Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Editorials & Other Articles
In reply to the discussion: Salon: When a party flirts with suicide [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)34. Excuse me but YOU were the one who said that he never used the term "in public."
Which infers you think he used it privately. If you meant that he never used it at all, I should think you would have said so, unless you were trying to be deliberately obtuse.
It's not a contemptible phrase, anyway, no matter how often you repeat that assertion. That's in your head, and apparently you are easily offended. It is an oft-used term for people who can be swayed.
All it does in the context of an election is describe a very malleable central segment of the electorate, that can be moved to switch their allegiances if a candidate says or does something that appeals to them.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
43 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I'm really enjoying George Will being upset about this ... after all, he helped cause it.
JoePhilly
Jan 2012
#2
Obama *is* the Democratic candidate, regardless of whom the Republicans nominate.
tblue37
Jan 2012
#9
If you want a liberal candidate, you do not keep the candidate from knowing such views.
AnotherMcIntosh
Jan 2012
#10
If LBJ would have stuck with Civil Rights and not reversed NSAM 263 w NSAM 273, no lengthy defense
AnotherMcIntosh
Jan 2012
#24
No way he would have forced Congress to pass the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 or the voting act of 1965
happyslug
Jan 2012
#33
You're right, the SCOTUS argument is specious. But if history is a guide, Reid will simply say that
AnotherMcIntosh
Jan 2012
#27
You are pulling the string too hard. The comparison is as follows: Goldwater=Batshit Crazy.
MADem
Jan 2012
#11
Six of one, half dozen of the other. He's the guy. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deep in fantasy
MADem
Jan 2012
#14
The "mushy middle" is a term of disparagement and contempt, not endearment or respect.
AnotherMcIntosh
Jan 2012
#17
The "mushy middle" wants Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and probably single payer health care
Doctor_J
Jan 2012
#19
No it isn't. It's reality. There is a big mushy mess of people in the middle. They are not like
MADem
Jan 2012
#26
There's a good reason why you never suggested that Obama used the term "mushy middle."
AnotherMcIntosh
Jan 2012
#28
ah, yes, the familiar lament from the right - "Don't tell me the truth - it's too depressing"
Doctor_J
Jan 2012
#29
You are entitled to your flawed opinion. Repeating it doesn't make it any more true than it was
MADem
Jan 2012
#30
So you are admitting that he won't have bigger majorities than he did the first time
Doctor_J
Jan 2012
#31
Gingrich, the perfect first abuser of Evidence-Free Indefinite Detention of US Citizens.
blkmusclmachine
Jan 2012
#15
You have to wonder what moderate Republicans are going to do if the right wing continues
neverforget
Jan 2012
#35