Now that Dems are poised to win '06, why so many "I AM LEAVING THE PARTY"

[emulatorloo]

threads?

With the '06 elections coming up, why so many threads about things that haven't happened, like imagined "unacceptable" 08 nominees?

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[sojourner]

7. where is that oncolological dermatologist when needed?

LOL and completely agreed!

[havocmom]

9. Throw in one with some experience with proctology

and we hit the trifecta cure all!

[electropop]

14. I heard about a dermatologist who feeds the moles

to his Venus Flytrap.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

45. Do you have any idea how weird your post looks

Now that the one it's replying to has been deleted?

Please don't tell me what it was - I'm just enjoying filling in all the possibilities in my imagination.

Truly, the mind boggles...

:-)

[sojourner]

53. yikes! no.........but that's okay, imagine away!

and why the hell was it removed? jeez............

[Clovis Sangrail]

12. true true

but I think among some, myself included, there is a feeling that our leadership doesn't represent us.

Personally, any politician who in ANY WAY supports this debacle in Iraq loses my support.
End of story.

(Hillary and Kerry both deserve to get tossed under the train as far as I'm concerned.)

I'll still vote Dem. in 06 but if the party doesn't start pulling it together come 08 I'll be one of the non-voting masses.

[Xeric]

21. Ben that may be true

But I'm a gay Dem and I'm pissed. I feel like I've been tossed overboard.
And I'm doubly pissed because my Dem congresslady just voted with the Repukes again. I'm in east side Elgin and Bean just did it again. I can't tolerate much more.
If you think I'm a mole then you are just wrong. This has got to stop.

[JeffR]

2. Fear of success

[Bill McBlueState]

3. possibly because

Possibly because the Chairman of the party appeared to use one of of the party's most loyal constituencies as a bargaining chip on a show for extremist Christians.

[emulatorloo]

8. Another "Dean Scream" maybe? In otherwords, I saw a "hit piece"

about Dean, but I have yet to see actual footage or a transcript to know what was said, what was the context, how it was said etc.

So maybe this is another "Dean Scream" -- taken out of context, distorted, not what it appears to be? It wouldn't be the first time that the words of a Dem got twisted or quoted out of context.

[Bill McBlueState]

13. well, I don't know

I use words like "possibly" and "appeared to" because all I've seen so far is internet hearsay. But simply by appearing on Robertson's show, Dean opens himself up to a certain kind of scrutiny.

[Kutjara]

5. People's Front of Judeah Syndrome?

One of the historic weaknesses of the left is, when they begin to sense weakness in their traditional right wing enemy, they immediately break off pursuit and start to devour eachother. Internecine struggle becomes all absorbing and they devote so much energy to it that they hardly notice when the Right once again snatches victory from defeat.

[autorank]

6. That's how we celebrate, isn't it. Seriously...

...now that we can win, presuming we scare the election thieves all to Hell, people are seeing a real meaning in getting involved in policy. That's going to get the blood boiling, particularly when you look at the policy wobbles (e.g., some Dems supporting * tax cut, Iraq resolution, bankruptcy). I see increased dialog as a sign of life in the politics of policy, it's a good thing. No need to leave now thought. Just an overriding need to get involved and TAKE OVER!!!

[Dhalgren]

10. I think that it is because the party "leadership" can see the long

sought-after "middle" finally coming up for grabs, and they want to obtain the middle more than they want to keep the left. I think that the party "leadership" and its corporatti want to try and create a "base" in the middle; in order to do that they have to shed the left.

Also, I agree that there are plenty of "moles" on board who are paid to fan any flames that might arise...

[Pirate Smile]

11. Isn't it primarily gay Dems angry at Dean for the firing/hiring of

its gay liaison plus the appearance on the CBN?

I can't believe how quickly people start believing the worst about Howard.
I don't think he deserves that.

[emulatorloo]

15. But Dean has a good history -- is this maybe another "Dean Scream?"

in otherwords, distorted, taken out of context and blown up all out of proportion? I admit I haven't been following the story, but we know from his history that Dr. Dean is not anti-gay rights. And it would not be the first time that a Dem's words were distorted and misrepresented.

[Pirate Smile]

24. I agree with you. Your comparison to the distorted Scream is a good one.

[Xeric]

16. Then what is he doing on the 700 club?

Giving that loon credibility?
Will he be making an appearence at an Aryan Nations meeting? Just stupid.

[emulatorloo]

19. Same thing he does on Faux news I guess

But at any rate I haven't been following the story. . . .and yeah Roberts is a LOON>

[Old and In the Way]

23. "Cuz Dean knows there are lots of religious, politically naive people

who vote that watch this show. Why shouldn't he use their forum to grab votes for 2006? Smart politics.

[Xeric]

25. Not smart to me

The nuts that watch the 700 Club will never vote Dem. They are sheep. All he did was insult and humiliate a loyal dem constituency.
And if I were him I'd tell the louts at Fox to go to hell too. Waste of time.

[emulatorloo]

28. Did you see the show? Or a clip?

Dean isn't anti-gay -- I did not see the show or a clip, but don't you think it is possible that the reporting on this is not getting it right? It would not be the first time that Dean has been misquoted quoted out of context etc.

[Xeric]

30. I don't watch the 700 Club

Because I'm not nuts.
Either he was on the show or he wasn't. If he was, it was a strategic mistake.
I'm all ears for a clarification.

[JNelson6563]

46. You mean "facts" and "perspecitve"??

Hysteria is so much more fun and a lot easier to come by.

Julie

[Old and In the Way]

41. Well, lucky for us, you don't run the DNC.

I'll go with Dean's instincts here. If he picks off another 2-3% of dumb voting Republicans, we can have the majority in Congress and start changing the agenda. But you'd need to see the big picture to understand that. It's really difficult when the most important issue we have is your sexual orientation.

[rucky]

17. 1 = "so many"??? n/t

[emulatorloo]

20. I saw at least three tonight, more today, etc etc n/t

[rucky]

44. That's it, I'm Leaving! n/t

[Old and In the Way]

18. I noticed that too, tonight.

What ought to be the big story - wiretaps....yet we got a 'Dean hates gays' distraction brewing. Makes one wonder.

[Xeric]

26. Hey this is important to some of us

It's our lives. I'm a gay Democrat. If the party is going to toss me over the side then I have to say something.

[Old and In the Way]

33. Riiiight

Dean is your enemy and he's tossing you over the side. The singular, most important issue we have is keeping you happy.

[Xeric]

35. Are you gay?

If not then you don't know what it's like to be a second class citizen and be vilified constantly.
I'm not a one issue voter by any means. But if something is important to me then I speak out. I speak out for gay rights. I speak out for women's rights. I speak out against the war (that was me freezing me stupid butt off protesting on a windy Chicago February day before it started). I speak out for healthcare for everybody.
What I do not expect is the chairman of my party (and I consider it my party since I've voted Dem and only Dem since 1974) to go on a hate show as despicable as the 700 Club and insult my hopes and aspirations in the hopes of getting some kooks to vote Dem. They won't.
I have never thought badly about Dean until now. In fact I supported him when he was running for Pres. But this was a terrible mistake.

I'll ignore your cheap shot. Your loyalty is admirable, but in this case misplaced.

[Old and In the Way]

38. Here, let me help.

:nopity:

[Xeric]

40. Okay

Since you have contempt for me and my beliefs you get the honor of being the first on my ignore list.

[Old and In the Way]

42. terriffic and I can save on additional comments.

No contempt, just :nopity:

[janx]

22. Loads of trolls--

this place is HEAVY these days.

[w13rd0]

27. Because the GOPs...

...only strategy for winning is "ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK". They do it themselves, they do it in disguise, they do it through outside agitators. It's all they have. Nothing constructive, that's for damn sure.

[Zynx]

29. We have people who are too idealistic to be in politics.

We all have to sell our souls a little bit in this business. There are no Hollywood endings in politics with a pure revolution throwing the corrupt out of power and creating a government true to our ideals and free of corruption. No, change is all at the margins and occasionally we get a chance for big change, but even those opportunities must be used carefully. Forcing too much change on creates a huge backlash as the Republicans have found out over the last two years.

[1932]

31. Sometimes I wonder if the answer is "because Dems are poised to win."

I posted about this yesterday or the day before. It's almost like a desperate effort to sabotage the party.

[TreasonousBastard]

32. A good lot of them...

are from people who are worthless to the party anyway. Big talk, little walk.

G'bye-- ain't done shit so far and ain't gonna be missed.

Some single-issue people think the party abandoned them, but there's no place else to go, hence some serious frustration.

A big problem is so many people who are amazed that politicians will act like, well, politicians. There's damn few statesmen out there, and the few idealists who get elected soon get corrupted by the way things work.

Ain't many idealists elected, though-- most places you don't get on the ballot and then win the general by being a nice guy or daring to tell the truth.

It's all about the balance of power, not running the government. And that's the sad truth some people just won't accept.

[Zynx]

34. They never show up to vote anyway because the candidates aren't

pure enough...ever.

[populistdriven]

36. because it has been a long goddamn 5 years, people are nervous

[populistdriven]

37. FREEPS: Meltdown over at DU because of Dean's slip-up

[flaminbats]

39. do Democrats want to defeat Republicans?

Republicans usually work for a common purpose..the good of the party, selling a political ideology, and to blame every problem on liberals. an individual Democrat works for a Republican who is not insane, for Democratic politicians who freely attack the party, for ideas which help that voter, for independent candidates who are more outspoken on the issues than the Democrats, for incumbent conservatives that voter disagrees with on the war, and for more cooperation with the Republican majority.

IMO..Democrats are no longer an organized political party, but voters also blame existing problems on incumbent Republicans.

[bluescribbler]

55. As Will Rogers said,

"I don't belong to an organized political party. I'm a Democrat."

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. I became an Indie in 2005

why? Well look at the damn voting record

that said, I give money to thsoe DEMS that share my ideals, coincidentally, with one excption, they happen to be RUNNING for the first time... not be in office.

You figure it out

[MrBenchley]

47. Because the forum is being ratfucked by third party loonies

I suspect.

[Vinca]

48. I hope the Dems are "poised to win '06," but I won't believe it

until I see it. They seem to go out of their way to alienate people, either by sucking up to the right in hope of garnering 'puke votes or by remaining silent when they should be standing up. I hope we get a majority in November . . . IMHO, it's life or death time for the country. But I don't assume it's going to happen.

[sendero]

49. You are making a pretty bold statement..

... "poised to win in 06". We are not WINNING anything. We are STANDING BY and hoping that the REPUBLICANS LOSE.

It is a very risky strategy and not one that is remotely guaranteed to work. Americans are STILL WAITING FOR A REASON TO VOTE DEM, other than they are NOT REPUBS.

I'm not leaving anything, but I'm coming to the conclusion, every day in every way, that the biggest problem in this country is not REPUBLICANs, it is INCUMBENTS who are more concerned about keeping their jobs than with actually doing it.

[niceypoo]

50. The rank and file have lost faith in the party

Myself among them. Why? because the Democrats have allowed themselves to be railroaded at every turn for the last 5 years all the while hoping 'niceness' will win the day for them. Most of the democratic leadership never mention things like diebold, etc, because they dont want to have to defend their position. They are poll driven when they should be taking tough stands. If they deliver in November I will have regained faith in them but until then all I have to go on are their actions, or non action, over the last five years.

[Totally Committed]

51. Where are all these threads?

I haven't seen many at all, and not for a while now.

There are far more "Concentrate on '06"'ers than those looking ot leave the Party, imo.

TC

[leesa]

52. Because it's not about winning, it's about ethical behavior.

[welshTerrier2]

54. because they don't feel represented

it's amazing that we keep getting questions like the one in the OP ... it really speaks to a divide in the party ...

sooooo, let's try this yet one more time ...

picture two different schools of thought each with its own progress meter ...

the party loyalist school says "look, we're winning; i don't understand why the others are whining ... don't they understand that once we gain control we can make real changes???"

the issues-focussed school says "look, we're winning because the republicans are losing ... but we're not hearing our key issues being addressed ... we're worried that winning will send the wrong message to our reps ... they'll assume they have the message right; we know they don't!!!"

the reality is that the more likely Dem wins are, the more it will reinforce the status quo of the party's message ... does this mean issues-focussed Democrats (i.e. those who vote issues BEFORE party) don't want Democrats to win? NO!!!!! it means we want Democrats to stand up for our beliefs ... to us, winning the political game without winning on the real issues will not produce progressive change or the reforms we are seeking ...

[pnwmom]

56. I think a lot of those people really came to recruit others to

their various causes, and weren't really serious Democrats in the first place. Some of them (Greens, especially) appear to have come here specifically to push for their own party.

Whenever you hear the line "both parties are equally" whatever, be suspicious of the poster's motives.