So there is a thread that says Howard Dean thinks the Democratic base is demoralized...

Ahem Dr. Dean.. I am the base of the Democratic party as are all or nearly all Obama supporters.. we are the base and we are NOT demoralized.

I am not a party offshoot that sometimes will vote with the Democrats.. the greens, socialists etc etc etc..

I am solid Democrat from head to toe.

And we are not demoralized.. maybe some of the party offshoots are.. but the Obama base is NOT!

I am also union, third generation... AFSCME.. and we have not lost support for the President.

Projection of your own fears does not lead to rejection by the Democratic base. My Dear Dr. Dean, you are projecting your demoralization. Not mine. I will be glad to help you if I can, but you do not speak for the base.

constant attack mode, he is doing OK in my view, and the polls seem to support that

I really like and admire this President. I think after a full 8 years of Obama as President we will all be amazed at what he has accomplished and the turn around in this country.

I still very much support my President!

As for Dr Dean I wonder what his motives are. You would think he would be up in MA working on energizing his base to help save Ted Kennedy's base. For a guy who was the party chair, you would think he would be more supportive of the party. Instead he seems to be pandering to his own base at the party's expense.

which by the way, just a few months ago, some of the very same posters who are suddenly pro Dean wanted him drummed out of the party for the 50 state strategy.

When anyone gets caught in the middle of their own politics, even people I have supported before.. (Lieberman for VP, Nader etc.. ) get caught up in their own self burnishment.


Human being in power (whether elected of popular) inevitably screw up and start believing their own press..

because there are parts of the nation where they are the only Dems that can get elected. Yet Dean supporters deliberately ignore that fact and blame the Blue Dogs on Obama, Rahm or the DLC.

and in my state we elected a Blue Dog Democrat and St. Louis put her over the top election night. The Republican candidate was celebrating before St. Louis was counted. I don't think Claire McCaskill would have won if she wasn't a Blue Dog.



:shrug:

I have found no easy way to do it without having the post deleted as a "call out," but I know some of the sudden converts to all things Dean were castigating him back in 2006, before the elections, claiming we were all screwed by "wasting" resources in this or that state.

And I'm pretty sure that with some of them, if you dug down into their brains a bit and got some truth rather than the groove on their broken record, you'd find many don't actually believe in the 50-state strategy because they're pretty much demanding most of the South be written off as well as large parts of the West and MidWest.

I'm not really sure what's up with Dean. I was Dean supporter before I even found DU, and I'd pretty much abandoned him as a viable Presidential candidate before I found DU. I think he's a good guy and good in certain roles, but, for some reason, the media and some on the left have lifted him up and are celebrating him as party spoiler. Why Democrats would be reveling in that escapes me.

Tend to forget that he was widely regarded as a centrist/DLC-type Governor while in office and in fact that the DLC even portrayed him favorably as a model example of a centrist Governor in one of their publications. He campaigned to the left in the primaries but even Markos from Daily Kos -one of the leading advocates of the Dean campaign -concedes in his book "Crashing the Gate" that Dean would have moved to the right in the general election campaign in a bid to broaden his appeal among independent voters and moderate Republicans

I have a feeling that, had he won the nomination and went on to win to the presidency, the very same people hailing him now as a progressive icon would have thrown him under the bus faster than you could say Barack Obama

Same with Al Gore. He's also been magically transformed into this Kucinich-type progressive icon by some of the people on this board and was favorably contrasted with candidates such as Obama and Clinton last year. What they tend to forget is that Gore was one of the original founders of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) and ran very much on a conservative platform during his 1998 presidential campaign -attracting donations from such left-wing luminaries such as now Republican Governor Rick Perry and Harriet Miers, Bush's unsuccessful supreme court nominee - as well as being an advocate of NAFTA during the Clinton presidency. If you read Arthur Schlesinger's diaries, you'll see that he was not popular with the liberal wing of the party because he was seen as being too conservative


Don't get me wrong. I love both Dean and Gore and would have absolutely loved to have seen a Gore presidency as much as I valued Dean's excellent leadership of the DNC, which I think was a key factor in our 2008 victory. But I love how some of those on this forum are making both Dean and Gore out to be the kind of far-left wing icons that they never were

when Krugman was criticizing Obama's economic policies he was a genius with a Nobel prize to prove it. When he spoke out in favor of health care reform bill he became a clueless fool.

The other factor at work is what the football world calls "everyone loves the backup QB". In football the fans love the backup QB because he is sitting on the bench and hasn't made a single mistake. More often than not though, if the fans get their wish and the backup goes in they quickly turn on him (as he makes just as many or even more mistakes).

The ally of my enemy is my enemy.

:eyes:

and I have no reason to think he did not, then I would say he is a bit jealous and is trying to undermine the president and the party. Someone said that he and some of his supporters are mad because Obama did not give him a high position in his administration, but I don't know it that is true or not. I don't know why Obama did not do that but suspect there might have been a good reason if Dean said this. :shrug:

His timing on the last few statements he's made is quite telling. Getting a teabagger in place instead of a Dem is freaking idiotic! His life won't change much, however, the regular people out here will be hurt if this ass gets in office as opposed to Coakley. There are some snakes in the hen house! I had a lot of respect for Dean, but I'm starting to lose it with him. I'm starting to the think limbaugh isn't the only group hoping this president fails. What the hell are they trying to prove?

messages in some of these hair on fire comments we are hearing.

to sit on the back of the Bus until Dean said he could move forward?

I have always been a Dean supporter but I'm not sure why he is going in this direction ~ he should be campaigning for the Democrat - yes? no?

so no-drama obama winning sort of supports the concept than Dean is too volatile.

And, I was a Deaniac in 2004.. I was bummed after he lost out to Kerry but came back strong for Kerry. Really proud of Dean as the DNC Chairman, as we all were.

I guess I'd have to see the quote and the context to really comment anymore but I sure as hell am not demoralized with Pres Obama winning and doing his job in spite of the meltdown he inherited and the repukes and mediawhores he deals with..as well as doing everything else including getting help to Haiti, ASAP.

There is a reason that I don't go to the GD and the GDP anymore and this thread is an example of that reason. After reading it I have come to the conclusion that if the moderators do nothing about these vile posts and posters then I have no reason to continue to come here. What they protest as free speech I say is divisive speech meant to tear the party apart and to divide it into different sections that will work against each other. If this is allowed to happen then all I can say is congratulations to the winners...the repubs. :puke:

Edited to add. I posted a less than complimentary post on Dr. Dean and have gotten too responses. One I can read and one is from ignore, but I think it is funny that suddenly may be they are not so accepting of different opinions.

vilely demoralized?

There were four responses to me. One I could read, two were on ignore, and one was removed by the moderators. :D

It seems that freedom of speech is for them and anything they want to say about Obama, but not for us and any criticism we might have of their people they want in power. Who would have thunk. ;)

I accept setbacks and delays as part of the normal process.

a tremendous service in revitalizing the Democratic party. We all owe him a great deal. Like Cha I'd have to see the specific reference in context. But while I admire Dr. Dean, I give my support firstly to our Democratic President.

I think the people who went all out for single payer or public option have run into a wall - partly made from their own intransigence - and they feel disheartened and defeated. Dean is smart enough to pull back from the edge of 'kill the bill'. Not the anti-insurance or FDL crowd. After the time and money they'd spent trying to defeat Lieberman in 2006, they were further enraged by his role in defeating the public and medicare options.

I agree with Al Giordano when he says the base of the Democratic party is made up of minorities, women, youth, and labor rather than on-line activists and publishers. Polls show these Democrats strongly support the President.

and think he did a great job as Chairman of the Democratic National Committee. I posted earlier that I was unsure of what Dean had said. In the article I read, it was confusing to me because in one sentence he seemed to compliment Obama then said something that did not sound like a compliment. So I am still unsure of what was meant by him.

Bur after reading how the people on that thread interpreted it just made me so angry that I posted something in the heat of the moment. Oh well, it happens to the best of us. I guess?