Movement growing to Dump the Dump Kerry supporters!

[trumad]

And on July 30th 2004 they'll be fucking history!

[JohnLocke]

1. I'll join this group!

:D

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

2. Hear, Hear!!!

Need someone to do perimeter security? ;-)

[WilliamPitt]

3. *snarf*

Funny. The 'Phins still suck, but that was funny.

:)

[trumad]

5. Right back at ya

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x1120223

[WilliamPitt]

7. Yeah, it sucks when you win a championship and have to go

to the White House because of your championship.

Marino never got to go to the White House.

:)

[trumad]

8. Easy Boy..I didn't start that thread..LOL.. And you're wrong about Marino

visiting the White House...

http://www.anaheimwhitehouse.com/aboutus/celebrities.php

[WilliamPitt]

10. I don't see a trophy

:)

[trumad]

19. Here's a trophy...

[WilliamPitt]

24. Heh

Marino?

[trumad]

26. Tom?

[WilliamPitt]

30. Ah, the innocent look of a boy who would never win a championship

Kinda sad.

[trumad]

31. Dude...that's Peter Brady....

Can we get a smilie that indicates "right over your head"?

[displacedtexan]

4. I'm in, too!

Clinton was my second choice, but I worked like a yellow dawg should to get him elected twice!

[acmavm]

6. Why, what's up? Do you mean here at DU? The people who don't have

any interest in ridding us of bush* and just gripe and whine about Kerry, how he's unelectable, too this, too that? Or do you mean something else.

Fill me in, I really want to know.

Kerry is the nominee, people just need to damn well get used to it. Or just openly support bush*. We have the candidate, he is a good man, hell, compared to bush* & co., anyone can probably be classified as a good man.

[juajen]

9. Definitely count me in

I am really tired of those posts.

[vickie]

22. Please include me in this valient effort!

I too would like to join to noble cause of dumping the "Dump Kerry" members! Practical, valueable criticism is welcome - this defeatist whimpering and whining is useless.

Vickie

[Old and In the Way]

11. It's the one's who continually post that Kerry can't win because

__________________. Or "Is Kerry too ____________?

Of course, they cannot just attack him outright, so they resort to rhetorical questions to make their hit, I mean point.

There are some single issue purists here that are willing to discount his entire legacy because of his vote on IWR, or comments he made on Venezuela, or whatever they can use to justify their "will not vote for Kerry". Most of these people have bought the Nader meme "there's no difference between Republicans and Democrats".

More than a few are probably on the clock for the RNC.

[Terry_M]

17. Don't forget

That there may also be people who may not like Kerry because of his stance on more than one issue.

[Kahuna]

18. The Nader supporters had better be careful. They're prime draft bait...

:evilgrin:

[Qutzupalotl]

14. It's in response to this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x521832
about a made-up movement.

[readmylips]

12. You're dumping Kerry???

I don't understand...

[Qutzupalotl]

15. It's a double negative.

See the link in my previous post:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x521832

[trumad]

20. It took my brain about an hour to figure this double Neg out..LOL

My dyslexia is a curse...

[Adelante]

13. Sign me up, Trumad

I'm sick and tired of the whole bunch.

[elperromagico]

16. I have no problem with legitimate questions about Kerry,

his background, his Senate service, his current candidacy, et cetera.

But, as some less fond of Kerry than I would say: "We're stuck with him." He is our nominee, and the suggestion that we should "dump" him is just ridiculous. What kind of message would it send for the Democratic Party to dump the candidate for whom a majority of primary and caucus voters (yes, a majority) have chosen as the Democratic nominee?

[wyldwolf]

23. Most of the "dump Kerry" dems at DU are mad their guy didn't win...

..the nomination.

[elperromagico]

28. My guy didn't win either.

My guy was General Wesley Clark. I still think he would make a better nominee than John Kerry. But does that mean I'm going to actively work against Kerry? No, it sure as hell doesn't.

In this campaign, we have two candidates who have a chance of winning on 2 November: John F. Kerry and George W. Bush. Nader is a candidate, and Nader has an influence, but Nader is not going to be taking the oath of office on 20 January. Neither is the Green Party nominee, nor the Reform Party nominee, nor any other third party nominee.

It's down to Kerry and Bush, and if I am going to choose between them, I am going to go with Kerry. Bush has been given four years to prove himself as a President, and he has failed repeatedly. Kerry has flaws, and there are very legitimate questions about his voting record (particularly in regard to the IWR), but I would rather have a President who represents the majority of my interests than a candidate who represents almost none of them.

My two cents...

[wyldwolf]

29. Wes Clark was my guy, too... and I was being polite... most of the...

"Dump Kerry" people on DU are Dean supporters.

[elperromagico]

36. I knew you were being polite.

I was simply making the point that a lot of us here at DU have "settled" for Kerry. We have not seen the necessity of working against the Democratic nominee, because we know that helping him (whether we supported him from the word "go" or not) is the only way to beat Bush. :hi:

[Colin Ex]

42. Jesus, I can't believe I'm agreeing with Wyldwolf.

But this Dump Kerry bullshit is stupid as fuck.

Remember: WE HAD PRIMARIES. JOHN KERRY WON THEM. (By a lot.)

John Kerry is not my favourite. But he won legitimately (!!!) and now he's the nominee. If you really, really loathe him, vote for Nader or for Brown (I believe that's the socialist candidate?). But don't throw out the democratic process because you didn't get your goddamned way in the primary.

-C

[wyldwolf]

21. I'm IN! Do I get a t-shirt?

[Sparkly]

25. I'll join that movement!

:)

[PopSixSquish]

27. Word!

I'm astounded that anyone takes this idea seriously. Do you have any idea what a political/public relations nightmare this would cause for the new "super" candidate and the Democratic Party as a whole?

Hell, GW wouldn't even have to campaign at all.

[Arkana]

32. Count me in.

I'm tired of hearing people bitch about John Kerry. If it's not a disgruntled Deaniac, it's a bitter Kucinich supporter or a Naderite.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

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

[Sparkly]

34. "Defy progressives"

What the hell makes you "more progressive" than someone who is supporting Kerry, simply because they are supporting Kerry?

What the hell is "progressive" about being willing to hand the Chimp another four years?

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

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

[MadHound]

35. Ooo, let's have mob justice and vigilante purges Oh Boy!!

Instead of doing the logical, traditionally Democratic thing to do, compromise, build a coalition, address EVERYONE'S concerns, left, right and center. Look people, you need the lefties, the Deans, the Greens, and more if you wish to win this fall. That means you've got to give a little to get a little.

Maybe a plank in the platform in favor of UHC, or gay marriage. Or dare I say it, a pledge, a definitive time frame for getting out of Iraq ASAP. Hell, even FDR had to appease the Socialists in his first re-election bid, that's how we wound up with those to little plans called Social Security and Unemployment insurance. Compromise and give and take are all what being part of the real big tent party is all about.

If Kerry would stop being so. . . safe, if he would step up to the plate and issue a definitive time frame in which he would withdraw the US from Iraq, turning control over to a non-US entity(I would suggest the UN), he would not only immediately deflate the air out of Nader, he could wrap up the Greens and the rest of the far left, plus bring in a large bloc of non-voters.

But sad to say, it doesn't yet appear as though Kerry is ready to commit to peace. And as it was in '68, the hawkish outlook on war will cost Kerry and the Democrats the election in '04. Honestly, how can a pacifist vote for one man calling for vigorous prosecution of this war over another calling for the same thing? These are the horns of the dilema that we on the left are caught upon, and all of your fearmongering and bullyboy tactics won't make you or your candidate anymore enticing.

So as I said before, perhaps it is time the Democratic party relearn the fine art of compromise.

[trumad]

39. Let's learn it now?

Please.... Let's learn it after we get Bush out of office.

[MadHound]

40. But you see friend, that's what we on the left have been promised

For decades now! Wait until we get (fill in the name of devil 'Pug president here) out of office, and then we can deal. Yeah, right sure. And look what we got with such lovlies as Clinton, ooh, outsourced jobs with NAFTA, and a shredded social safety net under the guise of welfare "reform". Sorry friend, but I've got to call bullshit on that ploy, I'm old enough to have seen it too many times now.

No friend, the time to deal is now. The Democratic party needs as many far lefts and nonvoting liberals as it can possibly get, and the only way you're going to get them is if the party deals with the left. It isn't that we wish to deliberately throw the election to Bush, we do see the full danger of keeping the boy emperor in office. But for any committed peace activist to willfully vote for a candidate who is rattling the saber as much as Kerry is like asking a vegan to eat meat. It isn't going to happen, we've seen that, yes, Democrats make wars too, just as bloody and just as deadly.

I know that it comes across as being bent over a barrel, but there is no help for that, reality is that way. If Kerry would come out with a plan for getting out of Iraq ASAP, he would have the far left and non voting liberals swarming to the ballot box. If not, most will sit on their hands. Besides, I doubt that such a stance would cost Kerry that many votes. Hell, with atrocities upon atrocities piling up, most of America is wishing we hadn't even heard of Iraq and would welcome our bringing the troops home.

So we will see if Mr. Kerry has the courage of his former convictions. Let us hope that he has the wisdom to see his choices.

[DU GrovelBot]

38. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v2.0
==================
 
The time now is 10:34:38PM EDT, Monday, May 10, 2004.
 
There are exactly...
6 days,
1 hours,
25 minutes, and
22 seconds left in our fund drive.
 
This website could not survive without your generosity. Member donations 
pay for more than 84% of the Democratic Underground budget. Don't let
GrovelBot become the next victim of the Bush economy. Bzzzt.
 
Please take a moment to donate to DU right now. Thank you for your support.
 
- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot

Click here to donate.

[Zorra]

41. The New Dump Kerry Movement: We Should Dump Kerry

right into the Oval office on Jan. 20th, 2005, so he can get right to work in his new job as President.

[SoonerShankle]

43. United We Stand!

Divided We Fall!

Let's not fall into another four years of Bush policies. Let's stand behind Kerry, the next POTUS!!!

[zeemike]

44. That sounds good to me

Let’s divide ourselves still further by purging those who would dare want a more forceful candidate.
We only have six months to convince those that are dissatisfied with things to not even bother to vote, so get with it.

[trumad]

45. Ahhh the old Nader argument

except were not buying that rationale this time...