It's time for Dean and Kerry supporters to get together.

We are closer than we usually let on here.

Kerry was my choice until I was disappointed by his IWR vote and poor debate appearances.

But he has a solid record as a veteran, peace activist, and advocate for progressive causes in the Senate.

Dean has run a phenomenal campaign. He has energized a dispritited base and attracted legions of new voters.

He has given the party a new sense of mission and a new voice of authority and conviction, for which everyone here should thank him.

But now there is a new and very uncertain face in the scene--one whose campaign threatens disunity and catastrophic defeat in the general election.
That is the campaign of General Clark.

My sincerest hope is that Kerry and Dean will emerge as the victors in IA, and then move on to stop the Clark campaign in its tracks, in the snows of Iowa.

Then we can finally see a ghenuine New England Democratic race between two distinguished leaders of our party:

Kerry and Dean.

between Kerry and Dean - notta a one. Clark is my number 2 choice followed by Edwards.

Between him and Dean.

I respect both men.

Why not toss the others and let them go for it?

one-on-one debate - the first last September when Dean initiated it. Kerry would bring out the real Dean and Dean knows it.

n/t

I would love to see a principled debate between Kerry and Clark, and would be happy to support either one for President. I would even add Edwards into that mix, although I would be happier if he had more FP experience, for sure.

there should be an investigation for the deliberate media bias and a class action suit

nt

n/t

that did a side by side of the candidates to view their stances.

According to the nice lady in my HR office, she says that the AOL comparison showed Dean and Kerry were "exactly alike"

Anyone get AOL? I would be curious to see this.

both were both for and against the Iraq War?

which demonstrated a grip on the "real world". Nuance does seem to be lost on some folks.

Dean will not. No thanks.

and you've already become my favorite fellow DU'er :) .

Thank you for your integrity. Dean has done too much damage for ANY Kerry supporter or Gephardt supporter od Edwards supporter to forgive him for.

I would vote for Dean in November, but I would really rather have ANYONE (Edwards, Gephardt, and Kerry figuratively means anyone) than him.

Gephardt's "Gingriching" of Dean?

n/t

I don't want a general in charge of the Democrats if it can be avoided, and I have real concerns about the quality of Kerry's campaign, but I know either of them could beat Bush in the GE.

But nothing like Dean's campaign has ever happened before- it uses tools previously unavailable to maximum effect, and as a result is very difficult to predict. How can you be so sure he can't win?

It seems like such a fear based thought. And keeping us afraid is Bush's best tool.

Wow, he uses the internet. That has been such an overrated point. The GOP uses the internet too, so rest assured that Dean's words will be weighed heavily if he wins the nom.

Dean is *'s best tool. The media is supporting him (FOX News is doing it by reverse psychology) because he'll hang himself with his own microphone cord after the primaries.

Study: Network News Criticizes Dean Most

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&ncid=716&e=5&u=/ap/20040116/ap_on_el_pr/tv_news_democrats

Try again.

bradley and mccain raised half a million bucks on line IN ONE DAY!!!
btw....what happened to the bat?

independent. He said that if Kerry wins the nomination, he would be behind him 100% - even work on his campaign. He said that he would never vote for Dean because he scares him immensely. This is a very politically astute and intelligent man - late 40's.

This is middle America folks - our party needs to encompass and appeal to ALL voters.

and Dean is the one I support and the only one I have FULL confidence in walloping the hell out of Bush. I KNOW Dean will beat Bush. I think some of the others might squeak out a win if luck is on their side, but I'm not confident about them at all. For every one loyal Democratic voter Dean has, he has at least two voters solidly behind him that haven't been secure Democratic votes before now. In my opinion, it would be the dumbest thing Democrats could do to snub that. :shrug:

He'll be climbing over a LOT of Dem bodies to get the nomination.
Especially General Clarks.

I do hope that once one of those two is eliminated he will show the leadership to mend fences with the other and energize his supporters for the Democrats, but I think things are gonna have to shake out for awhile first...

NOW, you want Kerry supporters after all these months of bashing their candidate? I somehow doubt they are going to be very accomodating to you and the Dean campaign and I wouldn't blame them. I could be wrong. If I were a Kerry supporter, I would say, Thanks, but NO THANKS!

and fence sitter... but he is a dem and I think he'd make a fine president.

I'd much rather have Kerry than Clark and I also hope Kerry's campaign finding its legs in Iowa will allow him to come into NH and knock Clark out of it.

Besides... Kerry's been lifting things from Dean speeches for months. I nearly shat when Kerry said he wanted to help Americans have the same access to the health care plan that folks in congress have. Which was a word for word quote from Dean like 6 or 8 months ago.

I would support Kerry, but there's no way in hell a defense lobbyist who thinks Reagan is a truly great leader that he tremendously loves and admires, would get my vote.

I'd vote for dog vomit before I'd vote for Clark.

Gee, we are Democrats, is it really so surprising we share some viewpoints?

His plan is for people to get exactly what Congress gets.

Both excellent in foreign policy/national security, both social/economic liberals, represent different regions and combine legislative and military experience to make an ideal ticket. And, I don't particularly care which one of them is at the top.

I may shift my alliance to Kerry in the coming weeks, and I put Clark supporters and Dean supporters in the same disagreeable camp.

I hope Kerry would never let that guy who called Reagan a great leader into the White House.

...not if Clinton's history is any indication.

Also I would like to wish Kerry supporters a victory on Monday. That will send a message to someone saying don't take us for granted!

...that all-New England would spell death to a campaign.

There would be open discrimination against them AND the public would heed it.

Additionally, Dean's anti-war position would be compromised and that would make him a sitting duck against Bush.

Kerry also allowed himself to be used as a killing machine in the Vietnam war, AFTER he deounced it (he considers is heroic because HIS life was at risk).

That is an insult to every veteran in this country. No shit he was a killing machine, but he put his life on the line even though he was a blue-blooded aristocratic Bostonian.

You think Dean would be able to beat *?

No serious political analyst predicts a Dean success against Mr. Pretzel.

Hello populist,

First off, I have no wish to insult Kerry's record of service. I have nothing but the greatest respect for those who have served with honor in our nation's military (including Kerry and many member's of my own family).

That being said, you have stated that:

"No serious political analyst predicts a Dean success against Mr. Pretzel."

Just to give me an idea of whom you consider serious, can you give me a name or two of serious political analysts who have predicted Mr. Gephardt can beat *? (Incidentally, I personally think Rep. Gephardt or Gov. Dean could beat *, but do not claim to be a serious political analyst.)

Regards,
Schmendrick

Many, many others.

He is a fine man and a great DEMOCRAT.

Clark served his country well too--he is just not our best choice for pres, i s all.

.

There is absolutely no excuse for an Ivy-Leaguer with a firm grasp of the facts AND a formed opinion that the war is wrong, to go abroad and kill people.

No serious political analyst has a voice in this country. They are all foppish moral cowards in their own Eddie Bauer, SUV-driving way.

I mean, say what you will, Dean has not been BORING, he is a scrapper!!

And Kerry has a persistent, stubborn, never-say die streak that Mass. Dems have grown to admire over the years.

They are the best in the pack--so I say, let's get the others out of there and let them at it!!!

has long been Kerry.

And if Kerry supporters don't like my campaigning for Kerry if Dean doesn't go the distance, I don't care. And I wouldn't even dream of asking a Kerry supporter to help Dean if Kerry doesn't go the distance.

Clark's past votes and statements of support for the GOP will be used to destroy him.

Since Gephardt appears to be a regional candidate at best, and Lieberman is going nowhere, it seems to me that either Kerry or Dean are the best choices for the number one slot.

Edwards would be the ideal VP for either man.

That is my POV..and it makes sense from here.

Howard could fix it in about ten minutes. He just has to come out and tell the truth about Iraq, tax cuts, NCLB and children's health care in Vermont. He has to own up to the fact that he said Saddam had chem/bio weapons and probably nuclear programs and was a theat; and had to be dealt with even through unilateral war if necessary. He has to tell the truth about the middle class tax cuts, that they were Democratic initiatives and are important for the people and the economy. He has to tell the truth about the intent of Kennedy and NCLB. And he has to tell the truth about SCHIP and its contribution to Vermont children's health coverage.

When Howard does all of that, I'll support him gladly.

but I don't believe in stopping any campaign in "its tracks", to use your phrase. Every candidate has the right to campaign.

To win you have to stop the other guy.

We have seen "Stop Dean Movement"" threads flourish here over the past months.

Why not a rock-solid. long-term progressive Democratic effort to stop Clark?

Makes sense to me....

they make us look bad.

Just envisoning a better debate involving the most worthwhile candidates.

But I can assure you his supporters had nothing to do with that. If I based my candidate order on supporters Kerry would be my #7 or so.

Julie

His vote for the IWR sealed his fate as a footnote in '04.

I believe that the invasion and subjugation of Iraq was a political ploy by the idiot-in-chief to win the support of the voters after 9/11. Even though his stated reasons for going to war had nothing, zero, nada, zip, to do with 9/11 or for the alleged WMD. This has been done at the cost of thousands of needless deaths.

I believe it to be unconscionable to buy votes with lives.

Kerry supported that invasion and subsequent slaughter. I will not vote for him.

That was a war to build a pipeline and nothing more. Dean should never have trusted Bush. Bush could have gotten al qaeda without bombing Afghanistan, he just didn't want to. Dean was a fool to believe him.

That's the logic being applied to IWR.

I don't recall the UN voting in favor of the slaughter in Iraq.

:7 :7 :7

Iowa can't pick two candidates. If Dean wins Iowa, you're getting a Clark v Dean race whether you like it or not. If Kerry wins, then Clark is marginalized to some extent in NH, and Dean will have to figure out a way to stop the bleeding.

:hi:

Dean is next to last, beating Lieberman. I see few similarities between Kerry and Dean.

Kerry is my first choice and who I've cast my vote for (Michigan...we're already voting). Clark is my new second.
The only thing Kerry and Dean have in common is that they are
members of the same political party.

except I'd vote for Lieberman before I'd vote (in the primaries) for Dean. Oh, and Kerry is my #1, Clark #2.

are once again disenfranchised.

Thank you, mass media, for poisoning the spirit of a populist movement. I always knew I could count on the likes of you for slandering and mud-slinging.

I think the word you're looking for is disgruntled. Or even disgusted.

But not disenfranchised. Cuz the mass media hasn't prevented you from your legal right to vote :hi:

Just why does the clear winner in Iowa {Kerry} need to align himself with dean? Why?

Kerry doesn't need dean, and until now dean sure sent the message he didn't want or need anyone.

If Kerry or his supporters fall in line with dean just to make dean look better, then it will not be just to derail Clark, but to derail Kerry as well, and anyone else that stand between dean and his goal.

I detect a desperation ploy coming on.

Too bad, so sad.



retyred in fla
“Good-Night Paul, Wherever You Are”
So I read this book

And the Dems risk collapse of the party.

since you said it would you care to elaborate on just how you see the collapse of the party if dean doesn't win.

From where I stand and from what I've read about dean wanting to restructure the party, it would appear to me that a dean win would fracture the party even more.


And then there were none!
” JAFO”

Restructure or expire. The last mid-term election spells it right out.

Just how the Democrats would fracture has been done to death (no pun intended).

Would you care to make a friendly wager on your confident prediction?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

not likely

or his campaign. Have a nice day.:hi:

n/t

If Clark is the candidate ...hopefuly, if it goes that way, I will be wrong.

and the war shall remain the issue.

Hubert Humphrey's support for the Vietnam War was anathema to those that supported the antiwar candidates Bobby Kennedy and Gene McCarthy.

People died and will continue to die because of this war, a war that was made possible by the pro-IWR of many Democrats that chose to follow the DLC's advice to be accommodating to Bush.

There is only one candidate left, assuming Dean continues in free-fall, that best articulates our opposition to the criminal invasion of Iraq, and whose position on the issues are more liberal than John Kerry's. That candidate is Dennis Kucinich!

I will do everything in my power to stop the candidates that are so scary that I couldn't even vote for them vs. Bush.

and after Clark, we still have Al. After Al, it gets a bit fuzzy, but I will say that Edwards has run a clean campaign and has not engaged in the Beltway gutter politics that Gephardt and Kerry have.

Lieberman is on his way to joining Zell Miller, so he is not a factor.

It will have to take a major revelation about Clark, something along the lines that Clark supports the PNAC agenda and has been lying all along, for me to drop Clark. I will point out that no such revelation has yet to surface. General Shelton's smear of Clark remains that, a smear. No evidence has been presented.

I don't think Clark is a liberal anyhoo, but neither is he a conservative or a centrist as defined by the DLC. I think Clark is a pragmatist. I also find Clark intriguing from an intellectual point of view, a man that will make his own imprint in history.