C-SPAN...dean followers says dean followers will not follow another dem

you guys really ought to hash this stuff out in your meet-ups.
having people announce that it's Nobody But Dean on tv is probably making rove cream his jeans.

puking in the toilet.

I very much doubt that any Dean supporter will refuse to vote Dem just because their guy wasn't the nominee. This is just hyperbole born from enthusiasm.

rove puking and Dean supporters voting for the nominee even if it's not Dean. :)

"cream his jeans" since Dean is going to be the nominee.

Dean himself said he couldn't tell his supporters to vote for another Dem if he didn't get the nomination.

A Bush supporter is now saying Dean is getting the Martin Sheen vote (she means the Jed Bartlett vote) as a mythical "perfect" candidate. She has a point, I think, though I don't know if there is a high correlation between Dean support and being a "West Wing" fan.

Lucianne Goldberg is saying that Dean support is about an inch deept, and that Dean supporters are "Deanie babies and that's it," meaning that they would not vote for another Dem. (Yes, Lucianne is not a friend of Dems but she's today's guest, and we need to listen to what the right is saying even if they're wrong.)

A guy is now saying that Dean, at Yale, tried to include freshmen in his fraternity, claiming that it was "racist" to require students to be sophomores before they could belong. Never heard this before. Guy claims to be a member of the same frat, but at Southern Cal (?) rather than Yale. Was Dean in a frat? I'd never heard that.

Now a Southerner is saying that jobs and free trade can hurt Bush in the South but Dean can't sell himself in the South.

what a cow...she uses quotes and sound bites of the dems way out of context.


edited for spelling

we don't ever have to listen to her no matter what she is saying.
C-span callers determine nothing for me.

she really isn't very bright, is she? i'm not sure why i thought she would be but her lack of a grasp of current events really shocked me.

she seems well read but still has a low grade grasp of what she's read. i'm very surprised.

Most of us, whomever we support, are more than ready to support our party's eventual nominee.

Are you, sir?

i just hope we all do, and that the sentiment expressed on CSPAN doesn't hold should something happen and dean implodes.

In a more positive vein on this board?

I am sure we would all like to hear who you support, and why....

i am very aware of the practice of trying to deflect any criticism of any candidate by launching into an attack on whichever candidate the critic supports.

i choose not to play that game in more ways than one. 1)why would i give my opponents ammo to use to try and distract me and 2)for me, the big picture is NOT who is "winning" the primaries but who will be president elect, one year from now and 3) there are several candidates that i support.

i wish i could say i see the same sentiment from everyone who posts here but it appears that at DU, at least, the primaries have developed into a team sport. this leads to a refusal to look at the strengths and weaknesses of all the candidates. "Your" guy is perfect because to say differently would be betraying "your" team..

at the same time every other candidate is worthless because he isn't "your" guy and to note a positive would be betraying "your" team..

this is, imho. trivializing the process into some sort of fanatical contest more akin to the NBA playoffs than a serious quest to get bush out of the WH and i refuse to participate.

And your "explanation" is not very convincing, or satisfying.

I don't really care who you support. Assuming it is one of the Dem candidates, that is.

But I will suggest that your strategy of hiding your own choice is not helping your case against Dean.

As for me, I do not , as a rule, post attacks on other Dem candidiates.

I have been pretty critical of Lieberman, it is true. But I consider him a tool of the GOP in his present incarnation.

I have also expressed sadness about Kerry's IWR vote and present decline, and most recently posted my frustration regarding the defeatist rhetoric used by some Clark supporters....

you wrote:
"I am sure we would all like to hear who you support, and why...."

and then you wrote:
"I don't really care who you support."

followed by a implied question that isn't supposed to be asked here.

tell ya what...you spend your time attacking me if you like. the people i want to reach are the people who are intelligent enough to realize that just because someone has issues with dean, that doesn't make them a pubbie.

On edit:

And listen, if you refuse to state your political preference, then it seems perfectly OK, even inevitable, that your readers will be tempted to speculate.

I will assume that you are a Clark supporter, since you generally follow their preferred line of argument.

It is just a guess of course, as you like it.

But I stand by my overall opinion that strategies such as yours ultimately serve the interests of Bush and the GOP more than they do any of our own candidates or our party.

ultimately serve the interests of Bush and the GOP..hmmmmmm

my strategy is to field the best candidate. since your strategy is to back dean, the current loser among the top tier, in polls against bush, who is ultimately serving the interests of bush and the GOP?

the person who is backing the loser or the person who isn't

please note the down trend for dean in the dean/bush match ups

it seems to me by stubbornly backing a loser, you are the ones doing the pubbies work, not me.


The latest Washington Post/ABC News poll confirms a pattern has been consistent since the beginning of polling on this question: Governor Howard Dean is consistently seen as relatively week in a head-to-head against George W. Bush. This despite the fact that Bush administration is pretty much viewed as a disaster.
In an early test of strength, 55 percent of those surveyed said that if the election were held today, they would vote to reelect the president, and 37 percent said they would favor Dean.

WashPost/ABC
12/20/03
-----------------------------------Bush--55-----------Dean----37

Past national polls, which asked more head-to-head questions, showed repeatedly that Dean fares much worse against Bush than Senator John Kerry or General Wesley Clark.

WashPost/ABC
11/02/03
-----------------------------------Bush--54-----------Dean----39
-----------------------------------Bush--51-----------Clark----40
-----------------------------------Bush--50-----------Kerry----44

USAT/CNN/Gallup
9/21/03
-----------------------------------Bush--49-----------Dean----46
-----------------------------------Bush--46-----------Clark----49
-----------------------------------Bush--47-----------Kerry----48

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=20297

Who is a good candidate, in my opinion.

I am not sure why he has not done better--I've been impressed by him in the debates.

As for Dean--I am becoming more certain by the day that he will be the nominee.

I may be wrong.

In any case, he is the present frontrunner, and for that reason alone, you might consider toning down the heat of your derision and scorn.

Here's how I'd go about it. I'd perpetuate unsubstantiated rehtoric. I'd cite questionable sources. I'd attack the front runner to stir up discord. One thing I wouldn't do is advance a particular dem candidate.

they prefer instead to simply attack those who do.

If someone just wants to attacks candidates, yet hasn't got the guts to say who they support... they're no different than a freeper in my book. Since all they do is bash dems.

That's one of my favorite sayings...I never could find the author.

with the negativity.

I'll bet there will be plenty of Dean objectors who will not vote for Dean if he is the nominee if what I read almost daily on DU is true. How can they vote for someone who day in and day out they call a liar, an incompetent, a draft evader, and a sure loser?

Next time I casually hear one or two Clark supporters say they can't vote for anyone but Clark I'll make sure I run to this forum and post it. (that is sarcasm).

Because he is NOT George W. Bush.

We have had bunglers and liars in office before, and we've done okay.

We have never had anything like this administration, at least not since FDR. This guy is hellbent to dismantle this society and drop us right into the pre-New Deal kind of America.

As bad as a Dean presidency might be, and we could do a lot worse, he's heads and shoulders above Bozo the Chimp-in-Chief. I could vote for him in a New York minute.

I'm just hoping the party will be savvy enough to choose someone more likely to beat the Chimp than leave us once again on the outside looking in.

incompetent, a draft evader, and a sure loser?

desperation?
ABB?
the same fears that cause us to point out his inconsistencies, his problems with how he handled his deferment and his failings in a match-up with bush which will cause him to lose?

look at it this way...trying to convince some people that dean can't beat bush seems to be a losing battle, yet that doesn't deter me. you should take comfort that the day we nominate a candidate, i will try and take that same determination into the general. of course a person can't be expected to be as effective fighting for something they don't believe in as i am for something i do.

but either way..i will vote.

No link, no stats, no nothin'... :eyes:

how do i link that?

If only you devote your energy and passion to a positive argument, at least once.

Please Offer Only Praise

sorry...that attitude is waaay to bushlike for me.
i'm a dem and like a cat, i don't herd well.

the time it was on, and who the guest was. That way we can at least look for it on the website.

and the time was whenever i posted it...
on edit...approx 7:50 am eastern.

btw..thank you..this was good advice.

It drives me bonkers to read a post about CSPAN on here and have no ability to find what the person saw. Sometimes they are things I would really want to see and I know programs are rerun on CSPAN all the time.

When they asked the question if the Bush Campaign should start attacking Dean. There was no guest, it was before Lucyann was on.

See your pluralization of "Dean supporter(s)".

So, which is it? One fruitcake calling CSPAN or a blanket condemnation of all Dean supporters?

Step up to the plate.

or do you expect us to go through the entire CSPAN archives? I know you blew a gasket the last time I asked you to actually do some research but I will not be dettered from doing so.

Believe what you want.

:shrug:

nt

think that, if Dean weren't running, Dean preferrers wouldn't vote for anyone against Bush?

but I am sure there are some, just like there are some Clark supporters and some Kerry supporters, and some of every other candidate's supporters who would only vote for their preffered candidate. In all cases we are talking about a very small number.

then that's really sad--if ANY candidate says this. If they can't be a "good sport" and accept whatever the nomination is, then they truely don't care about wanting Bush out, only feeding their ego.

Dean has incited his own supporters by suggesting in the past that they are not transferable. It is, in my view, a kind of blackmail: nominate me or I will take my votes and go home.
When pushed he has said he would support the nominee. I want to hear him say that when he is not the nominee, he will urge anyone who supported him to vote for, work for, contribute to the nominee. If it is really NOT about him, that should not be a problem.

Dean was talking about the greens who would support him or kucinich, but if someone like Kerry or Lieberman or Clark was the nominee, would vote 3rd party.

Dean was saying he has no control over that, and can't just order his supporters to vote for someone else.

dean has attracted many independents

Drives them nuts that we don't move in lockstep like the Stalinists in the GOP, or....

every candidate has some vocal supporters or "alleged" supporters who say misguided or stupid things.

Do we have to waste time highlighting them all on DU threads?

Dean was talking about the greens who will vote for Dean or Kucinich but who are not willing to vote for any other democrats and would not vote or would go 3rd party.

Thanks for allowing me to correct your information.

War is good. What the hell was I thinking.

Vote the war candidate! That's the way to permanent prosperity for all our children!

divisive candidate out there. this isn't grassroots, it's just plain cult-like

The issue: We are talking about independent voters, that did not vote for the 2000 Presidential Democratic nominee or did not vote at all, who are now attracted to one of the Democratic antiwar candidates.

An independent voter that is attracted to the Democratic Party solely because they are behind the candidacy of someone like Dean, or more likely, a Kucinich, cannot be expected to stay with the Democratic Party if his candidate does not win the nomination.

It is unrealistic to expect new voters that never trusted the 2-party system for a variety of reasons, to abide to some misguided loyalty oath--the very same thing that probably kept them from supporting the Democratic Party in the first place.