Letters to the Editor
-
put a fork in it, their done.
The Democrats are dead. They lack central leadership, organization and more importantly a cohesive agenda to attack the Republican's War Machine.
Even wounded with scandals, corruption, a war policy that is a shambles, revelations about spying on citizens monthly and propaganda lies out the ..., the Republicans still manage to circle the wagons and beat the Democrats.
The Dem's are unable to realize that playing fair is out the window, not that they market playing nice to win with but the Dem's need, sadly to say a 'visionary" like Rove on their side to rally the troops and fight the viciousness of the right, tooth and nail.
What's at stake is more than the Democratic Party's survival but the very fundamental roots of our democracy. With a three part system nearly controlled by a party that has forsaken the basis of our democracy and all in the name of naked power and despite the wrapping themselves in the flag, we are, I fear doomed. I'm sure hope I am wrong, I hope that civilized rational discourse could prevail but fear, hate and propaganda seems to be winning.
-
Well, duh
Let's see, take the two putative GOP candidates most widely perceived as being "centrist" (not to mention most widely covered in a positive light) and put them up against two Democrats whom the media has done its level best to demonize and/or marginalize by turns for the past DECADE.
Here's a hint, guys. Maybe we need to see a name on the Democratic ticket that we actually haven't seen there before. At least that way the Mighty Wurlitzer will have to take a few breaths before tearing into them.
-
Why in the World would Democrats Nominate Clinton or Gore?
They're both damaged goods, and of course McCain and Guiliani poll well against them. Hillary's negatives are way too high - an Al, altho a good guy - is just not an alpha leader. Bill Clinton would mop the floor with either of them - so its up to the Dems to find candidates - like John Edwards or Barack Obama - who can galvanize support.
Both McCain and Giuliani have a lot of negatives, too - McCain is an ill-tempered nut and a hard-core hawk on Iraq - and that can be used to crush him. Giulianai is a divorced public adulterer, whose sole claim to fame is he kind of did his job as mayor of NYC at a difficult time. Big freaking deal. He only looked good next to Dubbya.
The most important issue for the Democrats - and perhaps for the Republic - as we can ill afford another incompetent loser like Bush - is to heed Grieve's header
It's about the candidates, stupid
-
The person, not the party
We regular readers of Salon might think that the fight is between Republicans and Democrats, but it seems pretty clear that when it comes to presidental elections, the vast majority of folks use this principle: "I vote for the person, not the party."
Clinton and Gore are (unfortunately) damaged goods -- they may be redeemable, but it won't be easy. A new, admirable leader who runs on a platform of better government and reform of a corrupt and incompetent system is what people want. McCain and Guiliani appear to fill this bill. Remember that people voted for "honest leadership" when Bush "won" in 2000, and I'll bet that will be what propels whoever wins in 2008.
-
Well, yeah, of course.
But you can read this another way. As in, Hillary Clinton may have been anointed the frontrunner by the wagging tongues of the punditocracy, but what is her actual support among democratic voters?
I live in MA, and I don't know anyone who actively yearns for a Hillary Clinton presidency.
What would the McCain v. Kerry numbers be in MA? That might be a better indicator. McCain has had a free ride so far by the press - his saintly aura will suffer some significant dings once the vetting process begins in earnest.
-
Frightening and bad news
Maybe the Rep. candidates ARE better than the Dems, so the free thinking people of Mass. would pick the best choice. Isn't this what we want the people of Red states to do?(a little late, I know). Use these terms if Jeb Bush is the candidate listed in the polls.
-
Feingold Feingold Feingold.
Stop being scared of passion, Democratic Party.
I still believe people respond to passion. I live in Illinois and saw how people came to feel about Obama. People WANTED to vote for him; and couldn't wait to do so. It never felt like a "lesser of two evils," and it was so refreshing.
-
If the Democrats owned the Media
None of the candidates have been horrible. The Republican-run media has merely done a good job of convincing even Democrats of that. If the Democrats owned the media, they would not only have the opportinity to define themselves positively, but also define their political opponents before they had an opportunity to define themselves.
IT'S ABOUT THE MEDIA, STUPID MORONIC SIMPLE MINDED IDIOTS!!!
Look how far Salon has swung in the past year in their fear of
Until everyone figures out what the real problem is, and a way to combat it, we might as well pack it in.
-
As Florida, As Mexico, as eventually everywhere
The tools of persuasion and propaganda have reached such a perfect science, that given two well funded parties and competent candidates, the results will more and more be a virtual tie.
-
Can we please stop polling about McCain, Giulanni, and Clinton?
Polls this far out are pretty much about name recognition, so the pollsters only bother polling head-to-head matchups that feature names people know. Ergo, I understand why it's McCain vs. Clinton, because if they said Allen vs. Biden know one would know who the hell they were talking about.
But let's get real. John McCain will not the nomination of the Republican party. Even though he's their best chance to win, probably - it'll never happen. Can we remember please that the GOP establishment saw to it that McCain would not get the nomination in 2000.... and was so desperate that they chose the lightweight George W. Bush. You don't think they can't find some other "real" conservative to back this next time around?
And you'd think they'd be wise to the fact the country isn't as conservative as they are, but this in the GOP we're talking about - actual opinions of Americans be damned - they're going to insist on their social-security privatizing, spending-cutting, tax-cutting policies no matter what the people actually want.
Giulanni is even more of a fantasy. He's pro-gun-control, pro-choice, and pro-gay-rights. The conservative primary votersi the Republican party will never nominate him.
Also, Clinton is going to get the nomination. She's alienated left-wingers with her "triangulation" into the center... centrists don't think she can get elected anyway. It's not going to happen. she leads polls because of ... you guessed it... name recognition. She's a paper tiger, ala Howard Dean, and if she runs ,which I'm not convinced she will fade quick in the stretch run. She will inspire fear, much like Dean did, to the point of someone getting drafted to stop her (ala Wes Clark in 2004) but it won't matter - she won't be the nominee.
Gore I suppose has a shot, but he's said over and over he's not running.
So yes while obviously generic parties aren't on the ballot, candidates are - these four candidates won't be on the ballot in 2008 either. In any event, we should focus on the midterms. 2 years away from an election, I assure you NO ONE has any idea who the nominees are going to be. Who would have said John Kerry in 2002 or Bill Clinton in 1990?