Read it. Understand it.

[mr715]

A) Nancy Pelosi has been a spectacular Speaker and has led the Democratic party in the right direction given a tough situation and an adverserial White House.

B) Harry Reid has fought hard in the Senate and has consistently shown himself to be a spectacular minority then Majority leader.

C) Whoever we nominate will be better than ANY of the Republicans.

D) The perfect need not be the enemy of the good, particularly when the "perfect" is strictly hero worship and cult behavior - we are running a very strong progressive field.

E) Ron Paul is a jackass. Just because someone agrees with you does not make him SANE.

F) It is likely Hillary Clinton will be the nominee. She leads in money, polls, and campaign infrastructure. She has all but apologized for her mistakes in the past, but is brilliant, a fighter, and is shown to beat any Republican in polls - frequently with a huge electoral margin.

G) We will gain seats in both houses.

Why can't we be happy? Not everyone wins all the time, but all you need to picture is a theocracy to know that it is better to have ANY democrat (ANY) than a Republican. I'd take Lieberman over Olympia Snowe anyday.

[tandot]

1. You better get one of those:

[Capn Sunshine]

51. I was thinking this would be more effective:

[silverweb]

2. Hear, hear!

Well said... and illustrates why I stay far away from the vociferous infighting I see going on around here.

"Pobody's nerfect," as the saying goes, but there's a HELL of a huge difference between Dems and reTHUGs.

[Hydra]

3. I guess you'll be another person I'll be laughing at come 2009

while you're wondering what happened to our world.

I wonder how many countries we'll be at war with at that point and how much gas will cost due to lack of supply...

[mr715]

4. I'm sorry

But are you endorsing an Olympia Snowe for president?

Provide me with some choices here. Real choices with real information

[Hydra]

6. I should have just kept my mouth shut

You're obviously here to crusade...don't let me stop you.

[mr715]

9. And what are you here for?

I'm here to say I dont care who we elect as long as its a democrat. Are you here to tell me that you'd perfer a Republican to any particular Democrat?

[Hydra]

10. I'm here to read the news

and as tempting as it is to respond to you in a blistering fashion, have fun trying to change minds by telling them what to think.

[baldguy]

5. The Dems were elected to END THE WAR!

They have not done so - THEY HAVEN"T EVEN TRIED!

[DURHAM D]

23. No they were not.

That is a lie written by the right wing.

Exit polls absolutely do not support that assertion.

You want it to be true but it is not true. You have been played.

[yodermon]

45. really?

go to http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/states/US/H/00/epolls.0.html
Scroll down to "U.S. Troops in Iraq".
What do these numbers mean?

[DURHAM D]

54. The prior declaration was that Dems were elected to "End the War"

Your referenced exit poll section is not a question about "ending the war" - it is about bringing troops home. It is a different question.

However, using your reference, only 29% want to bring "all" troops out. That means 71% of the 2006 voters, at least to some extent, want to continue the war.

The proof of the spoof is in the current Presidential polling. If the Democratic voters really had voted (wanted across the board to withdraw troops and end the war) in 2006 Bill Richardson should be leading in all the national polls of Democrats.

That poll further indicates that the 2006 voters interests were more focused on corruption, their personal/family financial situation and the general war on terror more than the Iraq war.

[countingbluecars]

7. Regarding A and B

What have the "spectacular" Pelosi and Reed done to get us out of Iraq or to restore our civil liberties?

[mr715]

8. Investigations? Dropped Bush's approval to 20s.

What could they have done that would get through both houses and get signed into law?

[RebelSansCause]

11. they could have done a lot more

they could be pushing the message of our government failure to the people. you need to look past numbers, the very stability of our democracy is threatened. the constitution is being shredded, screw it, it has been shredded. these calculated games are nothing more than that, games. politics has become a game of looking good. that is terrible, a sad testament. i do not know what has happened to the progressives of old who used to lead the party, the ones who believed in truly helping the poor and speaking out on what is wrong. now, we have this. true, it is certainly better than any repuke, but that does not mean i have to like it. i will not accept hillary as the nominee until the final votes are counted, i shall not stop fighting the wolf in sheep's clothing, the mouthpiece of what is, the aggressor and corporate panderer.

[robinlynne]

21. welcome aboard Rebel, and thank-you for your post!

[mr715]

27. What progressives?

The corporate Kennedy family? How about the anti-semite FDR? How about Korean War Truman?

There has never, nor will ever be, a perfect politician.

"Corporate panderer"? I'm sorry, but Hillary Clinton is a bone fide liberal. Her record reflects as such. She has done great things for New York and I'd be as proud to call her President as I am to call her my Senator.


M

[bigwillq]

56. Hello.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[Hawkowl]

48. Congress' approval at 11%

Yeah. Woohoo. The best cowardly congress ever. Craven, useless cowards! Why don't they just cut off funding for EVERYTHING Bush wants until his staff start showing up for subpoenas? Why? Because they are AFRAID of their own friggin shadows.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

12. A & B are just silly. Not as bad as some say, but hardly spectacular! Agree with the rest.

Reid in particular. Ugh!

[Semper_FiFi]

13. Kick and recommend...

Great post.:hi:

[ElizabethDC]

14. I agree. K&R. n/t

[Nimrod2005]

15. Dude, you're getting a newspaper...Seems like to you need to study some more

What good are Dems leaders if nothing has changed, we still have a war, we still have FISA, we still have talks of WWWIII, we still have uninsured poor kids, we still have NCLB...etc. I can go on, but you can use the GOOGLE yourself.

[mr715]

28. What could they do?

Besides bring the issues to the media's attention?

Congress is too close to override a President's veto.

And we only have TALKS of WW3. I dont see it happening. You think if Mitch McConnell was in charge of the Senate, we'd be so reserved on Iran?

I believe Kucinich voted against S-CHIP. That means its a bad bill, right? Because however Kucinich votes is always right, right? I mean, he is our only hope. You know, because he speaks truth to power. And hes such a brave man. And hes everything the sample here says about him.

The Democratic leaders bring issues to the table, they dont ensure votes. The fact that we KNOW what we know is because of Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid. You ought to be thankful for them.

[tkmorris]

16. You're right, Ron Paul IS a jackass

The rest of that is rather debatable.

[AX10]

17. I'll give you a 5th red'd!

:kick:

[Nutmegger]

18. LIARman is a fucking repuke.

He can go to hell, and take the other war mongers with him. He shames me on a daily basis.

[mr715]

29. Well

He still believes in global warming. And the right to choose. And stem cell research.

[Lerkfish]

31. and nuking Iran. So, in balance, he's still a dangerous nut job.

[mr715]

32. Did he really say he'd nuke Iran?

I think that'd get some news play.

[Lerkfish]

34. um, last I checked, I do NOT have to listen to anyone defending Lieberman

so STFU.

[mr715]

36. Ah

Okay. So that was a fantasy.

A Kucinich support I wager? Listening to voices from the stars telling you stories about Clinton?

[Lerkfish]

37. an insufferable jerk, I wager?

I think I'd win that bet. You lose yours.

[mr715]

39. You, sir, are the one who

told me to "STFU" for expressing my feelings on a matter.




M

[Milo_Bloom]

19. Hardly 50%

A) False
B) False
C) False
D) True/False
E) True
F) False
G) True

[The Backlash Cometh]

20. 11% approval rating for Congress.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. Congress Is An Institution

I suspect there's not one Democratic congressperson with a approval rating anywhere close to that and 98% of them will be re-elected in 08... I don't think I can say that about the Rethuglicans...

[babylonsister]

24. 'all but apologized' is part of the problem. Oh, and your must have

a super-duper tint on those rose-colored glasses.
Don't worry, be happy? You obviously haven't been paying attention.

[BootinUp]

25. I'm happy.

Of course I'd be happier with Clark in the race, but I am going to make the best of it with what we have.

I like your threads mr715, they speak the truth.

[mr715]

26. I appreciate that.

No better complement than being told I'm honest.




M

[Lerkfish]

30. taking a turn into bizarro world

I agree with E. I agree with part of F.
I don't even undersand your point with D.
B is simply wrong and A is delusional.
C is probably true, but being only SLIGHTLY better than republicans is not a good goal.
G. Maybe.

[Lerkfish]

33. so, now the DLC propaganda is trying to push LIEBERMAN on us?

geez, you guys are really trying too hard, there.

[mr715]

35. Uh no.

I support the Democratic nominee.

I dont understand why people would NOT vote for a democrat in this race, for any reason.

[Lerkfish]

38. there isn't a democratic nominee yet

and Lieberman is not a democrat.

and the implication I would not vote for a democrat is just you blowing something out your orifice.

[mr715]

40. I'm aware

Whoever the nominee is, I will support him.

I did not vote for Lieberman in 2004, nor would I in the primary in 2008 if he chose to run, but if he was the nominee, I'd vote for him over any republican, anyday, happily.

[hootinholler]

41. "we are running a very strong progressive field"

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

WHEW! You know
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Um, WHEW! Well.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

I'll get back to you when I stop.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[LWolf]

52. My reaction exactly. n/t

[GeorgeGist]

42. WE, WE, WE

all the way home.

[calteacherguy]

43. Indeed, why can't we be happy?

If you're happy and you know it, clap your hands (clap clap)
If you're happy and you know it, clap your hands (clap clap)
If you're happy and you know it, then your face will surely show it
If you're happy and you know it, clap your hands. (clap clap)

If you're happy and you know it, stomp your feet (stomp stomp)
If you're happy and you know it, stomp your feet (stomp stomp)
If you're happy and you know it, then your face will surely show it
If you're happy and you know it, stomp your feet. (stomp stomp)

If you're happy and you know it, shout "Hurray!" (hoo-ray!)
If you're happy and you know it, shout "Hurray!" (hoo-ray!)
If you're happy and you know it, then your face will surely show it
If you're happy and you know it, shout "Hurray!" (hoo-ray!)

If you're happy and you know it, do all three (clap-clap, stomp-stomp, hoo-ray!)
If you're happy and you know it, do all three (clap-clap, stomp-stomp, hoo-ray!)
If you're happy and you know it, then your face will surely show it
If you're happy and you know it, do all three. (clap-clap, stomp-stomp, hoo-ray!)

:hi:

[Grateful for Hope]

44. "I'd take Lieberman over Olympia Snowe anyday"

This statement is all I needed to understand where you are coming from.

Enjoy that place.

[Whisp]

46. rotf laughing my guts out.

tanks for the funny.

[question everything]

47. and, the Supreme Court is in the balance

There will be at least one, perhaps three vacancies in the next few years, all of liberals. Clinton will make sure that we do not have a court full of Thomases and Scalias.

I always find it ironic that if the left will stay home - as it did in 1968 - or will vote for a Nader candidate - as it did in 2000 - it will help Bush with his "legacy."

[OneBlueSky]

49. "Nancy Pelosi has been a spectacular Speaker " . . .

by what conceivable standard? . . .

[Tesha]

53. In the same way that Hiroshima was a "spectacular" fireworks display. (NT)

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. Two points

1.- perhaps you are not familiar with US Electoral hsitory, but for quite a while, and no, not starting in 2004, but at least 1960, those who lead this early in the campaign don't get it. No matter how good their strucuture is

2.- Perhaps I missed this too, but Isn't Joe Momentum an INDEPENDENT and didn't he run AGAINST the PARTY NOMINEE that beat him in the primary? And wasn't he also supprted by REPUBLICANS

Just chekcing

By the way he is free to run. that is what small d democracy is about

But he ain't a Democrat

[ieoeja]

55. So why not someone else?

You are correct. We are going to win this election fairly easily. That is the reason we should NOT compromise now.

When the country was anti-liberal in 1994, did the Republicans say, "hey, we got a great chance if we just run some guys who can appeal to the Left!" No. They said, "hey, we can win this election in a walk, so let's shoot for the moon and REALLY move our agenda forward!"

We need a Democratic Newt.

[codjh9]

57. You're right, except the one I have the most problem with is Hillary... but even so,

YES, she'll be a lot better than the Worst. President. Ever. Even so, she ain't my first choice, nuh-uh.

[ileus]

58. Hillary take 50 states, any other nominee takes 12-15...

[MH1]

59. Love your avatar.

Nice sentiments, too, but F) is a bit of a downer, mainly because I don't believe the third sentence.