would also support Gore or Clark if they jumped in the race. I'll support Dean if he receives the nomination, but he doesn't seem ready for the national stage yet. I'll probably be screamed at for saying this, but he seems too hot-headed to be in that degree of public spotlight. There are so many reports that he's quick-tempered and if that showed at all in the debates, we'd be in big trouble. This election is far too important to simply disregard something like that. Millions of (oftentimes undecided) voters watch the debates and the press follow them like bloodhounds. I have reservations about all of the candidates, but Dean is the one that worries me the most.

However, I do have to praise the Dean camp and his supporters, who have done a terrific job of raising money and creating some much needed buzz about this race.

i hear you..i am with you..i am a vermonter..i know that dean can put people off..but he was my governor for something like 11 years and he pissed me off for sure...but he did what was right for our state...40 states are facing bancruptcy now..we have a 10 million surplus..trust me, he pissed me off, he will again..but you can count on him...but as i said..i will support whomever gets the nod

but it will, of course. Way to get into the spirit of the thread, dude.

time to work like hell for you candidate, dontcha think?

how many anti-Dean threads have appeared today and how they have kept at the top of the discussion.

I'm sure it bothers anti-Dean people (why do we have anti anybody people, the only person we should be anti is Bush, but oh well, I guess it is up to the Dean people to keep committing to saying they will support whoever gets nominated... I don't hear the Kerry people saying that very often) when Dean supporters SUPPORT Dean in the threads.

mostly posted by one person in particular.

As a Kerry supporter, I have said all along I will vote for whomever gets the nomination. I just believe we have a better chance of unseating Bush if that person is Kerry.

I don't beat up Dean and I will happily vote for him, and get out the vote for him, if he gets the nomination.

and i respect your choice, but does it bother you at all that he voted for the war powers act? i have a real problem with that..and if hillary were to run 9 months ago, i would be supporting her, but she sold the balance of power out too...so she is out in my mind..as well as all those who violated our trust in them....that is not a slam...just a question....our founding fathers constructed a crucial, but delicate balance of power...in good faith we send these people to washington..they sold us out

before the vote? There has been endless discussion about this in the Politics area here in DU and there are people (namely DrFunkenstein) who are much more articulate about this than I am.

But, to answer your question, it bothers me only a very small amount. I don't hold it against him b/c I understand where he's coming from. Until I got out of college, I was 100% anti-war, I am not like that anymore. Kerry has constituents, whose issues, as an elected official, he needs to consider. I don't know if you are from, or live in, the northeast (NY, Washington, Boston area) but I know that there was a lot of fear in that area for a long time post-9/11. And there still is. And the Bush administration did their best to take advantage of that. Dean has the liberty of saying he was against the war, since he didn't have constituents and didn't have to make the vote.

There is so much more to this and I hate to sound like a cop out, but it is past my bedtime (yes, I'm an adult, but I'm a morning person).

And IMHO, Hillary is nowhere near the liberal that John Kerry is.

i am a born and bred vermonter, but i lived in nyc 6 years and i lived in boston a number of years before that....yeah...i guess after awhile i got some kind of 'culture'...i know what is going on in my world

I am talking about the September 11th attacks that targeted New York and DC!

but many people around this nation seem to assume that those of us who live up here are not quite with it...trust me...we are leading the way..we have civil unions..we respect each other..this is not a flame..just an attempt to communicate...we are on the verge of discussing death with dignity...

I AM talking about 9/11.

And speaking from the deep south, I think you've got it backwards. People think WE are not quite with it...

I'm glad you're on the VERGE of discussing death with dignity. I already work for a Palliative Care group.

So, good luck with trying to bring people together...

tpub, i guess i am misunderstanding you...please explain further

I started reading the forums right when GD went down and noticed the slew of anti-Dean threads and came in to figure out what had happened. I thought some actual news had broken, but it was some anti-Civil Rights talking points instead.

Not that I don't appreciate the information and would like to see the Dean campaign address what was said just for clarification sake, but there were at least 4 seperate threads on the topic. Then a Dean supporter got overzealous and posted 4 threads regarding Kerry and Graham and the Patriot Act. I felt that THAT also was overkill. It fragments debate.

The only kind of anti-Kerry stories I saw were the one piece from Slate that was completely lame and the other lame story about Mrs. Kerry. Blech. Both were barely substantive at all.

And I will support Dean if he is the candidate. I am not anti-Dean, or anti-any of our candidates. I am anti-Bush and anti-Bill Thomas and anti-Orrin Hatch and anti-Jeff Sessions. The primary is for candidates to put forward ideas and for people to select the direction that the party takes next. I don't think that there are any Kerry-Lieberman-Gephardt-Graham supporters on the DU who would choose Bush over Dean, and I don't believe there are any Dean supporters who would support Bush over the eventual Democratic candidates. I agree, saying you are Anti-Dean isn't helping anyone's cause except Bush's, but they are supporting another Democratic candidate over Dean, not Bush over Dean.

However, the best possible route for any candidate would be to attack the man we all want out of office. The man who is destroying education, the environment, Social Security, the judiciary, the electoral process, Medicare, and Homeland Security. Gephardt-Dean-Kerry-Graham-Gore-Clark-Kucinich-Moseley Braun-Lieberman-Sharpton-Biden-Clinton-Edwards- in 2004. Just no more Bush!

Sometimes there are reasonable and rational discussions about Dean, about his record, his statements etc. But mostly there's a lot of b.s. Dean's a big target with a lot of momentum. He's also not perfect, like all of the candidates.

Most of us have even given up trying to defend Dean with the facts, because there's no point. Any good thing Dean did as governor is spun into something negative, even signing the Civil Union's bill (the only thing they could say is that he must've had a gun to his head when he signed it.)

I can find something to like about all of the candidates, even Lieberman, and will vote for any of them. Bush is dangerous and stupid, and that's what I'm fighting.

But the constant insistence that Dean is evil and bad is tiresome.

Were first cast as being loony for having him as Gov and now from what I understand they were living in a police state. I am learning all sorts of things today.

.

Dean wanted to move up in the pools. He got what he wanted, but with that success comes scrutiny. The increased likelihood that we might wind up voting for him in November, 2004 have resulted in a more careful study of what he stands for.

If you thinks that is hateful, wait to the Bush campaign, with their opposition research funded by $200 million, lets loose on him. What we private citizens have found is peanuts compared to what is coming next summer.

A number of issues comes to mind:
Sealing of his records: Why did Dean first want his executive privilege files closed for 20 years, but later agreed to the 10-year time frame, when previous Governors had settled for six years?
Dean: "Well, there are future political considerations. We didn't want anything embarrassing appearing in the papers at a critical time in any future endeavor."
What embarrassing info is in his records??


Civil Liberties: Dean has not been scored by The American Civil Liberties Union. Dean, who is running on his civil rights record as governor, is well-known for signing Vermont's law legalizing gay civil unions.
The Vermont Civil Liberties Union was alarmed by then Gov. Howard Dean's call for a "re-evaluation" of some of America's civil liberties following this week's terrorist attacks. Dean said "I think there are going to be debates about what can be said where, what can be printed where, what kind of freedom of movement people have and whether it's OK for a policeman to ask for your ID just because you're walking down the street." Later Dean backed away when asked about them later. He pointed out that he was not advocating for such restrictions, merely predicting what he believed would be the salient issues in the debate. When asked what, if any, impingement he supported, Dean had no answer. "Right now (Sept 23, 2001) we have to let things cool off. Proposed changes in the Constitution ought to be served cold."
But what changes would he like to see implemented??
http://selectsmart.com/president/Dean.html

I could go on, but I don’t like you to think of me as hateful!!!

I have done at least as much checking on Kerry, and have found answers that I find convincing!
Now help us non-supporters and give us the answers, and the issues might go away.
Even Bush, today, figured it out and took responsibility for his State of the Union speech.

politics is not emotional to me, the quote you gave came 3 days after the sepember 11. attacks..we were all pretty emotional at that point, i said things then i would retract now..our so called president was shown in tears on our tv screens...ok, that all being said..as i have said..he has proven himself to me over the last 11 years as my governor and he has constantly worked for the less fortunate in our society and at the same time providing a 'rainy day fund'...liberal? no, forget that garbage..not liberal...but pragmatic...

sealing records...as i understand, he initiallially wanted to seal them for 13 years, i could be wrong on that..but our state allows 6 years anyway...i understand your concern with this and would not be opposed to demanding it be open..

i am not his spokeswoman...my only point is..why can't others energize their base as he has?