Once and for all - why Kerry lost!

[LTRS]

The minute we choose a candidate based on his war record instead of his voting record we lost! Period. Kerry voted for most of Bush's controversial programs, and wussed out on speaking against the ones he didn't vote for, long before he became a candidate.

We lost because the messaging sucked and sucked badly (when oh when will they fire the horrible consultants that run this party?), but more importantly we lost because Kerry had a recent history of voting not on principle but on what he thought would get him the most votes in a planned run for president a year later, and the Bushies exploited the hell out of that.

Kind of hard to explain to voters why Bush was wrong on tax cuts, NCLB, the patriot act, the Iraq war, ad nausuem, when you voted FOR all that stuff as a senator (probably because you thought if you didn't you couldn't run for president and capture the middle). Except surprise, there is NO MIDDLE anymore, and your base and what is left of the middle thinks you're just a con job, because you caved and didn't stand up for your principles when it counted.

Kerry lost because they tagged him as an unprincipled flip flopper, and in the year previous to the election when he was calculating, but not yet running for president, he was one.

Now he is one of only 2 voting against Rice. So is that just another political calculation on his part to fire up the base -- he's running again in 2008 -- or is he getting back to his core principles? We can't possibly know. And neither can the voters. Which is why, if nominated, he will lose again in 2008.

The constant calibration gets old. Very old. The public isn't as stupid as people think -- maybe about policy, but not about seeing the core values of a man. And time and time again they will opt for the agenda they disagree over a lack of principles if those are the choices. Every damn time.

Until our politicians and "consultants" finally get that, we will be wandering in the wilderness, hostage to the rethug's destruction of our country.

[MercutioATC]

1. Thank you!

Finally, a sane thread about why Kerry lost.

:hi:

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

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

[MercutioATC]

Obviously, there are some damn touchy people here...

:eyes:

[angrydemocrat]

178. The Kids Say It Best

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/herbert/image/image9.jpg

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/rudick/image/image16.jpg

[angrydemocrat]

179. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/rudick/image/image15.jpg

[MercutioATC]

204. Lost! Lost! Lost! Lost!

...well, he DID.....

[angrydemocrat]

217. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/herbert/image/image11.jpg

"FOR AMERICA, THE HOPE IS THERE! THE SUN IS RISING! OUR BEST DAYS ARE STILL TO COME!!"

[MercutioATC]

221. And he still Lost, Lost, Lost, Lost

...'nuff said

[angrydemocrat]

231. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/young/image/image8.jpg

"REAL LEADER 'NUFF SAID"

[Vektor]

209. WON! WON! WON! WON! WON! WON!

...and don't let any freeps tell you different.

[zulchzulu]

2. Another Kerry bashing clueless yawner....

Lemme guess...you were for Dean in the primaries...

[andyhappy]

5. so why are you still into Kerry?

seriously....why still cling to the idea that kerry was a good choice?

The guy couldn't even say the sky was blue without taking ten minutes to do so.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

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

[andyhappy]

11. jeez dude

just asking...

[cidliz2004]

22. Simplistic is the constant referral to Rove

everytime somebody voices an opinion against Kerry or the norm.

I say open your eyes and see what actually happened. Yes, Kerry may actually have won the election, the problem is that he folded before he even pursued the shenanigans in the Ohio vote AND he stayed silent during the attempts by independents to investigate the Ohio counts. Many Duer's claimed that Kerry was quietly working behind the scenes gathering evidence so that he could slam Bush...Ha Ha Ha. Really, and when exactly is he going to slam Bush?

We all knew that voting Fraud was THE BIG CONCERN and we knew that OHIO was a pivotal state..so in Kerry's leadership, why didn't he try to get ahead of the problem? Why didn't he protect his vote and the precincts in the pivotal states...it wasn't a surprise attack for God sakes! If he can't foresee and protect our vote in our own country with at least 4 years notice, then how can he lead the free world in this critical time?

He didn't LEAD the party that supported him, he quietly let others do the fighting and protected his royal political seeking ass. Wake up.

Oh, by the way I HATE Rove, Bush, Rumdum, Chaney, Rice, Wolfowitz.... so don't resort to your petty name calling with me.

[LTRS]

74. Exactly! (n/t)

[angrydemocrat]

185. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

[zulchzulu]

136. Again, the myth that Kerry was doing nothing after the election pops up

...and rears its ugly, dumbass head.

I've posted particles that show that Kerry was working on what happened in Ohio and other parts of the country through his legal counsel and other efforts.

It just falls on deaf ears. Those that are interested find it good news and those that CHOOSE TO BE IGNORANT continue.

I would expect people like you to think that Kerry should have gotten in a goddamn motorcyle gang and driven to DC and rammed through the White House and beat up Bush in the Oval Office nnd have it all on TV...sort of like some dumbass teen blow-em-up flick.

It doesn't work that way, Junior.

[AuntiBush]

145. Agreed! 100 Percent!

Thank you brother!

[angrydemocrat]

182. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

[Vektor]

92. At least he could identify

that the sky WAS blue, and string together a few words to describe it.


Unlike that brain-dead Bush-pig.

I'll take eloquence over idiocy any day.
But thanks, anyway.

[AuntiBush]

146. I Agree 100% w/You, too!

And thank you, as well! Agreed!

[AuntiBush]

144. Why must we pick on Kerry?

In my eyes, Senator Kerry is articulative, void of the use of words such as "awww..." and "well..." and "hmmm...!"

I'd rather have my President ready and brain-able to make real speeches regarding the issues than one that can not even finish a sentence.

[angrydemocrat]

180. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/burnett/image/image12.jpg


He was to busy talking about moving America forward and getting health care for every child in America from day one, getting afforabable and the best health care available for all Americans because health care shouldn't only be for the wealthy, elected, and connected. Put a halt to all the tax loopholes that award companies for taking jobs oversea's and instead awarding those who create jobs here in Amereica. Making a program where college students give two years community service and in return they get four years college.

So yeah your right he sure as hell didn't spend ten minutes talking about how the sky was blue. :hi:

[WildEyedLiberal]

232. The biggest fraud in the world is throwing a lavish extravagent gala...

...tomorrow, while soldiers die.

And you bitch about Kerry.

Pathetic, pathetic, pathetic...

Focus on our enemies -like Bush. Remember him? You wonder why they control the government? People like you, who prefer Democratic infighting to taking on the Pubes.

Oh, and facts help when you're trying to argue a point. Try them some time. More people might take you seriously instead of dismissing you as a disrupting lunatic.


Edit: OOOPS! Not you, zulch, obviously.... meant to reply to the OP. Dammit.

[Vektor]

235. Yipee!!!

Your voice of reason is most welcome in this cesspool of delusion.

[andyhappy]

3. nice rant

I dug it!

I really do not see why the people of ohio and new hampshire and all the other primary states picked him...let california have the first say next time and it will be someone with balls like dean!

or maybe someone better!

Gavin Newsom perhaps?

[angrydemocrat]

187. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/young/image/image8.jpg

[Larkspur]

4. Yep, that sums up what I think of Kerry and his current vote against Condi

Both his IWR votes -- 1991 and 2002 -- show that he's always BEHIND the times on major issues.

[zulchzulu]

7. So you were for Gulf War 1?

If Kerry had voted for Condi, you'd bitch and moan. He voted against her and you bitch and moan.

WTF?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

17. So you agreed with the manufactured war of 91 after April Gillespie

dared Saddam to attack Kuwait? Or is this just another opportunity to bash Kerry in favor of a candidate who could only take his state of 600,000 (i.e. smaller than the city I live in) in the primaries?

[sampsonblk]

132. Thank you Thank you Thank you

I thought the whole party had forgotten about her!

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

135. You're welcome..but on further recall...it was Glaspie

I think, not Gillespie :D (that's the trumpet guy )

[angrydemocrat]

191. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/gunther/image/image19.jpg

And BTW in case you don't know what John is meaning in that picture I will be glad to tell you. He is demonstrating one of the world's smallest violens playing "my heart bleeds for you" just for all you naysayers and whiners.

:nopity:

[Maven]

6. It wouldn't have made a difference which candidate we ran.

Wake up and smell the "new and improved" electoral process.

[illflem]

12. agreed

Kerry did pretty damn well considering all he had going against him, but anyone would have lost against the cheating slime machine.

[AuntiBush]

147. Again, Agreed!

Can't thank you enough for your words of wisdom!

[LTRS]

You're in denial -- just like our party leaders...

and their "consultants." Every election includes attempts at voter suppression by rethugs. Nothing new here. But the fact is you gotta be a die hard dem to relish voting for a guy who voted FOR all the opponents programs then re-calibrated and spoke against them during a year long campaign.

You may be a die hard dem who knows policy and would rather put up with a calculating, calibrating politician than a horrible rethug agenda, and so am I, but there are just not enough of us for a dem to win office that doesn't project a principled stand.

You need to face up to the fact that the vast majority of voters don't know policy differences and are too apathetic or complacent to educate themselves. They base their votes not on agenda, but on character. And flip flopping is not a character trait that they will go for.

Yes, Bush is a flip flopper as well, but since our messaging sucks so bad we need a genuine candidate. Not a guy who puts his finger up in the wind and voted based on how it will be perceived during a future campaign.

And don't even tell me Kerry didn't do that. He voted for the war, then when it looked like Dean would win the nod and he wanted to fire up the base he voted against war funding. Moronic!.

[blm]

24. HAHA...Who gave you the bogus info you're relying on?

You know nothing of Kerry's decisionmaking because you can't even decipher his votes with any accuracy.

And if you think Dean didn't "recalibrate" on any of his positions, then you haven't studied his record of governance for 11 years prior to his campaigning.

How big of an ego is needed to declare that YOUR flawed opinion is the last word, anyway?

[LTRS]

30. No one can decipher his votes - that's the problem

And where did I say Dean didn't recalibrate his positions?? Granted, he didn't do it near as much as Kerry did, but he certainly did it. This is a poison that has infected the whole damn party with few exceptions and that is why we lose.

If Bush and his approval ratings aren't proof positive that the voting public will go for principled stands over an agenda they disagree with I don't know what it will take to wake up this party.

You can only stay in denial for so long.

[blm]

34. bush HAD NO PRINCIPLED STAND. He was LYING thru his teeth!

What kind of Democrat thinks Bush had principled stands?

Bush isn't against gays or abortion, he just lets his dumbass supporters THINK he is.

YOU are the one in denial. You sound like a Bush apologist.

[LTRS]

39. I didn't say he wasn't a liar!

Anyone who pays attention knows Bush is a liar. Problem is most people don't pay attention.

But what Bush doesn't do (on the big things) is change is position on things. He's a nimcompoop who truly believes that war will bring peace and that you can force democracy on people via a gun to their collective heads. And nothing is going to sway him from those ridiculous beliefs. You may not like it and I may not like it, but more voters prefer that over a guy who changes his mind like he changes his underwear.

Kerry, on the other hand, chooses political positions based on how he thinks they will play to the public. That is SO freaking obvious that I can't believe we even have to debate that. You can rationalize and justify his 180's but they are there.

So, when people say they had two bad choices (and lots of voters did say just that) they mean they had to choose between an idiot leading them down the garden path and a guy who doesn't even know which path he will be taking, and may just backtrack and take another path if he thinks it will get him another vote.

The devil you know is better than the devil who you will never know.

[Maven]

44. This was a *campaign issue* more than a *candidate issue*

It was a messaging failure.

Read my "Not Really" post below.

[angrydemocrat]

197. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/sullivan/image/image2.jpg

[Taragui Junkie]

215. You're right. We need someone consistent

But consistently progressive, without prevaricating.

I miss Wellstone.

[gottaB]

224. thanks for the note of sanity, blm

The issue here isn't character, it's mischaracterization.

[AuntiBush]

148. Nice. Real Nice!

Certainly the Repuks are enjoying this senseless arguing amongst the camp. Why can't we stand by 1 man, honestly!

And I do not agree with you. End of case.

[MercutioATC]

159. Exactly! End all dissent! We MUST all agree!

Oh, wait.........that'd make us Republicans, wouldn't it?

:eyes:

[angrydemocrat]

199. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/young/image/image19.jpg

[Maven]

31. Not really.

And you're mischaracterizing his voting record in the same way the bushies did. He voted against the funding bill in protest of the source of funds (i.e., more debt rather than repealed tax cuts for the rich). Say what you will about his support for the war, but don't repeat the bogus "flip-flop" claim as though it's accepted wisdom here. Whether you agree with his capitulation on Iraq or not (I don't), it was definitely consistent. :eyes:

Kerry wasn't my first choice, but I got behind him and actually grew to like him a lot...mostly on the basis of his off-the-cuff moments, his actions during the campaign (not caving on the FMA was a big one, despite the low-blow suggestion from Clinton), etc. And I agree that a lot of voters vote based on personality--notice I used the word "personality," not "character," since clearly the majority of Americans are a horrible judge of character.

A LOT of mistakes were made--I'm angry at Kerry's campaign for making those mistakes and blowing the opportunity to muster enough public support that outcome-changing suppression and fraud would have been too obvious. In effect, that's what made fraud possible. The GOP was willing to go negative early on thin air--they had few issues to actually criticize Kerry about, so they manufactured some (hence the "flip-flopping" rhetorical victory). Meanwhile, we had skeletons galore to pull out of their closet and decided to play nice and use bland slogans like "A Stronger America."

So, in effect, the election was closer than it SHOULD have been, and playing with the numbers was feasible without arousing suspicion. But don't think for a second that the outcome itself is reflective of the "will of the people."

[LTRS]

55. Have a tin foil hat -- on me!

And the result of your denial and rationalizations and justifications will be another loss in 2006 and another loss in 2008.

Here's the bottom line - we aren't going to win until our politicians grow some freaking balls and stand by their core values -- no matter how their "consultants" tell them those agenda items and "values" play to "focus groups."

[Maven]

63. So you have no doubt that elections can be won fairly at this point?

Because if you don't, clearly YOU are the one whose denial and rationalizations will result in greater losses of power.

And by the way, I think it looks rather nice on me. :tinfoilhat:

[LTRS]

66. Kerry also voted for HAVA

... which left us with no paper trail. And now he is crying "Election reform, election reform!" He maybe could have tried reading the bill he voted for before he voted for it. Maybe then he would have noticed it wasn't going to help America vote!

Thanks for making my point for me.

[Maven]

76. Do some research.

HAVA has nothing to do specifically with paper trails, nor does it even specify what type of machines must be used to replace punch-card voting systems. See, especially, HAVA §102 (1), (2), & (3). These decisions are made at the state level. HAVA simply provides funding for such changes and establishes an Election Assistance Commission to oversee the payments and set guidelines for voting personnel.

I will agree that HAVA was designed with all the wrong intentions, but there was no reason to vote against it based solely on the text of the law. It was a political no-win. If anything, the state Democratic parties should have raised more hell over the scams being pulled by their local Secretaries of State (if only their resources hadn't been tied up with GOTV efforts). And wouldn't you know it, the Governors and Secretaries of State of two critical states were Republican operatives.

Kerry's only role might have been to "raise awareness," but other than the slew of attorneys his campaign hired as watchdogs, there was no way to counteract oppositional leadership in collusion with opaque voting systems whose designers were loyal to the same opposition. In any case, be realistic. You can't put the blame for the electronic voting scam solely on Kerry's shoulders. Seriously, think in terms of politics: What would/could you have done?

[LTRS]

78. YOU do some research!

HAVA federally funds the use of electronic voting machines without requiring them to meet even minimum specs for a paper trail. You're damn right there is nothing in the bill about paper trails, but there sure as hell should have been. YOUR tax dollars and mine are used to create the largest unverifiable voting system in the world. And Kerry and a bunch of other dems said "hey, sounds good to me!"

[Maven]

85. "no paper trails, but there sure as hell should have been"

I couldn't agree more. But no other Democrat submitted an amendment mandating paper trails to my knowledge, either.

[LTRS]

97. No, of course not

Because being against HAVA (even one that funded electronic voting machines without a paper trail) might have been unpopular. Or they were just too lazy to care at the time.

Here the real deal -- rethugs are scrubbing over bills to insert or take out things in order to screw the avg joe in favor of their party or big business, and dems are having naive 28 yr old legislative lefty aides tell their bosses, "yeah, boss, looks good -- no problems here" while the consultants tell them which way to vote.

[Maven]

104. You have to be consistent in your criticism, then.

If you would have preferred that Kerry vote against HAVA based on a single (but important) provision, politics be damned, then you have to concede that voting against the Iraq funding bill based on a single (but important) provision was justified as well.

And before you say it: Yes, I know he should never have voted to approve use of force to begin with.

[LTRS]

109. There is much more wrong with HAVA than that

... I'm only addressing the point you raise.

[Leilani]

134. Russ Holt of New Jersey had a bill in the House

that required a paper trail, but the Repugs wouldn't bring it up for a vote.

[Maven]

137. I stand corrected.

Thanks for the info. :)

[angrydemocrat]

201. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

[angrydemocrat]

195. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

I think John sums it up pretty good for those who continue to spew repuke talking points and whine. Time to strike of the band and play "my heart bleeds for you" :nopity:

[mike_c]

8. not only do I agree 100 percent with your comments...

...but I offer my own vote as evidence-- I did not vote for Kerry-- the first time in nearly 30 voting years that I have not voted for a Democrat in a presidential election-- for precisely the reasons you articulated. There was no way in hell that I was going to vote for someone who carried so much water for George Bush.

Diane Feinstein take note!

[paulk]

10. Kerry voted against Bush's tax cuts

not for them as you state.

You want to know what gets old? Threads like yours.

How much is Karl paying you?

[LTRS]

27. FLIP, FLOP, LOSE

Here is what he said:

KERRY: I have supported or voted for tax cuts over 600 times. I broke with my party in order to balance the budget, and Ronald Reagan signed into law the tax cut that we voted for. I voted for IRA tax cuts. I voted for small-business tax cuts.

Here was their response:

Cheney, speaking to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington, called Kerry a "senator who will speak out against higher taxes when it suits the political moment -- but is one of the most reliable pro-tax votes in the United States Senate."

Here is how he voted:

Voted NO on eliminating the 'marriage penalty':

Vote on a bill that would reduce taxes on married couples by increasing their standard deduction to twice that of single taxpayers and raise the income limits on both the 15 percent and 28 percent tax brackets for married couples to twice that of singles

Here is what he said during the campaign:

Q: Which of the tax cuts enacted in 2001 would you change, if any?
A: I will roll back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. However, I don't believe that we should be raising taxes on the middle class. Specifically, I want to protect the increases in the child tax credit, the reduced marriage penalty, and the new 10 percent tax bracket that helps people save $350 on their first level of income.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

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

[LTRS]

43. No, sorry, you're wrong

He specifically voted against the marriage penalty bill - a single bill not included in the other tax cut bills. Then he flip flopped and stated in his campaign that he supported that same tax cut policy.

Those aren't RNC talking points - that is simply reality. And it is only one example of Kerry not walking the talk, but instead, when attacked, saying something that completely contradicts his voting record. You don't think the opposition is going to pounce on that? You don't think that the rethugs pointing those things out over and over and over again is what made him lose? Dream on.

[blm]

62. Do you know the difference between 20 YRS of tax votes and BUSH'S taxcuts?

Don't CLAIM Kerry voted for Bush's taxcuts and then try to pass this statement referring to twenty years of votes on taxes, with MANY of them procedural votes.

You are outting yourself as someone who doesn't UNDERSTAND voting or even what YEAR you are dealing with.

[LTRS]

67. You are completely clueless!

He voted against the marriage penalty tax cut in July of 2000, then made his statements supporting the very same tax policy in 2003. That ain't 20 yrs, pal.

And then there was HAVA, and now his cry for election reform. Then the war and funding for the war. Then his comments that he would have voted for the war again. Then his voting for the patriot act, then his cries that it should be repealed.

And as we all know, it wasn't his tax cuts / no tax cuts votes and comments that brought him down -- it was his utterly incoherent views on the war.

[blm]

96. incoherent to morans easily duped by RW talking points.

pfffftttt!

[LTRS]

101. You go the polls with the voters you have --

not the voters you WISH you had. That voters are morans about policy is not a new concept. Isn't it time Dems got a clue about that?

We aren't ever going to win an election based on the hope that SOMEDAY voters will be patient enough to listen to policy positions that are incoherent on their face!

And sorry, but Kerry voted against funding the war for one reason only -- to garner support from the base and take the primaries from Dean. You don't vote FOR a war, then against funding it. That killed him.

[blm]

122. Your mischaracterization of what Kerry did is a hoot.

And I love how you throw in a reference to Dean for further effect.

Guess what? Real Dean supporters are sick of being used.

[Vektor]

228. YES THANK YOU!

I am so tired of it. Really.
:-)

[Redleg]

108. You are so right.

Anybody who didn't understand Kerry's views on Iraq was either misinformed or willfully ignorant. I am glad to see you defending Kerry from these ill-informed Kerry haters.

[angrydemocrat]

206. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/lane/image/image5.jpg

We are laughing right along with John on that statement. OMG repuke talking points all over the board tonight. Time to strike up the band again :nopity: Damn the band is getting wore out tonight.

[cidliz2004]

13. So True

I'd like to add this though: The Democrats are so afraid of offending and alienating their constituents that they have ended up standing for ZERO.

The Republicans on the other hand (or I should say Neo Cons) are not afraid to state most of their views very clearly. Even though they lie, they are smart enough to know that most of the voters do not investigate beyond what the candidate says. Most of the Republican supporters are just waiting to hear their favorite song and when they do they vote for their candidate.

The Democrats are frozen in fear and as long as they try appeal to everybody they basically stand for nothing but "the other choice".

Many people simply do not like voting for "the other choice."

[angrydemocrat]

214. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/young/image/image13.jpg

[MindPilot]

14. Agreed 100%!! And in several cases the Kerrry campaign

seemed like they were throwing grenades so the media could pull the pins and toss them back.

Instead of a nice short "I couldn't vote for that $87 million when I found out Bush planned to CUT Veteran's benefits if it passed", we got the "I voted for it before I voted against it". When Kerry was asked if he would vote for IWR again, he said yes. Nothing at all wrong with windsurfing, but you just know the media is going to have a field day with it. I have no idea how much of that kind of stuff was from the campign or Kerry himself, but they were serious screw-ups. Fact is he came across as a bit elitist, and there just wasn't enough anti-bush in the campaing to overcome the vote theft.

I still think he actually won, and I'm very pleased that he voted against Rice. Maybe he's getting his grove back, maybe he's just pandering, but either way, I'll take that no vote.

[moggie12]

87. Well said. Thanks for writing that since you saved me the time -

of writing something like that myself

[blm]

15. Do you know you are using bad info?

Kerry did NOT vote for Bush's taxcuts in 2001 or 2003.

NCLB was NOT being funded the way it was voted.

The IWR would have prevented invasion if Bush had followed it HONESTLY and let the weapons inspectors do their job.

The Patriot Act had sunset clauses, and Kerry sent up legislation to overturn parts of it in Dec2003.

Kerry is NOT a flipflopper. Only those easily duped by the media would think so.

You know NOTHING about Kerry. Your attacks on him in this post prove it.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

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

[Vektor]

115. My favorite is

"GIVE ME JUST ONE FACT!!"
When you know there is no interest in such things.

[Career Prole]

25. Thank you. You just saved me the trouble of posting the same thing.

Place is filling up with people that seem to have learned all they know about Kerry from watching repuke ads.
To them I say get off your asses and READ the speech Kerry gave before the IWR vote. READ the speeches he gave about the betrayal of NCLB and the PAtriot Act. READ the speeches about all your other whines.
His position was NEVER represented honestly by the media, and if that's all the research you did before you voted then shame on you.

[LTRS]

28. Oh please, wake up!

Here is what he said:

KERRY: I have supported or voted for tax cuts over 600 times. I broke with my party in order to balance the budget, and Ronald Reagan signed into law the tax cut that we voted for. I voted for IRA tax cuts. I voted for small-business tax cuts.

Here was their response:

Cheney, speaking to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington, called Kerry a "senator who will speak out against higher taxes when it suits the political moment -- but is one of the most reliable pro-tax votes in the United States Senate."

Here is how he voted:

Voted NO on eliminating the 'marriage penalty':

Vote on a bill that would reduce taxes on married couples by increasing their standard deduction to twice that of single taxpayers and raise the income limits on both the 15 percent and 28 percent tax brackets for married couples to twice that of singles

Here is what he said during the campaign:

Q: Which of the tax cuts enacted in 2001 would you change, if any?
A: I will roll back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. However, I don't believe that we should be raising taxes on the middle class. Specifically, I want to protect the increases in the child tax credit, the reduced marriage penalty, and the new 10 percent tax bracket that helps people save $350 on their first level of income.

[blm]

32. Oh please, USE FACTS. Do you even KNOW how to check congressional records?

And Democrats had to FIGHT for taxbreaks to include the working class. They wanted the working class to be the ONLY ones to get a taxbreak when there was a budget SURPLUS. YOu want to take those votes and claim Kerry voted for Bush's taxcuts, but, it doesn't hold water.

[LTRS]

47. I cut and pasted it from the congressional record

Deal with it!

[blm]

59. HAHA...you think those are voting records? HAHAHAHAHAH

Who do you think you're kidding?

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

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

[LTRS]

152. Let the record show

And quit with the whiny complaint that anyone who doesn't bow to wussy incoherent dems simply because they are dems isn't a real dem. If so many people like you didn't tolerate their wussy behavior and incoherent messaging we'd have better candidates.

[Name removed]

186. Deleted message

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

[blm]

98. This post of yours is NOT a voting record. Your post said:

KERRY: I have supported or voted for tax cuts over 600 times. I broke with my party in order to balance the budget, and Ronald Reagan signed into law the tax cut that we voted for. I voted for IRA tax cuts. I voted for small-business tax cuts.
Here was their response:
Cheney, speaking to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington, called Kerry a "senator who will speak out against higher taxes when it suits the political moment -- but is one of the most reliable pro-tax votes in the United States Senate."
Here is how he voted:
Voted NO on eliminating the 'marriage penalty':
Vote on a bill that would reduce taxes on married couples by increasing their standard deduction to twice that of single taxpayers and raise the income limits on both the 15 percent and 28 percent tax brackets for married couples to twice that of singles
Here is what he said during the campaign:
Q: Which of the tax cuts enacted in 2001 would you change, if any?
A: I will roll back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. However, I don't believe that we should be raising taxes on the middle class. Specifically, I want to protect the increases in the child tax credit, the reduced marriage penalty, and the new 10 percent tax bracket that helps people save $350 on their first level of income.
>>>>>>>>>>>>

You claimed in your original post that Kerry voted for Bush's taxcuts so he couldn't take a stand against them.......SHOW ME his votes for Bush's taxcuts and use the congressional record.

[LTRS]

154. Show yourself -- they are public record

If he wasn't voting for them he was CLAIMING he supported them, in part or as a whole, as his comments versus his votes on marriage "penalty" taxes readily show.

[blm]

167. YOU CAN'T and you're AFRAID to even look because

you know now that Kerry never voted for Bush's taxcuts and your post was filled with false charges against him.

Ya know, real patriots would BOTHER to learn and use correct information.

[sandnsea]

50. Pathetic

He votes for 600 tax cuts and your argument against it is a vote on a tax that harms single parents and SINGLE PEOPLE which nobody ever explains when discussing the so-called marriage penalty?

Pzzzzzcheeeeezzeeeee

(Is that the right response Will?)

[LTRS]

61. No my argument is that ....

... his comments are completely predicated on how he thinks they will play to the public and not on what he really believes or what is voting record actually reflects.

And THAT is why he lost.

[sandnsea]

88. No

Your argument is just more shit that continues to keep the Democratic Party running around in circles. Congratultions for helping Rove, he's lovin' ya!

[LTRS]

155. Uh huh, and by contrast....

I think YOUR suck up comments that accept any and all BS from our party and its pandering, spineless politicians are what contributes to 12 solid years of dem losses. Go figure.

[Redleg]

111. Doesn't Bush make decisions predicated on how well the public

will like them? If so, why didn't Bush lose?

[MercutioATC]

150. I agree completely.

Thanks for saying it.

[angrydemocrat]

226. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/young/image/image11.jpg

[Name removed]

130. Deleted message

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

[RaleighNCDUer]

16. Boxer 2008 n/t

[zann725]

121. A lot of people are starting to say that! And it sounds good to me!

n/t

[LittleClarkie]

230. Just wait, she'll vote the wrong way soon and go the way of Feingold

Will we be hearing any more Feingold 2008 calls?

We have the attention span of a hyperactive knat here at DU. And 2008 is a looong time from now.

[Der Blaue Engel]

19. Once and for all: KERRY DID NOT LOSE

pfffftttt!

[Maven]

40. And I thought *I* was the only one to use "pfffftttt" here! ;-) n/t

[Der Blaue Engel]

45. Nah, it happens all the time

People throw out a whoopie cushion and somebody inevitably sets it off. ;)

[El Fuego]

103. So we should say more correctly:

"Why Kerry didn't command a large enough lead to overcome their voter suppression tactics"

[seabeyond]

20. i didnt read all, but

i disagree with you. firstly i think kerry won. secondly i think the media had a lot to do with kerry's challenges. not that he was the perfect candidate, there is no such thing, he was a good man and working against the odds. i think he did build the enthusiasm and support regardless of how hard media tried to create otherwise

no, i dont agree with your assessment

but thank you for sharing. there is food for thought in your writing

[LTRS]

33. Kerry didn't win -- he didn't even come close

And the tinfoil hats just make it all the more likely that we won't implement reforms in the party that are needed to win.

And it's so damn simple -- all they have to do is have faith in their own values and their agenda. That's all it would take. Stand up and stand by for what you belive in. The majority favor the dem agenda, they just don't believe the dems will fight for it. And if they won't fight for it, they won't fight for YOU, the voter, the citizen.

[seabeyond]

37. ah to be so certain. stand by your convictions, i disagree with you

The majority favor the dem agenda, they just don't believe the dems will fight for it. And if they won't fight for it, they won't fight for YOU, the voter, the citizen.


and i dont totally by this for a couple different reasons, but i am not going ot go into it all. does sound go, but i dont think it is solid or correct

[LTRS]

48. Forty some percent said they didn't vote for Kerry

... because he flip flopped and didn't take a principled stand. Bush has the lowest approval ratings of any president who won re-election. Less than 40% support or agree with is policies on the war, SSI, and the economy.

Not too hard to figure out.

[seabeyond]

99. kerry was the flip flopper and gore the liar

who created that. and because bushco followed by media says it makes it true??????

now i could go thru and tell you how he is not flip flop, but a waste of time, further, cause people bought story isnt kerry's fault. he couldnt get media to get his comments out to the people.

i mean, you really wanting me to take kerry being a flip flopper and then expect me to literally pin it on kerry as his fault, once again is the bushco create a lie and then the other gets the blame for it

ah see, just cant go with your line of thnking

[blm]

49. good plan....Don't expose GOP control of media and voting machines

and instead concentrate on changing the party.

Brilliant. That will ensure GOP rule for the next century.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

21. We lost this election for the same reason Arnold won the recall

Free media time for Republican propaganda...75% of TV commentators pushing the Repub party line talking points, no fourth estate.

That is not to say Kerry ran a perfect campaign, but on sheer numbers, Kerry performed better than Bill Clinton did in both elections.

We were 110,000 votes short of victory. That is hardly a disastrous failure. I realize close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades, but I am far prouder of Kerry's performance in this race thanon Gore's performance in 00.

Are you saying the public was smart to choose Bush over Kerry then? Seems to me that your second to the last full paragraphs infers that.

[Dr Fate]

26. Would interviewers have turned down Kerry/Edwards appearances?

I hear you, but who was stopping Kerry/Edwards form requesting interviews a couple of night a week?

Then they could have said- " Wolf, Larry, Chris, Judy, I dont know why Bush is afraid to do interviews & answer these same tough questions you are asking me..."

I hear ya, but we went into this knowing the media was biased, but we still played the same game- we cant keep using that as out catch-all excuse.

[LTRS]

35. Gore lost by 526 - so how is Kerry an improvement?

Please, Kerry got creamed in Florida as well. Bill Clinton didn't do as well for the same reasons Kerry lost. Recalibrating finger to the wind politics. If not for Perot there wouldn't have been a Clinton presidency. He is hardly the model to strive for.

[sandnsea]

52. People like you

Running around repeating stupid right wing shit that confused Democrats so they voted for Bush. Yes YOU.

[LTRS]

57. No, I am on the reality train

And reality is that our politicians play to polls and change like the wind. And that is why we lose.

And until our politicians get clued into to that being the reason we lose we will continue to lose.

12 yrs of losing apparently hasn't gotten the message across, so it looks like we're screwed for quite some time.

[kerrygoddess]

207. 12 years of losing

12 years of losing has a lot to do with people in the party who don't know when to help spread the message instead of ragging on it because it may not agree with their concept of liberal or progressive or whatever little picky uny thing is they are complaining about!

Support the candidate, instead of attacking the candidate. The republicans know that but the democrats DO NOT!

[angrydemocrat]

234. Here Is Your Reality Train

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/sullivan/image/image9.jpg

KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

[Zynx]

91. Every mathematical study has proven Perot was not the deciding factor in

1992. Get over that bogus theory. Clinton would not have won by as much, but he would have won.

[LTRS]

LOL - talk about dem delusions!

This theory really takes the cake. I have heard it all now. Clinton, with 43% of the vote would have won even if Perot hadn't been in the race. That's almost as good as Nader's theory they he didn't help Bush win in 2000.

[blm]

170. Wrong again. The majority of Perot voters said they would have voted for

Clinton over Bush if Perot didn't run. So, do the math.

[angrydemocrat]

229. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/brucewoodall/image/image3.jpg

[angrydemocrat]

233. KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/young/image/image4.jpg

[angrydemocrat]

236. Now It Is Clinton And Kerry You Feel The Need To Bash...

Well here's a picture it will last longer:

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/clendenin/image/image12.jpg

KERRY! KERRY! KERRY! KERRY!

[Northern Perspective]

23. You're not alone in your opinion

Errol Morris is a great and passionate film-maker. His take...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/18/opinion/18morris.html

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

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

[Jacobin]

56. Old line dems knocked Dean out in Iowa

If it happens again, I'm green.

We won't know what would have happened if Dean had run because the old line dems wouldn't let him.

Given a chance to run, I happen to think he had a better shot than Kerry, who obviously lost.

[Vektor]

38. Wow, SO transparent.

Thanks, but we're familiar with the talking points - just keep trying to convince the Dems it's our fault. We're SOOOOO incompetent and that's why Bush won.

Um, NO.

Three words.

FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD.

Ok, that's one word, but I said it three times, because it doesn't appear to be sinking in.

Here's another one:
CORRUPTION.

The only reason Kerry "lost" (ahem) is because he didn't have Wally O' Dell, Jeb Bush, and Kenny Blackwell on his payroll.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

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

[Vektor]

72. Puh-leese...

I certainly hope you are not implying that I do not stand up for what I believe and that I do not support reform efforts? Are you actually insinuating that one cannot see that fraud was indeed committed AND support election reform!? That the two do no in fact, go hand and hand?

You may have chosen the wrong person to make that insinuation about...

And would you like to talk about denial? Let's do that. Where have you been living for the past few months? Have you not been paying attention to the election proceedings? Does remaining under a rock with your head in the sand make you feel better? It must. I suggest you start researching the democratic house judiciary report on the matter and read it from end to end. If you can sit there and actually say that everything went hunky dorey in this election after GENUINELY educating yourself about the case them you are not only wallowing in denial, you are drowning in it.

I'd love to continue this conversation, but I have very little doubt you have any genuine interest in any progressive causes, so lets' just say that I definitely see where your coming from, (boy do I) , and it's not a place worth visiting. Your name calling and hostility clearly demonstrate that helping the Democratic party is not high on your list of priotities.
'Nuff said.

[LTRS]

75. And in all those months, not one single FACT

... that would support a fraudulent election. So yes, I have been paying attention. Not a single FACT (and look up the definition of the word, because far too many DU'ers don't seem to understand what that word means) has been uncovered to support the tin foil hat theories.

Not a single damn one.

So excuse me if I tire of hearing hapless dems try to explain away our constant losses with pie in the sky fantasy. That isn't going to get the job done. Rationalizing away our losses on fantasy is not going to help the party in any way, shape, or form.

[Vektor]

80. It' not OUR LOSS...

...it's yours, but you know that.

Look, give it up.

NO FACTS, HUH?

No, I suppose there aren't any that YOU would admit to seeing. Ahem.

Take this little act elsewhere. Really. It's wearing quite thin.
:hi:

[LTRS]

105. Just as I suspected

You don't have fact one to back up your tin foil hat theories. And as a result, you and the other tin foil hatters make us look like a party in denial that refuses to be accountable for our losses.

DU nutballs and their Bev Harris bots are making us all look stupid. You and folks like you are the very architects of our next loss.

[Vektor]

110. HAHAHA Nice try...

And oh, so common a tactic.

Sorry, love, but the burden of proof is on you to support your silly rant, since you are the one with the obvious problem. You, after all, started a whole whining, insolent thread about how wrong we all are.

Let's see...what did you call us? Pussies? Tin foil hatters?
Wow, you might even get a "suicide mission" award while you're at it!

So, YOU provide the "facts".

I'm confident my position is correct, and I need no convincing.

If you think Bush won, YOU prove it. You after all are the one trying to convince the Democratic Party that we lost because we are losers, and Shrub-pig is a glorious victor, beyond reproach. Besides, all the exit polls and judiciary reports have been presented to you and all you do is whine "GIVE ME MORE FACTS". You'll just continue to ignore them and keep protesting. You don't read the stuff, you just keep trying to throw red herrings around.

SO OVER IT.
YAWN.

ADVICE:
Educate yourself about this case before you attempt to perpetuate this nonsense.

[LTRS]

157. Why is the burden of proof on me? You're the one claiming

the election was stolen. I am supposed to prove you're correct when you don't have a single fact to back up your claims? You're confident that your position is correct even without a single solitary fact to back up your "position?"

My gawd, no wonder we keep losing.

[Vektor]

181. Give it up.

You started the thread, you are responsible for convincing everyone you aren't a raving disruptor.

I know I am correct. And I know you are full of it.

WE aren't losing anything.

There's no "WE."

Get over yourself. Really.

[LTRS]

213. I started the thread so I have to prove some wild claim

you are making isn't true, even though you don't have a shred of evidence to back up your claim?

Sheesh, I thought that kind of ridiculous nonesense was confined to the republican party. LOL!

[Vektor]

218. No, darling...

You started the thread, so back up WHAT YOU SAID IN IT.

And it's pretty clear which one of us is spewing Republican Party nonsense.

Ahem.

I won't name names, I'll just point to LTRS and whistle.

[ebayfool]

238. Give up Vektor, she is playing games - she knows there was fraud.

A small sample:

DU'ers, WE uncovered the fake votes in Gahanna.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2605621

BBV: Help America Audit -- 5 Things You Can Do Immediately.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2636130#2636669

Here is what I am doing about election fraud in Florida.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2604729


BBV: Our position is that fraud took place.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2602324#2604787

[RaleighNCDUer]

138. And you will never see any facts unless you are willing to see

them.

Facts like purged voter roles in Florida. Facts like inappropriate placing of voter machines in Ohio. Facts like disqualified or denied provisional ballots in Ohio. Facts like massive 'undervotes' for presidential candidates, as counted on ESS machines, in New Mexico.

The methods of fraud were tested in '00 and '02, and widely used in '04. And there is no way to know how widespread it was because 'it couldn't happen here'.

At the same time, your point is valid. We have to define our message, and get it out at the grassroots level. Difficult, when the opposition owns the media, but not impossible.

But fixing either problem without fixing the other is a guarantee of failure in the end.

We need to take care of both.

[LTRS]

158. What you are talking about is voter suppression

... not vote fraud. Suppression has been going on since the beginning of time. Is our party just figuring out that its a problem now? No. They just haven't gotten off their butts to do anything about it, content to vote for HAVA without even addressing it.

So excuse me if I don't rally round Kerry NOW for suddenly claiming it's a problem. He's the last one to know. Gee, I should be so grateful, I suppose. No, not really.

[no name no slogan]

41. WOW....flashbacks to November already?!?!?!?!

No sh!t he lost. We KNOW why he lost.

Must we continue to flog the dead, bloated corpse of Mr. Ed re: Kerry/Edwards '04 campaign?

[LTRS]

53. Yes, we must continue to flog the horse until.....

people get a clue and demand changes from their party's politicians. By all means, the horse should be flogged non-stop until our worthless "consultants" are fired, and our leaders GET IT.

[angrydemocrat]

239. LTRS: If you want to beat on a sorry ass bastard

Wise up and beat the right one here is a reminder for you:

http://209.150.59.148:8080/dontphoto/snyder/image/image2.jpg

Here is a picture to remind you of the bastard that needs to be flogged nonstop and fired GET IT!!

BTW study hard it is very obvious you need to.

[mvd]

42. I still believe Kerry won Ohio and New Mexico, and that..

he probably did better than he supposedly did in other states. I'm not sure the popular vote would have gone his way, but as we painfully know, that doesn't matter. Besides the fraud, the slow reaction time to the Swift Boat Liars and not counteracting the "flip-flop" label better also contributed to his loss.

[Jacobin]

54. Very well said

I agree wholeheartedly.

Kerry had his shot. I supported him (although Dean was who I really wanted) and he blew it.

I will not support another Kerry candidacy. We can't afford more of the same. It didn't work in 2004. It won't work in 2008.

[LittleClarkie]

60. "Once and for all"? -- I doubt it

You don't get once and for all on an internet message board.

First, you have to get people to agree that Kerry indeed lost. While I think he ran a flawed campaign, I'm not one of those people.

Second, there WILL be varying opinions on exactly why, from the media to Shrum to The Closer's late arrival.

"Once and for all" is such a funny phrase. It always strikes me as the person saying it wants this to be the last word. Rarely happens on the internets.

[LTRS]

64. LOL - I didn't mean it literally

And I am quite sure that it won't be the last word. But I truly believe it's going to take folks facing up to the fact that dems have to stop recalibrating every 10 days for us to win.

The public just won't vote for candidates like that for president.

[consciousobjector]

65. Kerry won

get over it

[LTRS]

68. Kerry lost -- deal with reality!

[robbedvoter]

70. I now know the reason for this thread. Kerry won - and what followed

YOU cannot deal with (neither did Kerry, but that's another story).
We won this election and were robbed .

[LTRS]

71. Give me one FACT to support that!

Just one FACT -- not a hunch, not a belief, but a FACT that supports your theory that Bush won through election fraud. Just one. I would love to see it.

[robbedvoter]

82. Here (and that breaks your cover, BTW, "Dean supporter"):

[Vektor]

95. HAHAHA

They are all "Dean supporters", aren't they?

[blm]

100. Nice catch, robbedvoter.

they are out in droves lately.

[robbedvoter]

107. Forgot to answer me too. They want facts, then run!

[Vektor]

113. They don't want facts...

They just want to be seen and heard. They ignore the facts...

[robbedvoter]

114. Correction: they demand facts, then they scram.

[Vektor]

117. Or switch to...

...name calling of the individual person "pussy dem, tin foil hatter" and Clinton bashing.

[Name removed]

161. Deleted message

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

[robbedvoter]

165. Your repertoire of insults is endless. Your targets predictable.

Shoulldn't you be out there celebrating? After all it's not often that a man od W's distiction gets installed in the White House.... (with bow to Garrison keilor)

[Vektor]

183. I think the party is just fine.

And I think you are completely out of line with your personal attacks.

No one is buying your rant. Give it up.

Your opinion is invalid.

[LTRS]

162. Sure I do... when you get some let us know

Because unforunately you don't have jack right now. And its painfully obvious.

fact ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fkt)
n.
Knowledge or information based on real occurrences: an account based on fact;

a. Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed: Genetic engineering is now a fact. That Chaucer was a real person is an undisputed fact.

b. A real occurrence; an event: had to prove the facts of the case.

[Vektor]

184. Wah wah wah

Keep up the whining. You're so good at it.

[LTRS]

160. There are no facts there -- just unproven theories

Like I said, look up the word "facts." As for who I support, like any dem I support the dem candidate for president, even if I do know he's doomed because he's a flip flopping wuss.

[consciousobjector]

73. We make our own reality

Kerry WON!!! (You will NEVER convince me otherwise)


KERRY,KERRY,KERRY,KERRY,KERRY,KERRY,KERRY,KERRY,KERRY,KERRY,KERRY,KERRY

[Name removed]

77. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

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

[robbedvoter]

83. All the nice RW talking points in a row - stirring s* here

Stop using "we". There is no "we" here.

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

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

[Maven]

90. I don't think LTRS is a freeper.

Although his/her growing hostility is making me question.

I, too, think dems need to start holding their representatives more accountable when they cave. I just disagree with his assessment of this particular situation.

[Vektor]

93. You're on the right track.

"Although his/her growing hostility is making me question."

Classic symptom. Keep watching.

[robbedvoter]

112. Let's just say that the motives for this thread are not what they appear

Once he was done with "you lost, get over it", moved on to Clinton's misdeeds. I wonder why?

[Vektor]

116. The ol' bait and switch!!

Classic.
It always somehow becomes Clinton's fault, doesn't it?

[Maven]

118. Well, ya know...

They would blame FDR. But half the country doesn't know enough history to remember that far. :eyes:

[Vektor]

119. Oh, he's a good one...

...once the Clinton bashing gets old, maybe they could switch to Carter...those peanut farmers can't be trusted, you know.
<sarcasm/>

[apple_ridge]

79. Wrong.

The message never got out there at all due to our corporate RW media.

Flip-flopper is hardly a killer tag for Kerry or any other candidate. If he had responded by saying "Liar" and "Deserter" almost constantly when the mike was in front of him, then the attention might have turned back to *. However, he gave * a free ride on desertion, drugs, everything. Hmmmm....it's hard to believe he even intended on winning.

The real reason we lost is BBV and until it is outlawed, we will continue to lose more power until our extinction. You can blather all you want about message and future leaders, etc., but you're just wasting your time.

[LTRS]

94. And dems caved on the telcom act when Clinton

was in office, which is what gave us much of the corporate RW media consolidation. We wanted to be the party of big business, just like the rethugs. That was the DLC winning strategy, remember?

See how caving in is bad?

But of course it would be bad form to EVER hold our dear dems accountable and demand changes. That just won't do!

[JD Lau]

86. I must strongly disagree. See Greg Palast's interview

in City Beat, January 16th.

excerpt:

One state that people haven’t looked at is Arizona. People say, “Well, it wasn’t close,” but I suspect that Kerry won Arizona. I’m pretty confident he won Ohio, dead certain he won New Mexico, where, supposedly, Bush won by 5,000 votes, but you had a massive non-count of Hispanic and Native-American votes. If you’re Navajo, they throw out your ballot. You get provisional ballots, crap voting machines and they just don’t count them.


LTRS et al: You seem to know enough to have a strong opinion, so if you want a link to the Palast piece...find it yourself!

JD

[John_H]

102. Guess who's still formulating strategy and speaking for the party?

You guessed it! The same 0-3 consultants-spokespeople-surrogates-judo-chess-afficianados that brought un election 2000, 2002, and 2004!

Tell him about the prizes, Johnny. "That's right Pat, every Democrat has won an all expense paid trip to GOP AMERICA in '06 and '08!!! But that's not all! We also get a two years supply of wimpy-surrogate-ass-kick!!"

[Redleg]

106. Kerry voted for all of Bush's programs? Can you name them all?

Or are you just engaging in a bit of hyperbole?

[Lexingtonian]

120. Oh, get real...

Congratulations. You've graduated from Purely Superficial Analysis to Rather Superficial Analysis.

It's always much more fun to blame Kerry than the far more wishywashy and defeatist Party he represented rather more well than you pretend in your revisionism. Let alone take a hard look at the electorate.

[Anon]

123. For those of you that keep citing the exit polls as "evidence"

http://www.ap.org/pages/about/whatsnew/wn_011905.html

http://www.ap.org/media/pdf/EvaluationEdisonMitofsky.pdf

[Anon]

124. And the voting machines

http://www.cleveland.com/election/wide/index.ssf?/election/wide/machines.html

Maybe, sometimes, our candidates lose.

[Vektor]

128. And maybe sometmes they don't.

That is a notorious right wing newspaper. Voinovich quoted from it in his Zell like rant during the Jan. 6 debate, and we all laughed and said "Yet another right winger quotes the Plains Dealer like it's gospel."
That rag is Faux News set to newsprint.

[Anon]

131. Alright. I'll rememember that

However, why isnt anyone else doing studies like that?

[Vektor]

133. Actually...

There have been a number of reports released about both the unlikelihood of the election results being valid, and the distribution of the voting machines...

The Plains Dealer is the only source I have seen that states that machines were distributed fairly, and that minority and inner city precincts were properly equipped. Eyewitnesses at the scene of these suppressed precincts not only stood in line for up to ten hours to cast their vote, but observed as machines were actually REALLOCATED to suburban Bush heavy precincts, where the lines were not nearly as long, anyway. This was all detailed in Conyers report, and captured on film...it was pretty ugly.

[RaleighNCDUer]

140. Yeah, sure. I remember the pictures of all those suburbanites

standing in the cold for six hours waiting for a chance to vote.

Get real.

[LTRS]

163. Denial is apparently much more comfortable

... and that is understandable. But you can't fix the problems in our party if you won't admit they exist. Sad. Because that means we will probably just keep on losing.

[Vektor]

129. I'm not sure what that accomplishes...

It's one opinion in a sea of hundreds by various mathematicians and statisticians that indicate Bush's "win" is a mathematical impossibility.
Try looking at some of those reports. They are very disturbing.

[RaleighNCDUer]

139. From what I read, the report keeps coming back to the unprovable

'republicans refused the questionaire in higher numbers'. They offered no proof of that, other than the supposed proportionatly higher numbers of republican votes. Then again, fraud would account for the same, exact discrepancy.

They don't dare admit that the changes they put in place to account for the unexpected republican victory in 2000 (I gag) actually weakened the exit poll capabilities. They were just as baffled by the 2002 elections in Georgia. And they will continue to be baffled, as long as they refuse to admit to the possibility of fraud.

[AP]

125. What you're saying is basically no Senator can be president

and I don't agree with that.

It wasn't the voting record that mattered. What mattered was not establishing a strong enough cognitive framework within which people could understand his votes, and not having a framework that put a priorty on values that are the Democrats' strengths.

I think the Democrats created an almost insurmountable hurdle the minute they started acting like war records were more important than valuing the working man and giving people opportunities to succeed.

It's absolutely important to tell Americans that you will keep them safe and that bush's actions are not keeping us safe. But when you say that this is the priority -- that how you do other things falls from how you do national security and fight terror -- then you're saying the Republicans strict father values system is the right one for America, and NO Democrat is going to out-Strict Father a Republican (or at least, it's not going to be easy, and it's not going to help the broader Democratic project).

So, when the Democrats decided that it wasn't all that important to articulate a clear message about what Democrats believe in and then fit every issue (even the Congressional votes) within that cognitive framework, Democrats lost. Democrats were too willing to accept the Republican cognitive framework and then try to conform the candidates to that framework. That's a mistake.

[LTRS]

164. Agreed!

"I think the Democrats created an almost insurmountable hurdle the minute they started acting like war records were more important than valuing the working man and giving people opportunities to succeed."

I think that's pretty much what I said.

[AP]

198. But that wasn't caused by voting records, because Kerry had a

voting record that he could have (albeit with some effort) fit within the proper Democratic framework.

[orpupilofnature57]

126. WE LOST! DO TO (PROGRESSIVE) AGENDA,TOO MANY

SAM nunn demos.

[KoKo]

127. We are left with the "Left." The "Peasants with Pitchforks REVOLT....

So...whatever THEY DO..is left up to us to be the "FORCE" behind them...but not to trust them totally...to hold their "feet to the fire" with funding...but to know that it's going to be a LONG HAUL...to REPEL THEM.

It's going to have to be a "many pronged attack." Some of us will have to be as "Ruthless" as "THEY" are. SOME will hang back hopiing that the "Main Stream Media" does a "wake up" and they are the ones who will be the last to support us...but when they DO...it will be curtains for the BUSHCO/PNAC/BFEE/CORPORATISTS...

It's going to be a LONG time coming, though...and the "Last" to show up will get the credit...Are all of us prepared for this? :shrug:

I loved the quote from DU'er "Plaid Adder" who said about Kephra (Scott Lowery) on DU that he was an "Architect."

It takes awhile to build a beautiful building that everyone will credit...

[AuntiBush]

141. He lost?

Jeez. Next thing you'll be telling me is that Gore lost, too!

Let's see, Voter Fraud... let everyone count the many ways!

[CatWoman]

142. ONCE AND FOR ALL -- WHY THIS THREAD FUCKING SUCKS

As long as Republcans control who counts our votes, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference.

We could have ran Jesus Christ, and Diebold would have still seen to his defeat.

[Vektor]

222. HAHAHAHAHA

I am not sure why it is even still up.
I thought flamebait wasn't encouraged.

[newportdadde]

143. Senators make very easy targets.. we really need a Gov to run.

[Jose Diablo]

149. Once and for all - Kerry did not lose

The election was rigged.

[MercutioATC]

151. Opinions are like bellybuttons...everybody has one.

Enjoy yours.


Mine differs.

[NVMojo]

153. If Karl Rove is reading this, he must be smiling with satisfaction.

The Dems are beating on Kerry worse than his paid minions, the Swiftboatfeckers. Rove has won in his own mind. He is the enemy.

[MercutioATC]

156. Or, possibly, Bush just got more votes....

...no "they stole it", no vast conspiracy, no Rove, just a lot of ignorant voters.

[robbedvoter]

166. Yup. 11 million martians landed, voted, took off. Check the polls now

and wonder - where did W's voters go?

[MercutioATC]

168. Well, they went to the polls on 11/2...

Like I said, it's an opinion. I have mine. You're free to believe whatever you'd like.

[Name removed]

171. Deleted message

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

[MercutioATC]

173. Now, there....it'll be O.K......just go to your happy place...

:eyes:

[SammyWinstonJack]

169. Prove to me that Kerry lost.

:eyes: And Kerry never has been and never was a "flip flopper" ! Gawd! This crap is getting old! Kerry was defeated in the Corporate Paid for Media. He was a great candidate and would have made an excellent President!

[MercutioATC]

174. I'm a yellow dog Dem and I only voted for him as a vote against Bush.

I thought Kerry sucked.

Seriously.


I don't find it too hard to believe that a lot of other people had the same impression of him.

[Vektor]

190. Most people liked him...

And rightly so.
But I guess it's easy to sit at home on your computer and criticize a war hero, and a great man whose entire life has been a series of astounding accomplishments.

[MercutioATC]

192. Well, it IS easy to criticize a Dem who voted FOR the IWR and the Patriot

Act...


It IS easy to state that Kerry had zero appeal to most Americans. It IS easy to state that Kerry, in recent years, seems to take whatever actions are politically prudent, not politically courageous.


...but that's just me (and a BUNCH of other Dems)

[Vektor]

194. Do you have any idea...

...what his "vote for the IWR" meant?

AGAIN: HE VOTED FOR THE USE OF FORCE AS A LAST RESORT WITH A COALITION-- NOT A UNILATERAL, IMPULSIVE MOVE.

Also, the Patriot Act has been completely abused. Just because Bush fucked up what responsibility he has been given does not mean that's Kerry's fault.

What Kerry voted for and what Bush DID with the authority are two different things.

Kerry had much appeal to a good 57 million Americans.

I doubt this "bunch" you are referring to are Dems at all.

[MercutioATC]

196. Yes, I do...which has been my argument since the primaries.

There are two possibilities:

1) Kerry voted for the IWR because he's a political opportunist. Public sentiment at the time supported the war and most politicians realized this.

2) Kerry voted for the IWR because he's a naive idiot. What person in their right mind would vote to give an opposition President who'd surrounded himself with a Cabinet just to the right of Atilla the Hun Congressional support to wage war without any safeguards?


I'm actually being kind by assuming he's a political opportunist.

[Vektor]

200. Neither.

I think he saw merit in SOME increased regulations after a terrorist attack, as did many. So he gave him the benefit of the doubt and chose, as MANY did, to believe that Bush would actually adhere to the legislation with some degree of responsibility and not screw everything up to the extent he did.

Kerry is not an opportunist or naive. He has spent 35 years serving this country, and that's a pretty long time to put on an act...he's a hell of a man, and Bush has miserably failed and let down anyone who voted to give him an ounce of credit. That's Bush's fault. Not Kerry's.

No amount of nay-saying is going to convince me that Kerry is a man of dubious character. I have spent many years researching and studying his career, life, and accomplishments, and was a constituent of his for 17 years. I know all I need to.

[MercutioATC]

202. Which is why we all have the right to differing opinions.

...but it IS opinion, not "fact".

[Vektor]

205. That's correct...

...and opinions are fine. I just saw it more as an attack to accuse him of opportunism and what not, when he he's put his ass on the line for this country on more than one occasion. He has been very brave on many occasions. He may not be perfect, but he has done a lot of good things.

[MercutioATC]

208. I'll agree that he has done that in the past.

...which is why I was so disappointed in the present. To me (opinion) he always angled for the "popular" position...starting in the primaries. I realize that others feel differently, I just have seen nothing to disabuse me of this opinion.

[Vektor]

211. I guess I just don't see it that way.

I think he has been very noble, and still is. I think the MSM has done a hell of a job debasing him, though. We may just be at an impasse here...
:shrug:

[MercutioATC]

212. Fair enough.

Sorry if I came off kinda rough. It certainly wasn't directed at you.

:)

[Vektor]

216. it's ok...

I'm a little sensitive about the bashing.
You were civil, which is all I ask. :-)

[Catherine Vincent]

172. Kerry didn't lose.

Sorry everyone for kicking this stupid thread.

[SammyWinstonJack]

176. Not sorry for kicking this stupid thread!

Kerry didn't lose! bu$h stole the election for a second time.

[moggie12]

175. You know, at one point I was horrified by threads like this

But now I think it's therapeutic and useful. For example, the "Yes, you moron, there was massive fraud/No, you a**hole, there wasn't," debate was mostly resolved when one Poster came up with a compromise: The fraud camp would relentlessly work on seeking incontrovertable proof of fraud while the non-fraud camp would work on getting true election reform and trying to get Democrats elected in '06. I thought that was fantastic: If both sides are successful, we'll be in great shape.

The "Kerry sucks/No, he doesn't" debate is also very useful, at least in my opinion. I think both sides are right, believe it or not. He is, indeed, a fine man, but our primary system needs a little work and what looked good about him in '03 maybe wasn't quite what was needed in '04. And Good Lord, that campaign of his could have used a lot more smarts (we already got some progress on that, though -- Shrum retired -- YIPPIE!!). It's kind of mean to be so harsh on Kerry though -- he really did give it his all and those Bush turds are the scum of the earth and not easy to battle against. Anyway, I think a continuing debate on the '04 race will help us realize what we can do better next time. That's why I think it's so good to talk about this stuff -- learning from mistakes is essential. (I could do without the name-calling on these threads, but maybe that's just me).

When the Kerry issue gets resolved, I'd like to go on to another festering sore: The "DLC sucks/No, it doesn't" debate. I don't think we can win elections until we figure that one out.

[Clarkie1]

177. Fantastic post every dem should read! n/t

[Vektor]

188. Many did read it.

Most vomited.
:puke:

[Clarkie1]

189. I think it is accurate - I have nothing against Kerry, but facts are facts

Even with the fraud, the author of the post accurately delineates all of Kerry's fatal political weaknesses.

What parts of the post do you disagree with, specifically?

[Vektor]

193. I think those are the poster's personal opinions.

Those "weaknesses" that this person listed are just a slew of insults by someone who has spent this entire thread calling Democrats stupid, pussies and tin foil hatters, etc... They are not FACTS.

One personal attack after another.

That's all. No factual information involved. Just flame bait.

What don't I agree with? Baseless attacks. Of any kind.

[Clarkie1]

220. there is factual information, and the assertions are not baseless

I don't think any objective person could argue otherwise.

I respect Kerry, but all those weaknesses did cost him votes.

[Vektor]

223. Can't agree.

"We lost because the messaging sucked and sucked badly"

How is this fact? Saying "something sucks" is only fact in Beavis and Butthead land.

They are character assassinations, based on the poster's negative opinion.

I don't think any objective person could argue with that.

Assertions are not facts. They are opinions with an extra bit of pushiness thrown in. This is plain and simple flame bait.

[Clarkie1]

225. Here's a fact

"Kind of hard to explain to voters why Bush was wrong on tax cuts, NCLB, the patriot act, the Iraq war, ad nausuem, when you voted FOR all that stuff as a senator."

Even if we say Kerry did not vote "for all that stuff," it was still hard to explain senate procedures to voters as in "I voted for the war before I voted against it."

I don't think that can be argued by any objective person, really.

[Vektor]

227. Too easy...

You can argue that Bush was wrong on anything you damn well please. Voting to give a president responsibility to handle a situation, then calling him on it when he fucks up is totally and absolutely acceptable.

So..it's an opinion that you "can't argue."
Any objective person CAN'T argue that.

In fact it's plain wrong to say that!! Kerry CAN AND DID argue that Bush abused and misused the responsibility he was given. And he argued it pretty effectively. LTRS can whine about Kerry until blue in the face, and others can try to back it. I'm not buying it. Done now.

Over and out.

[IronLionZion]

203. NO MORE SENATORS

They can spin and attack every vote. That's ridiculous. They would have done the same to any senator or congressperson.

That's why we need governors, generals, any kind of executive position but no more legislative ones.

[LeftofU]

237. I agree...

They always seem to sell thier souls there.

[googly]

210. IMHO Kerry had one BIG problem....NO Charisma

Charisma is hard to define. John Kennedy had it by the ton.
So does Bill Clinton. So did Ronald Reagan. I think it is the
ability to connect with people, just be able to talk to them
and make them feel comfortable. Kerry is more of a policy wonk.
He seems to be very knowledgeable on issues as the debates proved.
But he can not make small talk in front of a crowd.

It is too bad we lost John Kennedy Jr. He had name recognition,
looks, and charisma. Where is our Mitt Romney? Heck I would settle
for someone like Jeb Bush. Or, better yet where is our Arnold?

[progressiveright]

219. kerry did screw up

Flip flopper? Every senator's record can be made into flip-flopper, senators usually vote against bills because they want to pass a slightly different bill that does the same thing better (McCain and Hagel defended Kerry on that point more than most democrats). 'I voted against 80 billion before I voted for it' is exactly that, why in the world Kerry couldn't get that simple point across is anybody's guess.

Kerry ran on his war record, he completely ignored his opposition to vietnam war, many people learned about it in a negative way from Swift Boat Veterans. The simple response to them is that the answer was already given when all those people that actually served with Kerry stood on the stage with him at the convention, these other veterans are a part of republican propaganda and did not serve with him, that simple message should have been repeated by every single democrat over and over again.

He did not take principled stance on the war. He failed to define democratic party and democratic agenda in simple, attractive terms, lay out specific and attractive (if oversimplified) solutions for war and economy that could get through to voters. He was not charismatic.