Letters to the Editor
-
Experience in losing...
@E-Man an elephant never forgets?
...it's so hard, otherwise, to use up our old supply of Eagelton jokes...
McGovern might actually have some decent experience about how not to lose. Knowing what not to do can be very valuable.
-- Uncle Fester
In that case, the Department of Experience Gained From Losing is fully staffed!
McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry...
Such a rich tradtion of losers; talk about some "very valuable" experience! They sure know "what not to do"!
-
@ Uncle Fester
McGovern might actually have some decent experience about how not to lose. Knowing what not to do can be very valuable.
McGovern does have experience about how not to lose, and so does the democratic party. But they refuse to learn from it. A 2006 Harris poll indicates the following breakdown of how the American electorate identifies themselves:
conservative -- 37%
moderate------ 37%
liberal---------- 19%
If we assume (which is probably not totally accurate, but for the sake of discussion) that republicans capture the entire conservative vote and democrats capture the entire liberal vote, where does that leave us? Republicans need to attract 14% of moderates while democrats need to capture 32% of moderates in order to win the presidency.
So, instead of seeking out a candidate that will appeal to moderates, the activist, liberal idealogues declare to moderates "You are nothing but republican trolls", "We don't need you", "You are nothing but republican-lite", "Liberals and blacks ARE the democratic party", "The party has moved on". All of these are quotes from Obama supporters taken from these threads.
So yes, McGovern has the experience, and the democratic party has the experience, but to very loosely paraphrase, if you refuse to learn from experience, you are doomed... period.
-
@EMan if McCain is smart
He would be doing the same thing and using the neo-cons as examples of what not to do. Alas......
-
McGovern
There's some confusion here about the Clintons' relationship with George McGovern -- they're extremely close. Both Bill and Hillary worked on his 1972 campaign, and they've been very public friends ever since.
I think it might not be best to parse the AP story for signs of disrespect. Considering the man and what I know of his relationship with the Clintons, I'm sure whatever call he made was appropriate. Moreover, out of all the endorsements out there, I'm sure this is one of very few Clinton will take to heart, because -- even putting their relationship aside -- McGovern has a moral authority among old-time democrats that no one other than perhaps Bill or Gore. And she and Gore aren't that close.
No, you can laugh all you want at McGovern, although a good many are obviously laughing in ignorance, but I'd bet good money that this turn of events is probably high on Clinton's mind right now.
-
Reality Discounts
Peddle your propoganda down at the five and dime, people don't even endulge you as a casual waste of time...
-
@-- RealityCounts
Thanks for the mathematical analysis.
Please put your skills to work showing us how Hillary intends to win the nomination.
-
RealityCounts That was 2006
What does the landscape look like today? Do you have more recent data?
Earlier this decade the democratic party was shrinking and the republicans/independents were gaining. Now I believe that trend has reversed (see link below). That's what I've been saying about fighting the last war.
So, instead of seeking out a candidate that will appeal to moderates, the activist, liberal idealogues declare to moderates "You are nothing but republican trolls", "We don't need you", "You are nothing but republican-lite", "Liberals and blacks ARE the democratic party", "The party has moved on". All of these are quotes from Obama supporters taken from these threads.
You're basing any type of conclusion about the Obama campaign on the raving of us idiots here on Salon? I'd never do the same for Hillary and her campaign. I hardly find Obama more elite and liberal than Hillary. That's pretty much campaign spin. Personally I think that Obama will have a good a chance, if not better of appealing to independents and moderates than Hillary in the general campaign.
Link:
Fewer Voters Identify as Republicans
Democrats Now Have the Advantage in "Swing" States
March 20, 2008The balance of party identification in the American electorate now favors the Democratic Party by a decidedly larger margin than in either of the two previous presidential election cycles
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/773/fewer-voters-identify-as-republicans -
@elephantman
Do us a favor and list all the points that would make John McCain the best choice for president instead of just talking out your ass about the Democratic candidates.
-
More cuteness...
First, I don't often agree with AKA but she can take care of herslf so I'll ignore your silly jab at her.
"Second, as has already been mentioned, nobody posting here has any idea what sort of relationship McGovern has with the Clintons. Maybe the only reason he and Hillary are acquainted at all is because of his association with Bill. You know, sort of like Hillary and the rest of America."
Second, so nobody posting here has any idea but maybe you'll offer one that surprise, surprise, ends with lame and stupid snark.
"Third, I don't think that obsessing over Obama's middle name is racist. I think it's a transparent attempt to push the "secret Muslim" meme and capitalize on the racism of bigoted morons, but it's not racist in and of itself."
Third, so just mentioning his middle name name is obsessing over it, huh? Funny...
-
@Reality
Here's a zinger for you:
I'm black
I'm female
I am a moderate registered as an independent
I am from Florida
I support Obama's campaign in time and money
I vote.
Sorry to fuck up your neat little breakdown.
-
@Reality Counts...The value of liberal ideas comes with use of them...
If those survey numbers are accurate, it probably means that people might identify themselves as "conservatives" and "moderates" because, after all, they have lived through the last 40 years of conservative government. Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush. Conservatives and moderates, such as those awful New Democrats. But no real liberals there, in terms of their administrations. What would a liberal president offer, in terms of policies and approaches? Not a lot of Americans would know, because they've never had a liberal president. I read that the current college generation may be the first generation ever to NOT do as well economically as their parents. Could the reason for that be: Because that's the price paid for 40 years of national conservatism? Because no one has explained the benefits of unions, in order to maintain good-paying jobs? Universal health care, like other industrial countries enjoy, is "liberal," peace is liberal, fair trade policy based upon social concerns is liberal. And conservative policy brings us none of it. Young people are beginning to understand this. They know the loud-mouthed Limbaughs have demonized the word "liberal" for their own agendas. Because they have to be if they want real improvements, young people will be part of Obama's trajectory of progressive ideas and works that make America a whole lot better than what, sown by the conservatives, George W. Bush has reaped for this nation.