"Punishing the Democrats didn't turn out so well in 2000."

[TheWraith]

"Punishing the Democrats didn't turn out so well in 2000. The Democrats themselves weren't punished, but millions and millions of people around the world were. Many at the cost of their lives. This isn't a game." --Russ Feingold

[Lunabelle]

1. No matter how pissed off I get

I will always vote, even if someone swears to me it doesn't count. I just can't not vote.

[Luminous Animal]

28. Feingold did not say that. Laurence Lewis at DKos did.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/19/1008728/-Feingold-to-support-Obama-for-president-in-2012?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos%29

[TheWraith]

73. It was quoted in another thread in a context that implied Feingold had said it.

From there I thought it deserved attention.

[FarLeftFist]

2. If you don't vote than you have no right to complain.

Edit: ALWAYS VOTE!

[Xicano]

22. That's not true!!!

While I myself always vote, I do not believe its right to tell someone who didn't that they have no right to complain.

Often times choosing not to vote is a vote in of itself. Its a vote which says you don't agree with any of the choices, so you abstain. For an extreme example: What if the only two choices were choosing between a murderer or a rapist? Would your not voting for either preclude you from complaining about what the winner does later? No of course not, and especially if you're a tax paying member of society.

[treestar]

88. Abstaining from civic society means one has no influence on it

and no right to complain. Vote at least for some write in.

People on the fringes waste time if they complain. They have a big job to persuade a lot of people to vote their way. It's just complaining to rant on about how they do not.

[Xicano]

93. Voting for "None of the above" isn't abstaining from civic society

And anyone regardless of whether they voted or not has a right to complain about what decision makers do which affect them, especially if they pay taxes.

[treestar]

94. Yet it is

The person should run themselves if they have such an ego. And if so few people are willing to vote for a person, that person might want to consider whether they are right on things. People who are right should be able to convince at least a fringe. People doing worse than the tea party need to consider whether they have any valid ideas.

[murielm99]

35. I remember telling my brother that years ago.

He moved, and was "too busy" to change his voter registration. He wanted to vote for Carter.

When Reagan won, he did nothing but gripe. I would not listen.

After about the third time that I told him to stop griping, he registered to vote.

[leftstreet]

3. Abandoning the base turned out well. The Dems got their GOP opposition

Republicans get the blame.

Powder remains dry.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

[Number23]

4. Wraith, really. I understand and appreciate what you're trying to do. But why bother?

I can't tell if the people here constantly screaming that both parties are the same or that they won't vote or whatever are serious or what. Who do these people honestly think that they will hurt if they don't vote? Why do they think that one of the most effective and sought after tactics by Republicans is voter suppression?

REPUBLICANS DON'T WANT YOU TO VOTE. Republicans WIN BIG when voter turnout is low as has been proven over and over and over again. So again, exactly WHO do these people think they are hurting if they don't vote?

The idea that anyone thinks that not voting for a Dem candidate will somehow make more liberal candidates magically appear on their ballots is the battle cry of the unhinged and under-medicated. Getting more progressive candidates on the ballot should be the goal, NOT sitting home and crying like an infant because they're not already there.

[ZombieHorde]

26. Punishing Democrats by not voting may not be a winning strategy,

but just expecting people to vote for the lesser evil seems to have the same result: people stay home on election day.

The lesser evil tactic would work better if people were legally obligated to vote.

[Telly Savalas]

77. I'll take that to heart if I ever run for office.

But since I'm not running for office, my choice is restricted to whether I vote for the best option on the ballot or not.

[Luminous Animal]

32. To bad the OP fabricated the part that Feingold said this. Because Feingold said no such thing.

[Number23]

47. And? Do you think that changes the point I made?

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

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

[Number23]

64. Wow. You sound healthy, rational and sane.

My point was in reference to what was said and not who said it. But based on the fact that you are running all up and down this thread "proving" that Feingold didn't say the quote, I'm not surprised you didn't get that.

[Luminous Animal]

67. Like I said. Post an OP that isn't tainted by this thread, and I'll respond. I refuse

to engage in any substantive discussion in a thread that starts out with a disgusting blatant lie. I will not be part of legitimizing Rovian propaganda.

[SavWriter]

5. So we have LBJ two

And we console ourselves that it's the best we can do while we twist arms all over the world to keep our troops fighting and dying in this generations Quagmire. We don't dare commit to a full fledged war. We don't dare pull the troops out. How many more poor rural kids. How many more resident aliens will die trying to earn citizenship? How many inner city kids will join in desperation and die because it's the best we can hope for?

LBJ was a bad choice in 1964. Nixon was bad in 1968. But here is the kicker. We now sound like Nixon. We want peace, and we will reap the fruits of victory after the next escalation. We will achieve peace through slaughtering those who oppose our corporate imperialist rule.

[SavWriter]

6. So we have LBJ two

Sorry computer duped it. My apologies

[Skip Intro]

7. Support DINOs or kill many around the world. That's the choice, eh?

What a blatant attempt at coercion.

[hughee99]

70. Is that the choice, though?

In '08, the Dems took the White House and controlled both houses of congress. Did the killing stop then? Support DINOs doesn't seem to prevent the killing of many around the world.

[quaker bill]

75. The choice is the choice

describe it however you like.

[gateley]

8. K&R! nt

[Roselma]

9. I think we're going into 2012 with lots of discouraged

liberals thinking of either sitting this out, or voting for a third party candidate for president. If they sit the election out, then those coattails that would extend to Democrats in congressional races also suffer. Thing is...you won't see Republicans sit out an election. They get behind their nominee even if it means they have to pinch their nose while marking their ballot. If you wonder how Republicans have been so successful, it is because they never dislike their own guy enough to sit an election out. Also, I think they learned with Ross Perot's third party candidacy, that third parties are spoilers. It might feel good to vote for the third party guy, but there is a price to pay. They are probably still kicking themselves over Clinton and swearing that they'll never let that happen to them again.

[dameocrat67]

12. in fact the republicans sat out on mccain, dole and george the firsts n/t

n/t

[Cosmocat]

101. it took 8 years of the worst president in our lives

and a half senile and painfully desperate presidential candidate and complete flake VP candidate for the GOP to have a SLIGHT downtick in turnout.

Dems get a good, not perfect, but good president and are leaking support all over the place in the base.

Meanwhile, when the Rs had the worst president in our lives in office, they supported that disater 101 percent at least to got him reelected.

Rs are TOO loyal, the Ds not loyal enough.

[Solly Mack]

10. Feingold didn't say that did he? Isn't that a quote from the author of the article

who is talking about Feingold's statement?

So, those aren't Feingold's words.

http://iowaindependent.com/60363/russ-feingold-out-for-2012-elections

Nowhere in this article does it say Feingold said that.

However, in this article, the author does say it...and it is quite obvious that those are not Feingold's words....that quote belongs to the author.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/19/1008728/-Feingold-to-support-Obama-for-president-in-2012

[gateley]

14. Could be, but I wholeheartedly agree with it, no matter whose

words they are.

[Solly Mack]

15. 2000 was the year the SCOTUS gave the Presidency to Bush

If anyone punished the Democrats in 2000, it was the Bogus Scotus....not the voters.

Feingold would NEVER make such a stupid comment.

And it does matter who that quote belongs to...since it is being attributed to someone who didn't say it.

[gateley]

24. It was close enough for them to cheat in the first place. Had

we walloped him, they wouldn't have been able to even get it to SCOTUS.

They never could/would have attempted it in 2008.

ETA: I still don't care who said the words - it's the sentiment with which I agree. If the OP mistakingly attributed it to Feingold, does that change the actual message?

[Solly Mack]

34. I happen to believe they had every intention of stealing Florida

regardless of how the vote went...with JEB Bush as governor and Harris in office.....the fix was already in. I also have reason to believe that the Bush team knew exactly how those 5 on the Supreme Court would vote.

[nadinbrzezinski]

42. It was a coup, and it is time people wake up to that fact

the counting was stopped by GOP and CIA operatives. The stealing of the election had way too many things in common with operations in latin america.

It is time to stop blaming NADER and blame the GOP... they did steal it, and by the way GORE won.

People forget that he took it all the way to where he could peacefully take it. Listen to his statement the day he conceded. The next step was civil war.. and he wasn't willing to lead that.

It was a coup...

[Autumn]

82. And the Democrats for the most part were silent

and all too eager to embrace the SCOTUS appointment. I can not ever forget or forgive that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

91. I guess that was one of the reasons Gore was not willing to

go beyond where he did. There was zero support, except for the Black Caucus really.

[demosincebirth]

18. +100

[Luminous Animal]

31. And you have no problem with the OP flat out lying?

[gateley]

79. Ah, therein likes the difference between us. You're eager to judge and claim some

one a liar, when I believe the OP was mistaken. I trust my fellow DUers and we all make mistakes frequently (present company excepted?).

I saw the OP from which this was taken, and it could have easily been misconstrued as part of the Feingold quote - it wasn't clear that it was the author.

So what DOES bother me is someone baselessly calling someone else a flat-out liar, assuming the worst in others, and being judgmental.

[chill_wind]

72. Honesty and accuracy would be desirable, don't you think?

[gateley]

80. Of course, but I saw the OP from which this was taken and it seemed

as though this was part of the Feingold quote -- which I thought it was, too. There's no lack of honesty in this OP, just an honest mistake.

[Skip Intro]

16. You are correct. It is a quote from the author of a DKos article that also quotes Feingold. nt

[Solly Mack]

19. But it will fly all over DU as a Feingold quote.

[gateley]

29. I'm sure you'll be flying all over right behind it crying "foul".

Honestly, I don't think this is going to go viral. If it does, it does. People who agree with it (me) aren't going to all of a sudden discount it because it was said by some writer.

People who don't agree won't all of a sudden think it's right just because it may be attributed to Feingold, as evidenced by some posts upthread (before you noticed the inaccuracy).

[Solly Mack]

37. Well, I guess if people are OK with a lie. Have at it!

It's not about agreeing or disagreeing with the quote...it's about lying about who said it.

Of which I have made perfectly clear.

[gateley]

87. It was a mistake - not a lie. I'm not okay with people judging others

without basis. I saw the OP from which this came, and I thought it was from Feingold, too. Honest mistake.

[Luminous Animal]

40. Feingold is a well respected Democrat. His opinion has weight. Attributing this quote to him is a

flat out lie. The OP should be taken down.

[City Lights]

84. I couldn't agree more! eom

[Luminous Animal]

43. A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.

[Luminous Animal]

46. Is that the tactic? Wasting our time debunking lies? Is this what we have to look forward to?

Obama supporters making things up in order to support their positions?

Really, you have to utilize lies? You support using Republican tactics against your fellow Democrats? Ugh. Pathetic.

[RaleighNCDUer]

58. Why not? It works for the Republicans, so why not the DLC. er,

Third Way, uh, New Democrats?

[Luminous Animal]

30. Feingold did not say that. The OP is flat out lying.

[Solly Mack]

39. I know. But well..you've read the thread. You see it.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

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

[Solly Mack]

48. It's an appeal to authority...and insulting to Feingold.

Course, I'm sure the people cheering would never have a problem with words they didn't say being attributed to them. Snort.

[Luminous Animal]

50. The Wraith's post at the top of a google search. Congratulations to Wraith for catapulting the

propaganda; i.e., a flat out blatant lie.

[Solly Mack]

54. I more amused than anything.

[Luminous Animal]

55. I'm stil pissed. I still have hope that DU has more integrity than FR.

Though, I am thinking, now that we are allowed to make up quotes, I sure I can come up with 1000s of fake Obama quotes.

[Solly Mack]

57. Don't do that. (Please) That would only feed into the bullshit.

[Luminous Animal]

59. My OP is deleted. Thanks. I am a hothead paisano.

[Solly Mack]

60. Nah...just passionate. :)

[dameocrat67]

11. not surprised he advocates obama now

he did in 2008 as well.

as for 2000, there is little if any proof much would have changed if Gore won. Lieberman was his vp. All dlcers supported the iraq war resolutin and Gore was chairman of the dlc.

i doubt naderites thought it was a game. i also doubt they were punishing gore. they just did not like him.

[Luminous Animal]

36. Fake quote. Feingold never said that. NEVER.

Laurence Lewis at DKos said it.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/19/1008728/-Feingold-to-support-Obama-for-president-in-2012?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos%29

[RaleighNCDUer]

62. Gore was never Chairman of the DLC - he was a member, but

turned his back on them during the 2000 campaign, which kind of screwed things up as it wound up with a continuity break in the management of his campaign. It also meant that hardcore DLCer Lieberman was less than enthusiastic in supporting his own running mate. It left Gore with a mixed message that did not resonate with either the DLCers or the old Democratic base - and despite that he won anyway.

[RegieRocker]

13. The responsibility of satisfied democrats lies solely on the backs

of the elected democratic representatives period. They are to blame for any dissatisfaction.

[demosincebirth]

17. True. We elected Nixon twice, because we were pissed at the Dems for

the Vietnam war

[OffWithTheirHeads]

21. Who we Kimosabie?

I had the Dicks picture on my toilet seat so I could piss on him at every opportunity!

[dameocrat67]

23. wrong in 72 it was the war hawks that abandoned the candidate

who was antiwar George McGovern. The protoneocons like Richard Perle and Bill Kristol were responsible for that loss and we have been pandering to those shits ever since.

[demosincebirth]

95. No sir, we dems knew (I guess not you) that McGovern didn't have a

snowballs chance in hell to win. And yet, a certain faction of the Party pushed and pushed for his nomination and certain defeat at the polls. What good did that do? The war lasted another four plus years. Same thing happened in '68, but a different scenario all because a certain faction of the Democratic Party wanted it their own way come hell or high water. And guess what? Nixon elected for four years instead of Humphrey

[demosincebirth]

98. Nah, we lost the election ourselves by bitching over whining. And that

riot we caused in Chicago...that kind of turned people off. You remember that. Or maybe we forgot who our enemy was. Not Democrats, the Republicans! The demonstrations, that turned into a big riot, should have been held at the Republican Convention, not at our Convention! Or maybe not at all.

[Luminous Animal]

38. TheWraith is mistaken. Feingold never said that. The quote is from a DKos diary.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/19/1008728/-Feingold-to-support-Obama-for-president-in-2012?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos%29

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

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

[demosincebirth]

96. I still agree with the statement.

[ZombieHorde]

20. How did expecting people to vote for the lesser evil work out?

If politicians don't earn votes, they won't win elections.

Punishing Democrats may not work, but just expecting people to vote how you want them to works about the same.

[dmallind]

76. It got us the last half of the Clinton miracle - fringe leftists whined about him too.

[Smarmie Doofus]

25. We won't face that dilemma if we nominate a credible candidate.

To wit: someone who isn't tied to the mistakes of the past and who isn't the prisoner of a flawed, non-Democratic ideology.

[Luminous Animal]

27. Feingold did not say that. Laurence Lewis at DKos did.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/19/1008728/-Feingold-to-support-Obama-for-president-in-2012?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos%29

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our third quarter 2011 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

Click here to donate

[saras]

44. So who was it, besides the far right, who was "punishing the Democrats"?

Feingold says...

"The entire political climate is more infected by the domination of very wealthy individual and corporate interests than perhaps at any time in our nation’s history. That is why I founded Progressives United, an organization devoted not only to overturning the Citizens United decision but to challenging those involved in the political process who, for short-term political gain, are willing to seek and accept unlimited corporate contributions. This practice should be strongly opposed regardless of party..."

It's clear he's saying corporatists are the problem. Which I agree with 100%. But is the OP intended to imply the corporatists punished the Democrats? How? By foisting Obama on the Dems as the candidate? I don't think so - that's not how Obama got the nomination.

As far as Laurence Lewis, he seems to be saying that, even though corporatists are the real problem, that we must necessarily support them, because they threaten us with even worse if we don't. He sounds like every other dipshit that tries to sell us on the "my way, disaster, and nothing else in the ENTIRE UNIVERSE" scenario. I automatically mistrust him, even before I read the article in detail and research whatever assertions are fact-based enough to be testable, though there isn't much.

And FWIW, neither article says anything whatsoever about the source or meaning of the "punishing the Democrats" meme.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

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

[slipslidingaway]

49. Unrec and alert. n/t

[Cerridwen]

51. YOU made me hit YOU!!!!!!! n/t

[indurancevile]

52. unrec for false attribution.

[gkhouston]

56. False attribution doesn't turn out so well, either.

Way to shoot your argument and your credibility in the foot.

[H2O Man]

61. pants on fire

[emilyg]

63. Unrec.

[Matariki]

65. The Democrats WON in 2000. n/t

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

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

[Fumesucker]

68. The Reality Based Community has left the building..

The "quote" in the OP is a blatant fabrication.

[chill_wind]

71. Appears so. n/t

[OnyxCollie]

90. Catapulting the propaganda.

It's not just for the GOP anymore.

[AndyTiedye]

74. Kicked and Recommended

[Edweird]

78. The cake is a lie.

[City Lights]

81. Unrec for putting words into Feingold's mouth.

:thumbsdown:

[backscatter712]

83. Even if Feingold didn't say it, the sentiment is correct.

"Punishing" the Democrats by withholding support only gets Republicans elected, and gets the American people and the rest of the world ass-fucked.

[OnyxCollie]

85. So an OP lie can stand,

but pointing out that it's the same tactic used by Lee Atwater gets deleted?

How much should I donate to continue "catapulting the propaganda?":eyes:

[City Lights]

97. Nice, eh?

x(

[rucky]

86. How do you influence your party?

When you have very little time or money, what leverage do you have aside from your vote?

When it comes down to it, many who threaten to withhold their votes are doing just that - threatening to gain some sort of influence. You can argue that following through with that threat is detremental to your own cause, but it is equally detremental to the party to ignore a significant base of their donors, volunteers and voters.

Responding to the threat with "then enjoy President Palin" will NEVER convince someone else to change their stance, because their need is for their voice to be heard and others - however logical their argument may be - are responding by shutting down the one thing they're seeking.

[Autumn]

89. You are twisting the facts to suit your agenda

no one punished the Democrats and Russ did not say that.

[lynne]

92. Rewarding the Democrats in 2008 hasn't turned out so hot, either -

- and its still not a game. So, what's your point??? :shrug:

[Scurrilous]

99. K & R

:thumbsup:

[RegieRocker]

100. Stop the spin...

Democratic politicians f##k ups hurt themselves in 2000.

[Joe Fields]

102. "Punishing the Democrats didn't turn out so well in 2000."

Just like this thread.

The ideology behind it stinks....