The day someone started the kool-aid stuff about Dean.....

and started calling his supporters simplistic and idealists was the day I realized the real divide in the party.

Then there were more threads in which we were spoken to like children, referred to in condescending terms. Since I am a well-educated person with a couple of degrees on my resume, I have found it highly distasteful to be treated like a child. It has not stopped either.

I think you would be amazed at the make-up of our Dean group here. There is a wide variety in terms of education level, income level, and political experience.

There is one overwhelming similarity. Most of us are pretty decent people who care about our country deeply.

You can attack people personally just so much before it really hits home. The attacks are now mindless, just one after the other.

I do not think our country will long survive as status quo. I will not vote for anyone in any party who does not speak up and speak up loudly....for change.

On Edit, I highlighted as people were misinterpreting.

Seems to me that Dean supporters are getting it from all sides. The media and the other Dems running in the primary seem to try to out-do each other in attacking Dean.

The Bushies are loving it.

s_m

as a Dean supporter and as an intelligent human being.

Yes, he is catching it from all sides. Not sure which is worse.

Someone here told me that I played for sympathy. I don't give a hoot about sympathy. I was called a whiner and martyr type.

I don't give a hoot about sympathy, and I have seldom had the luxury of whining. And I picture a martyr type as someone who silently takes all the stuff that is dished out.

I am for taking our country back from the people who want to stop all social programs and spend the money to become an empire.

Yes, the GOP loves it and supports it, and I have no doubt that some of them are contributing to it covertly.

knee jerk reaction is to attack anybody in a position of power. Probably a product of years of being screwed over by leaders. I don't blame people for being skeptical & we must all be critical, but once we start hating our leaders, we're essentially giving up on the party.

As for Dean, there are extreme views both pro- and anti- : somewhere in the middle is the real Howard Dean. Our views of him become more extreme due to the atmosphere of the primary, the immediacy of the first elections, and the absolute urgency to beat *.

No matter who gets the nomination, we will have about 10% of the party who will not support the candidate. Just like in 2000. It's a given. No nominee could get around that.

started to be critcized, then you came to the party late, so to speak. Some of us realized it approximately a year and a half ago, when our candidate was being called a traitor, murderer, spook, Nazi backer...... You get the idea. It isn't any fun to have to read that garbage here about any candidate.

The attacks are mindless now, and were mindless then, but of course unless your ox is being gored, as the saying goes ....

I wanted to try to put a damper on this stuff about 4 months ago, but administration said there were too many changes at that time, and they didn't want to implement any more at that time. My point then was that one of these candidates was going to be the nominee and what sense did it make for Democrats to give the Republicans ammunition with which to savage our candidate now and more importantly later.

It would have been nice to hear a little defense of all the candidates at the time it started, not just poor ....... , now that it is hitting some a little close to home, as you said.

Dean is one of the most divisive Democratic candidates since that other states rights advocate George Wallace.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/000763.html

<snip>
In Iowa on Tuesday, a potential voter asked Dean how he would handle entrenched Beltway bureaucracy. As the New York Times reported, the Iowan "mentioned Republicans and Democrats alike, and Dr. Dean made no distinction."

Dean responded that if he won the presidency, lawmakers in Congress were "going to be scurrying for shelter, just like a giant flashlight on a bunch of cockroaches."

</snip>

He did piss off a lot of Dems with that remark, though.

s_m

Most of them ARE cockroaches.

:evilgrin:

Expand please.

We know what wing of the Democratic party that is.

Atlanta precincts, yes. Nothing else.

I don't seem to remember that in my history books.

Seems to me Wallace was pretty weak on gay issues too, rather than the choice of over 60^ of LGBT Democrats.

option. He won several states' electoral votes in the general election of 1968, running against Humphrey and Nixon. In 1972, he won several state primaries before he was shot and paralyzed. That's how third party candidates prosper, when each party nominates someone people don't much like.

I'm not sure Wallace or anyone else had ever heard of gay issues in 1968 or 1972. Certainly no one was campaigning for them then.

And the attacks against him from the cockroaches in DC since then have vindicated him.

That was an example of a veiled attack.

There have been ugly attacks on all. That I agree with. I do NOT think the other supporters have been treated as fools, though.

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

Just wondering.

and a Republican and told I shouldn't be on this board.

In fact a lot of times. I would like to see you post more good things about your own candidate and not as much negative about Dean.

You can't post a good thing about any other candidate without having the entire thread trashed. Kind of stupid to knowingly create a thread that's going to end up being nothing but bashing of my candidate, don't you think??

:hi:

Mostly trash.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=48125

It should stop. If someone posts a good thread, it should not be turned into something else.

And Dean supporters should be respected.

Dean supporters, by all means.

Big ooops?

as in Dean supporters, not the candidates themselves. I don't recall ever seeing Kerry supporters being referred to as koolaid drinking cult-like followers like Dean supporters have. You missed the whole point of the post...

Supporters of others have never been treated as simpletons. I resent it very much.

What the hell did you expect?

I had far fewer problems with Lieberman and Edwards position on Iraq than Kerry and Gephardt's. Lieberman and Edwards may have been pro-IWR, but they came out on the stump and defended their vote. Kerry and Gephardt attempt to spin the vote to the voters as some anti-war/pro-UN thing. Bullshit. If Kery and Gephardt had wanted an anti-war/pro-UN Iraq resolution, they would have written it and voted on that instead of the Bush resolution.

Did you honestly expect you weren't going to take heat for that?

And to those who propose capital punishment for Kerry for that vote, disregarding all his years of public service for our liberal causes, then I say, good luck to you and hope you have a nice life.

The venom that has been posted against Dean has really soured me to politics. So much so that I will vote for Dean or I will vote for nobody.

I attended a "New Year" houseparty on the 30th and it was great to hear from my President in Exile!

For the first time there were more people there that I hadn't seen at a meet-up or at any function thus far. There were 20, 30 and 40 somethings and for the first time there were approx. 8 older folks, too. One gentleman who is probably in his late 70's was delightful. Not exactly children.

Most were over fifty years old, and there were probably 40 people at the party. Young people were the minority at that party, although there were a few. It was a great bunch of people, by the way.

His organizers tend to be NMSU students (age 18-24 range) but those that attend the meetups and campaign orgs go up to the 60s and 70s in age. I have found its hard to really pin Dean down on a common age in regards to his support.

Non-Dean supporters are often treated very badly for not supporting Dean.

What is most baffling is that so many people who support completely different candidates are saying the exact same things about Dean. And getting the exact same reaction. Denial. There is just no other word when complaints are met with vacant "he can do no wrong" justifications. And "he's not perfect" is not the same thing as admitting something he did or does is specifically wrong.

It just seems like a lynch mob campaign hell-bent on destroying everything in its path. Bush, Washington insiders, DLC, DNC, everything and anything Dean puts in his sites. He's even pissed off Kucinich people and that's pretty tough. Anything Dean says is not just justified, it's glorified. Anything. He was for deregulation, then against because of California. But the Vermont Yankee sale was in 2002 and was specifically recommended by Dean's commission on utility deregulation. He went ahead and took a quiet step towards deregulation AFTER the California blackouts.

But it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter that his initial Presidential exploratory committee was funded in part by the energy industry. It doesn't matter that he kept environmentalists out of numerous energy meetings. It doesn't matter that he kept the meetings secret.

Every single week something comes out on Howard Dean and it just doesn't matter. That's why people respond to Dean supporters the way they do. It's a complete bafflement. And change??? Change to what?? Change for the sake of change isn't always a good thing.

Have you ever heard of jumping from the frying pan into the fire?

"It just seems like a lynch mob campaign hell-bent on destroying everything in its path. Bush, Washington insiders, DLC, DNC, everything and anything Dean puts in his sites."

NOW the truth comes out. Dean said the things that needed to be said about Dumbya. Kerry didn't. Now you're bitter when Dean displays a backbone because you're bitter that Kerry didn't.

To get Dean out of first place so their own candidate can move up.

Ain't gonna happen, though, I suspect.

They treat people with degrees and certifications just as arrogantly. Just brush it off and grin because the reality is -- you're smarter than they are. You picked a winner, they didn't. :)

I don't think winning's all that matters but your initial post implies that it is. I would feel worse about voting for someone who cheats than about voting for the one who loses. But the Bushies were delighted with their "win."

Is that the condescension and accusations of cult status etc are typical ploys of the current regime. Respond with belittling commentary if you can't respond with facts-- that's been the tried and true strategy.

The other major tactic:

As aggressive questions such as "win me over," "answer me honestly," along the lines of "do you still beat your wife."

It would be funny that many have taken these tactics to heart if it wasn't so destructive.

There needs to be a lot of sould searching from a lot of members from all camps.

As a grass roots Clark volunteer, I have utmost respect for what your movement has accomplished, the depth of your committment, and the obvious talent you have pulled together for your cause. Continued good luck. One way or another, I expect to be working together in the Fall.

We WILL be together in the fall, God willing. Clark is a fine candidate, and I wish him well--- just not TOO well. *grin* :hi:

I'm proud to be a Dean supporter because of people like you!

:yourock:

:hi:

You don't win support by insulting the folks you want to support your point of view.

It works for all of us, all the way around.

But it isn't divisive when Dean calls other Democrats cockroaches?

Read above, quit misquoting. It hurts us all.

Dean supporters are following Dean's leadership in refusing to apologize for anything, denying that he's ever wrong, and unfairly attacking other candidates as Bush Lite. That's why Dean supporters have been branded as cultists and Kool-Aid drinkers: in a cult, a leader is defended as being perfect, anyone outside the cult is suspect, and cult members believe that the cult has the only truth, while everyone else is blind.

After months of Dean and his supporters attacking all the other candidates, Dean is complaining about the other candidates attacking him, even saying that if Ron Brown were alive and still DNC chair, he'd make them stop picking on Dean. Here at DU, Dean supporters have attacked anyone who has tried to discuss Dean's negatives, relying on accusations of "lying" and "jealousy" against the messenger rather than dealing with the message that Dean has some serious negatives. I wonder why they think this will win people over to Dean.

I and a number of others have tried to point out that, if he wins the nomination, Dean will need every vote he can possibly get. Nobody has ever won for having the most committed supporters or for being most loved by his supporters.

QUOTE.."Here at DU, Dean supporters have attacked anyone who has tried to discuss Dean's negatives, relying on accusations of "lying" and "jealousy" against the messenger rather than dealing with the message that Dean has some serious negatives. I wonder why they think this will win people over to Dean...."

We refute issues that are slung at us time after time. It was an onslaught, and many have left because of it.

Wrong, I disagree Dean has the serious negatives. I would admit to them if I thought they were there. I really disagree with you.

I think he has just as good a chance against Bush as anyone, despite all the spin.

I think you just did the kool-aid thingy again.

I gave what I think is a careful, rational explanation of why the behavior of some Dean supporters led to comments about Kool-Aid and cults. And you came back with "I think you just did the kool-aid thingy again." :shrug: I'm not sure that I can explain it any more clearly.

You say "we refute issues" but that's almost never true. Instead, Dean supporters make fun of any post that is unfavorable to Dean, piling on a lot of "Dean kills kittens" comments to sink a thread, and totally ignoring the issue at hand.

You say "Wrong, I disagree Dean has the serious negatives."

Not even one serious negative? Some semi-serious negatives?

Come on, MF, Dean is not the Second Coming of Christ. EVERY candidate has negatives. Not recognizing that your candidate has negatives leads to cultish behavior.



I'm watching "Primary Colors" now and it's down to the scene where the campaign workers Henry and Libby are sitting in her truck. She's just been disillusioned about an earlier political hero, on top of knowing that her current hero, Jack Stanton, is really a scummy womanizer.

She points to the full moon over the ocean and she says, " You see that moon? That's me. Beautiful, huh? It's only reflected light, it needs the sun. . . The Stantons are my sun. I live my life drawing light from them. "

She says a little more, tells Henry to find himself a life before it's too late. He goes up to his room, she drives off to kill herself, shooting herself dead in the truck parked not far from his hotel.

That's the ultimate in cultish behavior, in overinvesting in politics. Maybe we're all a little too involved in politics at this point. It's something to think about, anyway.

You just used language guaranteed to put me down. You twisted what I said, you quoted a book which is NOT about Dean. I read it and I saw the movie. It has nothing to do with Dean.

You can quote my sentences all you wish. Just don't quote and restate. That is what makes us upset.

I DO refute issues that deserve refuting. You do have a way with language, though.

You did the kool-aid thingy a second time.

Why would anyone think a book and movie that came out that long ago had anything to do with Dean? Governor Stanton is so clearly modeled on Governor Clinton that it's farcical.

The point of the anecdote from the movie had nothing to do with Clinton or any specific candidate, anyway, but with the folly of overinvesting emotionally in political campaigns and candidates, believing that they are completely worthy of your trust.

I really don't understand why you think I "twisted" what you said or "did the kool-aid thingy again" but it seems futile to explain again so I won't try. I will say that I don't think the Kool-Aid references were ever about you personally, but about others.

:hippie:


Fear Ends. Hope Begins. Dennis Kucinich 2004

I am very willing to listen. I do know of several things I would suggest to Dr. Dean, but I know of so many others that suit me fine. It is like the independents and the two Republicans in our group: they disagree with some of his stances, but they greatly admire his overall honesty and his desire to grab our country back from the neocons.

It is the same with the others. To be quite honest, I actually admire most of the candidates for most things. I am just not going to admit it when their supporters are putting us down.

I do have very serious reservations about a couple of them. But then that is the way an election should be.

Please do not think it futile to explain things to me.

;-)

(whether they also appeal to older voters is irrelevant) it happens. The same thing happens with Jerry Brown back in 92. It bugged me then and it bugs me now, but there's little that can be done that I can tell.

You make it sound as though is it just "appeal" that has nothing to do with intelligence and common sense.

This is a different time in history. There has not been a time like it. This is nothing to do with appeal. It is not Dean appeal.

It is because he has the courage to say that our government is wrong. He called Bush out, and that is how I believe we have to do it.

Your words were nice, but the same feeling of tolerance and condescension was there that I earlier described.

This QUOTE: "whether they also appeal to older voters is irrelevant."

Oh, yes, indeed it is relevant. Those of us who are older are hurting much more for the loss of our country's values. We are aware of who will be the recipients of the loss of social programs. They have already cut cancer drug care under the new plan. We are still trying to find out more of the cuts. We see money that our country needs to care for its own citizens going to attack and invade other countries.

Do not ever refer to the Dean supporters or his campaign as "irrelevant."