Things are becoming really startling

[politicasista]

Ever since the endorsements came out it seems as StoryTeller said, the discussions on DU have gone downhill. It's even more baffling, I mean very baffling that somebody speaks out against a former Democratic president, nothing else that person did in the last four years matters anymore.

Praise has now been replaced by "I lost respect for" "I will never vote or support ____ again" or "my respect is even lower" yada, yada, ya. Not to mention all the hindsight (and sometimes I am guilty of that also) talk of how another Dem should have ran, gotten nominated, beaten Bush (never mind the Rovian machine) and not being in the mess we are in now.

This whole primary and the reactions to everything are baffling (as sandnsea said). Maybe some people or DU has jumped the shark I guess.

Weird indeed. :hangover: :hide:









edit for spelling

[Mass]

1. i have seen more stupid. Clinton supporters blasting Carter preventively

because he could endorse Obama!!!

It is not only Kerry. It is everybody who does not endorse their candidate.

And, as he has adopted the role of attack dog for Obama, they see it as even worse.

[politicasista]

2. That is disgusting

Not to mention the over the top attacks on Uncle Ted. If Carter (or Gore if he decides to endorse) come out for Obama (a big "if"), there will be more heads explode than ever.



It's just startling that it comes from those that used to call this forum home. But JI7 and TayTay warned us it was going to be like this if Kerry (and others) came out for Obama.


And I agree with you, stronger skin is a plus right here.

[ray of light]

3. Maybe Skinner needs a new animation icon...

*heads exploding*

Sort of does sort of feel that way around here. Can't wait for the primaries to be over.

I usually avoid most of GD but you just can't escape it.

[politicasista]

4. Exactly n/t

[beachmom]

5. It's ugly out there, and Kerry is on purpose taking hits for Obama.

It's not a fun role, but he decided to take it. He will do that doubly during the General Election, whether the nominee is Hillary or Obama. And the Clintons, mind you, will accept his offer of help -- you can bet on that.

[politicasista]

6. Yep. Even if the good posters that say good things about him

have to restort to RW talking points. Yep. He is the attack dog and they hate that, but he will do it for the nominee.

[karynnj]

9. Especially on the Florida thing - which I doubt he thought was a good idea in the first place

Where the hell is Dean. This was his inability to negotiate or even consider doing what the Republicans thought to do - give half. It really bothers me that Kerry will take a huge amount of flack on this - likely because no one else of his stature would. To put Obama out there would be insane.

[globalvillage]

10. That's a great question.

Where is Dean on the whole Florida thing? Isn't it his job to deal with these issues?

[politicasista]

12. Yep. n/t

[Mass]

11. I agree, It bothers me that Kerry is doing that. Where is the DNC?

[karynnj]

13. Dean has never stood up on any of this

I assume had he had a "summit" with the stakeholders - the states, the announced candidates and the DNC - something could have been worked out. All he did was issue an ultimatum and pride himself on not caving - though it meant disenfranchising two states - both big swing states.

The candidates themselves - including Obama - should have protested the decision when it was made. That they didn't and that Dean pulled no alternative out set the stage for this.

I saw Kerry on MSNBC and he was ok - he made a point of saying that he didn't like the situation. I wish Kerry would have had a "Kerry" in 2004. He is a great advocate - but I wish he had pushed the candidates months ago to not leave the situation as is in MI and FL - it isn't right.

[MBS]

14. I don't know--

Really, I think the DNC can't cave on this one. If they let MI and FL do what they wanted, it would set an awful precedent, and, in allowing every state to hold its primary ridiculously early, would make the primaries even more chaotic than they already are.The way I understand it, the vote of the DNC central committee (or whoever the big decision-makers call themselves) to hold the line on this --that is, not allowing any state to hold primaries/caucuses before the agreed-upon dates, was unanimous, or nearly unanimous. They really had to be hard-nosed on this, or risk losing control of the process entirely.

And all the candidates, including Hillary Clinton , agreed to abide by the rules and not campaign. HRC's about-face on this, after agreeing otherwise, and so transparently because she's worried she won't have the votes to win otherwise, is just beyond the pale.

[karynnj]

15. That makes sense - but I still think that starting last saturday

when HRC started making noise on FL, Dean should have been the one out there, making it nonpartisan and making your last point.

[Inuca]

17. Where is Dean?

I kept asking myself the same for the last few days. A CLEAR statement from him is needed I think.

[karynnj]

7. It is the nature of some of the more immature people on DU

and they will change on a dime. Many are very personality oriented and they do not even try to understand the essence of who people are. Look at the Feingold silliness.

People supporting Edwards in his newfound progressive persona, trashed Feingold, as not really a progressive - because if he was he wouldn't have trashed Edwards. Now, Feingold has a record that is extreme in protecting individual rights and is has never been even remotely considered DLC. Edwards was a poster child for the DLC when in Congress. He voted for the bankruptcy bill! So you have progressives acting as if Edwards is the reincarnation of Debs, arguing that he is a real progressive and Feingold isn't.

As to Clinton, I remember when I did defend him. So many attacks were unfair, living a busy life, it was easy to skip the step of really assessing each charge - so I fought all of them. I regret it. It is amazing there are still people doing it, but many are committed emotionally to HRC. When things are as intense as they are, it is hard to reassess who you support.

[politicasista]

8. Yep. It is still baffling n/t

[BlueIris]

16. Some supporters really have decided that winning=destroying opponents (and perceived obstacles)

in every way. Screw appropriateness, sense of occasion, and the need to maintain any kind of relationship with allies. It's a reflection, I think, of how much each candidate has mortgaged on the outcome of this election (a certain person, near as I can figure, has leveraged it all, or believes s/he has).