I would support Kerry again or Gore Or Feingold or Edwards or Dean

I am so tired of all these "I won't support...."

I will support any and all of these guys and will NEVER EVER VOTE REUPKE

you can't tell me that you will vote otherwise if one of these people runs.


If not, we end up with JEB or Condi or Brownback or Rudi or someone else equally depressing.



and you all know voting for a 3rd party just puts another idiot in the WH

I will too. Just don't say..., well you know.

I will support any ELECTABLE candidate who pledges to run on the Democratic Party platform. What choice do we have? We can't afford the luxury of idealism right now, we have to be practical.

I have no idea what is going to happen between now and the time these good folks might declare an official candidacy for President.

I just want them to be good Democrats now and do everything they can to help the Dems take over Congress in this fall's elections. The more they do that, the better they are in my book. (All of them.)

Gawd, a year is an eternity in politics. Hell, so is a month. I wonder who will actually be interested in this next year?

I will not actively campaign nor contribute money to
Hill, Kerry, Edwards.
I could hold my nose and vote for Kerry.
If I could stand over a toilet bowl while voting
I could vote Edwards.
If Hill wins I am leaving this country. Enough is enough.

It's THAT necessary.

I'd rather have someone who agrees with me - a pragmatic socialist - 60% of the time than someone who disagrees with me 100% of the time.

so that shouldn't be to hard.

.

from doing this from now on. I said I would try- there are no guarantees though.

we can not afford to be split

WHOM EVER the final candidate becomes, we have to support him/her or we risk having

JEB OR CONDI or Brownback or some other idiot in the whitehouse

and we can NOT afford that

I'd say that's not a very persuasive or "unifying" strategy.. :hi:

Many many, progressives are leaving the party.. that's just a reality, based on decades of disenfranchisment within the party.

They will be voting independently, meaning they will be voting their hopes not their fears.. there will be no more ABB style strategies - having learned the painful lesson it didn't work in 2004, or 2000.

Voting ABB may have done more harm than good, because it kept the progressive voting block off the radar screen, so that the strength (or weaknesses) of the progressive voting block could never be intelligently or accurately measured. We might as well have all been wearing Harry Potter's "invisibility cloak".

But this isn't "organized", so it's unclear whether or not it will be a "mass movement" that will show itself in the next election cycles or not.

The other facet that is of equal importance is the elections system itself.

It's a rigged system all the way through, from fraudulent election machines/vote count tabulators to the Electoral College..

But in the end, progressives who will still go to the polls, will be voting according to the merits of the options/candidates presented.

But the notion that false choices are to be seen as the 'only option' is a losing stragegy all the way. What has to be done, but i doubt will ever occurr, is that the candidates who are selected, are those that are favored by the people and not by the corporations.

Start from that premise... I think you'll find a much better strategy to unify around. just my 2 cents.. :hi:

it's already a "mass movement" ... there are tens of millions of Americans who are so turned off they don't vote anymore ... my belief is that most of them were previously Democrats ...

perhaps the view of legions of alienated lefties leaving the party to "go Green" or join the Democratic Socialists of America or whatever is not very likely ... it's also not very important ... Democrats need to reach out to all Americans and do what they can to win votes ... as long as they cater to some vague, amorphous group and see the world as a bell curve ripe for harvesting, they'll never make significant progress ...

i think Americans are so totally fed-up with bush et al that Dems will likely do very well this fall ... but "very well" is a poor target ... if the Party fails to reach out to the left and to non-voters, they are engaging in battle after tying their own hands ... there's no need for it ...

it's time to move past the inside DC strategists and get their hands dirty spending real time with their constituents and potential constituents ... they just seem to be unwilling to do this ... and that's too bad ... the alienation from the party that many are feeling is a very unhealthy situation ... in the long run, it will prove costly regardless of what size the "mass" currently is ...

just don't make me vote for Zell or Joementum, and we are in agreement.

and I will go one even further.


I really don't think it is time for Hillary to run, but if she ends up being the top candidate, I am supporting her

but aside from his ego telling him otherwise, I really do not think that Bayh has a chance at the nomination.

vote and fight for us.

Kerry has done some historically important stuff in the past from his opposition to the Vietnam War, to Iran-Contra, to BCCI.

His track record during the Bush period has been far less impressive, though I get the impression that behind the scenes, he's trying to convince the power elite that oil wars aren't a viable long term economic/foreign/energy policy.

But I don't want a candidate whose tea leaves I have to read, or dig down to paragraph thirty -two to an oblique reference to the issues I care about.

since he got to DC in 85. They know the moment he gains power he will open the books on them.

they win the nomination, the same way I will support Clark if he does.

But till that time, I will fight against them with every fiber of my being. They will lead the Democratic Party into electoral disaster. Clark is the only Dem with a chance to win, and I will support him for the Dem nomination.

He has the national security cred, the presence, gravitas if you will, the intelligence and experience, that they others lack. He doesn't have the baggage of the Big Three.

Clark's da man!

Obviously I have my personal favorite and that is Kerry, but I do my best not to tear down the value and service of ANY of our brave Dems. They are NOT the enemy. Thanks for the timely thread, K&R.

K&R

:kick:

Clark :)

thanks for the K and R

I'm impressed every single time I see him speak. Whether on a TV show, over C-Span, or on the news, he presents himself as an intelligent, well-spoken man. I can easily see him as President, and I believe he would restore the integrity we lost when The Bush Crime Family™ moved into The White House.

My choice in the primaries (Clark, if he runs) and whoever the fuck wins in the GE.

!

thats what we need

Are rightfully angry and disgusted with the Party. They don't want to say that they will vote for the nominee, because they are afraid some candidate who they don't want will be pushed down their throats since their vote in the GE will be taken for granted. I understand how they feel. And I do blame the Democrats, in part, for the fact that we are in a situation were I fear this country cannot survive another repuke administration. But that is the reality, regardless of their responsibility in creating it. I will punish them when we aren't fighting for our lives. Until then, anyone with a D after their name is better than President Frist, and that is a fact.

:)

:)

:hi:

.....devil himself if it would make neocons/fundies go away. So anything short of Lieberman.

LOL, sorry, I had to do that. :evilgrin:

....:rofl: :toast: :rofl: :toast:

you say you're sick of all the "i won't support" threads ... you emphasize the importance of unity ...

do you think threads like this build unity?

if you really want party unity, how about reaching out to those who feel alienated? how about demanding a more democratic process in the party to ensure ALL voices are heard and represented ... in fact, what's your plan for reaching out to the tens of millions who have stopped voting at all ...

this "look at me i'm so pragmatic" nonsense is nothing but useless rhetoric ... if you want more unity and you want more votes, do a better job representing more voters ...

i think party unity is critically important, too ... i don't think you achieve it without earning it ... telling Greens or non-voters all they're doing is helping elect republicans does nothing, absolutely nothing, to bring about the unity you seek ...

read my post up thread, it pretty much underscores what you've said here.

They're all great. If people focused on what these people are working so hard for instead of the endless spine threads, we actually might make some earth shaking movement.

but he's certainly a better choice than any republican.

I still proudly have a John Kerry bumper sticker on my car. That said, at this time, I could easily support Kerry, Gore, Feingold, Edwards, Dean, or Clark for Pres. in 2008. To me it's the policies they stand for that matter not so much the man or woman.

Let's have some integrity, shall we?

If you want to bring all of those independent, 3rd party, or non-voters in to vote for the Democratic candidate, the Democratic Party has a responsibility. Choose a candidate that can bridge the gap, and the voters will be there. It's really the party's choice. Framing the issue to blame those who spend their votes elsewhere when they aren't happy with the party's choice makes sure that the party doesn't have to be accountable for their choices, doesn't it? It's always someone else's fault.

Truth? The party can choose someone who can truly unite all those in opposition to the current rw theocracy, or not. Campaign slogans and talking points aside, I think you do that by choosing someone who gives more than patronizing lip service to the issues that drive so many outside the mainstream.

If you want the votes, nominate someone who will work for those voters. Otherwise, be mature enough to acknowledge that leaving those votes behind was your choice.

Truth? Nobody owes any party their vote. It's the party's job to earn it. What it takes to earn one group or individual vote may be different than what it takes to earn another's. Pick the votes you are going after, and don't whine about the groups not represented, or find a candidate to honestly represent the rest.

FYI, I have never yet voted for a 3rd party candidate in a national election. I retain the right to do so, however, and I certainly CAN tell you, or anyone else, that I will not support a candidate that doesn't work for my issues.

what kind of radical dogma are you preaching here???

nice post, LWolf ... the message is so simple; so many DU candidate supporters just don't understand it ...

if you want my vote, earn it!! i'm not a "purist" ... i'm not inflexible ... but the message i'm hearing from most potential Democratic candidates is just not going to do it ... until the party builds real processes to allow a meaningful exchange with constituents, nothing will change ... i keep getting these surveys from one Democratic group or another or one candidate or another with no mention of foreign policy ... and i'm expected to vote for them? ... not going to happen if this continues ...

i'm here; they're not ... when they want to talk, they know where to reach me ...

I'm laughing, yet it's almost too close for comfort, isn't it?

I value the democratic process; that's why I honor my right to vote by making sure it goes to the candidate who wants to work for me, rather than to convince me to follow him or her.

There are more of us, and our numbers are growing. When they want to talk, we'll be at the table.

whew ... ain't that the truth !!

nice sig ...

and i might add: "and neither is winning elections" ...

I'd say "Only as a last resort."

We don't vote for the Democrats and the Rethugs have a better shot at winning or we vote for the status quo Democrats and get wussy results.

We really need a third party.