Dean needs to quit his conspiritorial whining.

This whole thing about Washington insiders conspiring to "derail" his campaign serves no good purpose.


Howard needs to understand that ummm welll.....he is only getting about 10% of the vote; That we are not dumb blind or mute; and that his remarks are very unpresidential.

The invective against Kerry, Torch, the party in general does his own supporters a real disservice. The man had some great things to say about Iraq and courting bubbas in the South, but he is starting to sound more and more like Ross Perot.

If he wants a speech at the convention.....he's better be careful!

I read the article today, and it really comes across as desperate. Let me start by saying that I supported him until late December, and that I contributed to his campaign multiple times, went to many meetups, saw him speak numerous times, etc... He attacked Kerry when he was the front-runner waaaaaaaaaaay back over a year ago, and Kerry didn't whine about Dean attacking him at that point. Now that Dean has stalled, he's saying it's not fair that he was attacked when he was the front-runner. His performance during the few months that he was the annointed "front-runner" just proved that he is not even close to deal with the pressures of being a front-runner who could stand up to * in the fall, he has noone to blame for his losses but himself and the way he handled himself in the period from October to early January. Other candidates didn't "peel off" his support, he drove people like me away with repeated gaffes and mis-statments and pompous pronouncements like these.

for both himself and the party.

I've been uneasy ever since the WI retraction.

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

It doesn't really matter if it hurts him or not.

and where?

You're not willing to just trust the Kerry supporters when they say that Dean was whiny? Jeez, and after they've been so fair and balanced in their attacks on Dean.

After all, that whole bin Laden thing was simply a fair accounting of Dean's weaknesses on foreign policy. And the "Dean scream" focus may have been out of context and unfair, but the media outlets all admitted it was a week later, when directly asked, after the NH primaries, so there was no harm done.

Clearly, this is all so evident that any mention of it as having an impact on Dean's campaign should immediately dismissed as whining. Don't you know anything about politics?

Electable my left nut.

about Kerry's 'special interests'.

I wondered if he actually believed that the attention paid by Kerry to special interests was any worse than the attention he gives to his own special interests.

He mentioned something about the story that had millionare Kerry accepting one thousand dollars that was supposed to have influenced an appointment. I wish it was that cheap to get a position.

The attacks take valuable time away from his message, which we can all agree is one of the best parts of his campaign.The attacks make him look petty and small. He can manage more grace than that. It is, after all,the voters who are rejecting him; not the Democratic party.

This "mentioned something about" crap is starting to get pretty old. If you're going to make allegations, could you at least let us see something we can use to judge your broad statements?

for 'special interests'?? Isn't that part of his stump speech now?

CNN.com - Dean: Special interests have hold over Kerry - Feb. 1, 2004
Howard Dean lashed out Saturday at Democratic presidential front-runner Sen. John Kerry with some of the harshest rhetoric of the campaign, calling Kerry another special interest clone.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/31/elec04.prez.main


Get with your own campaign man!

What I see in Dean's statements is a candidate calling attention to the clear special interest ties of a candidate who has pretended to have none. It is a pointing out that the unfair attack ads used against him were financed by a fundraiser from Kerry's campaign.

Can you deny that any of this is true, or do you simply label any statement you don't like as "whining?"

"It turns out we've got more than one Republican in the race," Dean said. Dean has previously called retired Gen. Wesley Clark, former NATO supreme allied commander, a Republican.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/31/elec04.prez.main/

This was referring to Kerry and Edwards. He never retracted this. This is unecessary invective. This is divisive.

Well, this compels me to ask you what you thought of the Dean/Osama bin Laden ads. As I recall, most of us here thought those were pretty "bad form," "insulting," and "divisive" as well. Now that Kerry has been linked to those ads, is it only Dean's bad taste in calling attention to that fact that now makes him the bad guy?

A link would help.

did you have a chance to read the article (can't remember the source, it was in this forum today) where he attacked Kerry? his attack on Kerry was sickening IMHO.

I'm disappointed.

This is not whining it is deploring the truth of politics in our nation.

Without his personal wealth, John Kerry would be an asterisk in this campaign...where he was heading before he mortgaged his house. Go back to the polls then - it is the truth.

Money is winning big in the Democratic party.

I don't understand your point at all.

Huge difference.

Perhaps George Soros or Bill Gates should just buy the Presidency.

give credit....

That is what is winning it according to every poll...

And he was able to shovel money into Iowa because of his house mortgage. The campaign was dead in the water prior to that.

Voters in Iowa voted for something other than TV ads.

It's simple...the helicopters, the staffers, the ads...


Personal wealth in the form of mortgage money.

You can't rewrite history now.

the party insiders pulling in favors and republican cross over explains where Kerry is right now.

nearly 50,000 Iowans headed out into a cold winter evening and lined up for Kerry.

Without it, his campaign would be over. He was polling under 10 percent...and when he mortgaged the house and shoveled the money into Iowa things turned around. Perhaps it's good political strategy, but it is strategy based on the advantage of personal wealth.

Do you support that it is necessary to be personally wealth to help govern our country?

Those who don't understand this will repeat history over and over...and we will continue to be governed by the wealthy.

Kerry has an exemplary 35 year record of Public Service. I don't dismiss qualified candidates because they are wealthy.

Why not limit everyone's contribution to $250 or less...including the candidate's own contribution.

Is John Kerry supporting that?

No, I didn't think so.

So I'm very confused as to why he is going this route.
He should be speaking from a positive frame of mind if he wants to shore up support in WI.

"He'd better be careful"

Yep - this is so much an example of what is so so wrong.

when you need us! Make those of us who will be former Dean supporters fell like we're only wnated so long as our vote is needed!

That's the basis of our entire stance!

What I find humorous is that on issues, Dean and Kerry are not all that far apart and both give pause to make one wonder whether they will be totally true to their word.

The whole Kerry vs. Dean thing basically style over substance. If you ignore the campaign rhetoric and look at their positions and records, there's little real difference between them.

Their stance on the issues is quite similar. They're both centrist Democrats, with ties to the big-business community. They both come from patrician-like upbringings in the NE and both went to Ivy League colleges. They both live comfortable lives, and it's doubtful they ever had to worry about not having a place to live, or missing a mean while they were growing up.

I hate to say it, but it's quite hilarious to find these two in a pissing match over such minor "differences". They're good establishment Democrats, fiscally conservative yet socially moderate, who are not much different on the major issues, REGARDLESS of their campaign rhetoric.

It helps me realize how right he is. The ads happened, the dots connect. That is not whining. It is good to hear more put downs of him and us. It gives me strength in my independent thinking.

This whole thing about Washington insiders conspiring to "derail" his campaign serves no good purpose.

But the title of this thread, and the rest of the post, are quite insulting IMO.

Just the facts.

History will bear out the facts that the Establishment of the Democratic Party did indeed work to derail the Dean campaign. This is nothing new. They did the same thing to Jerry Brown in 1992. Whether you like Dean or not, he dommed himself when he talked about breaking up the media monopolies and ousting the failed leadership at the DNC.


I think your line....

"If he wants a speech at the convention.....he's better be careful!"

says it all. It doesn't sound too "Democratic" to me.

Whatever the case, Doctor Dean, like every Democrat realizes the importance of ousting Bush from office. He, like the rest of us, will
fall in line behind the nominee.

I think it's also important to look at what has happened in context. Remember the election of 2002 - when the Repubs took control of congress and the Democrats were dead as a party? That was our low point. Howard Dean had the courage to speak out while the leadership
of the party was silent. We've come a long way from that low and I think we owe a debt of thanks to Howard Dean.

Dean made the statement about breaking up the media just before Iowa, and a noticeable increase in media-negatives occured. Dean didn't damn his self, the media did it for him.

Let's see, media executives in a coordinated money-raising scheme for Kerry, and at the same time running tremendous negative coverage against Dean, and Clark.

We all want to believe we are making rational decisions, based on what we hear, and that they don't influence us. Most of the Clark supporters were saying the same thing about Dean supporters complaints until the media started bumping off Clark. Then they started rightfully screaming about the biased reporting. Now the Kerry supporters are dismissing it as 'whining' which is ridiculous, and blind to the obvious trail of facts.

If you are looking for a direct correlation with when Dean's numbers really began to fall drastically, it was the speech. They managed to knock about 30 points off, which he has never been able to recover from. Clearly it isn't just "unfortunate" but was a coordinated effort by extremely huge blocks of the media.

You will see it against Kerry in the fall, then you will be "whining" I guess. Like it or not, a lot of you that have gone to the Kerry camp have been duped by the coverage. Why do I know? You are repeating the stuff the media has put out there, verbatum, like so many Rush Limbaugh supporters do the same.

And I opposed Dean from the beginning, for very simple reasons - he is an opportunist and too right-of-center. As he kept running his mouth, it only got worse. So I laugh at all this contention that dark unseen forces did him in.

The people - ordinary people like me - did him in, at the polls. There was no cabal, no media conspiracy, just people with common sense and good intuition who saw through him and cared enough to vote.

As for his waffle on Wisconsin, I was one of dozens of DUers who correctly predicted he would flip-flop. Some have correctly called that strategy, and I agree, but it is a risky strategy to only energize your base while alienating the fence-straddlers even further. That is no way to win, or bring change to the Democratic Party.

Good riddance to Dean, the only Democrat alongside Lieberman from this race who deserved the scorn heaped on them by real Democrats who know better.

Aren't welcome in the party anymore, it seems.

Left, Right, or Center. Dean is Dean. He's for universal health care. He's for a balanced budget. He's against the war. He's pro-union. He's for affirmative action. He's for having the opposing party start to OPPOSE!!!

I don't think he's been done in. If you think everyone that lost has been "done in" then that would include: Kucinich, Dean, Sharpton, Moseley Braun, Graham, Clark, Lieberman, Gephardt, and Edwards.

really Zomby... nice of you to say so.

But even real Dems can be bamboozled by a con artist.

I am a proud independent, only registered as Dem to vote in the primaries.

Frankly, I have to wonder how most supporters of Kucinich can call themselves "Real Democrats" since the Democratic party has consistently ignored the causes championed by Kucinich and his progressive caucus.

And I have to wonder how much longer they will continue to vote like "Real Democrats" when it's clear the party wants to pretend the true liberals like Kucinich within their ranks don't really exist, since they're so embarassing to the mythical middle-Americans to which they're trying to appeal.

which I assume explains your support of DK.

and it was NOT a con artist...
you REALLY do your cause (be it Anti-Dean or Pro-Kucinich or whatever) no good by alienating people.
You may THINK your are truth telling but you aren't sole arbiter of truth anymore than I am.

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

I have never been about trying to convert people or making them see things my way. You can vote or support whomever you please. I reserve the right to tell unpleasant truths about certain candidates and their supporters.

I haven't changed a whit since joining DU. I have always been my own person and a free thinker. I am not afraid to step on toes in order to voice unpopular and pointed opinions.

They are your truths, then. Heap your scorn. I am way too used to it here to care.

I don't think Zombywoof has changed at all.

I guess I was just not the object of scorn before?
:shrug:

I am so used to it now.

From a person who supports the guy the media didn't even bother to worry about crushing, but simply ignoring him??? So, ummm, you believe your guy has had a fair shake from the media, do you? I'd love to have seen more of Dennis Kucinich, and Sharpton covered in the media. But it seems, for some reason, they haven't just received scorn, but have been virtually absent. It begs the question, why? Well, if I had to guess, I'd say their positions are so absolutely damaging to the corporate establishment, they found ignoring them the best case, since they simply don't put that kind of news on at all, and they sure don't want some last-place guy having a forum, and allowing the stuff they try so hard to keep totally off of the news.

Wake up! Dennis is the most media-abused of all.

Think about it, stopping globalization? Huge drop in corporate profits. Health care? Big tax money, and mostly from the rich (hopefully) Almost every position Kucinich has would hurt corporations. I'm just amazed that a Kucinich guy would think this way about Dean. I have tried to figure out why he's jumped in there attacking Dean, who has some of the most similar positions of any candidate on the stage. Why not attack Kerry?

and the rest is history. Either he got bad advice or Dean is a rookie in National politics. I still back him for Pres and hope he continues to be a force in the future. However, reality speaks volumes, long odds persist and success not in sight.

The main focus remains the Biggy in Nov. Go Dems.

he will definately be speaking at the convention

Snip

"What we now see is that John Kerry is part of the corrupt political culture in Washington," Dean said Wednesday. He said he came to that conclusion after learning that former New Jersey Sen. Robert Torricelli contributed to an independent group that ran ads that used images of Osama bin Laden to question Dean's ability to combat terrorism if elected president.

Torricelli, who was forced out of office over ethical lapses, is now raising money for Kerry's presidential campaign. Dean said disclosures that money was also raised by backers of Dick Gephardt show Washington insiders are trying to derail his candidacy.

And has Toricelli made any comments about why this money ended up financing these ads?

And demanding accountability from fellow Democrats is not whining.

"What we now see is that John Kerry is part of the corrupt political culture in Washington," Dean said Wednesday. He said he came to that conclusion after learning that former New Jersey Sen. Robert Torricelli contributed to an independent group that ran ads that used images of Osama bin Laden to question Dean's ability to combat terrorism if elected president.

Torricelli, who was forced out of office over ethical lapses, is now raising money for Kerry's presidential campaign. Dean said disclosures that money was also raised by backers of Dick Gephardt show Washington insiders are trying to derail his candidacy."



Dean comes across as running against the party itself....My point is that he is jeopardizing the good will he createed with his entusiasm and coming off looking like like an Angry Perot. Its the type of thing that makes me think he is going to run an independent third party campaign.

For all the screaming about Dean being a "whiner," I have yet to see a single Kerry supporter try to deny the allegations.

These are the facts:

-Up until last week, Kery supporters on DU were still denying that Kerry had anything to do with the Osama ads. The calls for "where's the proof" were deafening

-Now, they are saying absolutely nothing regarding the truth of the allegations -- they are merely calling Dean names for daring to bring it up. May we assume you now believe the allegations but simply don't care?

While you're all patting yourselves on the back for helping your "special interest-free" "clean campaign" candidate gain frontrunner status, why doesn't it disturb any of you that the ads you yourselves condemned when you thought it was just Gephardt now seem perfectly acceptable to you? Why aren't you asking yourselves the hard questions about Kerry?

don't mind hearing the truth and have more loyalty to that than party.

If you don't like democracy, you can live without our voice while you all goose-step to another loyalty oath of allegiance.

If he stays in after WI, Dean should get no speech at the convention, no cabinet post, no future in politics.

If he wants to become the pariah of 50 percent of America, let him go third party.

Nobody should be able to get away with damaging our nominee when he's got it effectively locked.

My schnauzer looked at me like, "What's so damned funny?"

"embrace his toastness" LOL! Classic!

Thank you.

Only truth.

so scary you have to threaten them.

"If he wants a speech at the convention.....he's better be careful!"

Very Ashcroftian, isn't it?

"democrats better watch what they say" states Ari the liar.
I am the original poster did not mean it the way it reads.

I read it as a direct statement that Dean had better toe the line or he'd have no future in the party. Admittedly, it's coming from some anonymous guy on a liberal forum rather than the White House press secretary, so it's got a bit less clout behind it, but I think it's definitely in the same vein.

This is too bizarre for words. Is he denouncing those who contributed to this group and his campaign or only the ones who contributed to this group but not his campaign?

He's really marginalizing himself now.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Anti-Dean-Ads.html

...
It drew some big donors, including two giving $100,000 each.

They are Slim-Fast Foods tycoon S. Daniel Abraham of Florida, who also contributed $2,000 each to Dean and several other Democratic hopefuls; and Yankees Entertainment & Sports Network LLC, a New York-based sports cable channel that televises New York Yankees' baseball games. The network's chief executive, Leo Hindery, contributed $2,000 to Gephardt.

Abraham wasn't the only Dean donor giving to the group. California attorney Ken Ziffren gave $5,000 to the Jones group and $2,000 each to the campaigns of Dean, Gephardt and John Kerry. Abraham and Ziffren did not immediately respond to messages left Tuesday at their offices by The Associated Press seeking comment.

sound like folks who are just throwing money at anyone or anything going against Bush.

Reading the article, it seems he has a pretty good point. I had suspected this group was Gephardt backed, and now he's endorsed Senate Washington insider John Kerry.

Clearly, it was out of bounds for a group to put such negative ads on against another Democratic candidate. This kind of steering of minds, soils the race, and the Democrats involved.

Seems like Dean has a legitimate gripe. Add that to all the money given to Kerry's campaign by huge media moguls under Rupert Murdoch, and you have the media shaping the minds of Democratic voters.

I disagree that Kerry is responsible for it.

:)

I sure wasn't. I was too stupified.

position from antichoice to prochoice right before he entered the Presidential race. Dennis K clearly showed he was a part of the DLC when he teamed up with Edwards, who supported the IWR that he had voted against, in Iowa.

Just a socially disconnected Ideologue.

Table for one, looney section!

After all the charges of "fringe leftist" thrown at him, I never thought I'd hear an attack coming from the other direction. Made my day.

If Dennis Kucinich isn't a real populist (or a real liberal) I will eat Tucker Carlson. WHOLE.

Don't just say he is whining, quote the man. It's in the rules here you don't start a thread with unsubstantiated negative. Heck, I recently opened a thread containing NOTHING BUT exact quotes and it got locked for having a subject line. :cry: :nopity:

Tell us what he said.

If they hope for a place at Kerry's NWO dining room.

"he's better be careful!"

If one is going to threaten, one should at least spell correctly...

1. If you start a thread in this forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. The moderators have the sole authority to decide whether a thread topic is inflammatory. Extremely inflammatory or inappropriate topics will be deleted rather than locked, and the thread's author will receive a warning.

Thanks,

DU Moderator