Dean says Democrats moving 'too far to the right'

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/08/05/dean.lkl/

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Rejecting criticism from some of his Democratic brethren that he is too liberal to be elected president, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean says that the real problem is that "the Republican Party and even my own party has simply moved too far to the right."

Dean, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, spoke Monday on CNN's Larry King Live from Burlington, Vermont.

"I am in the center," he said. "I balanced budgets. The president hasn't done so. I believe that states have the right to make their own gun laws, after enforcing the federal laws vigorously. There's nothing that's not centrist about me."

Dean, who was Vermont's lieutenant governor in 1991 when Gov. Richard Snelling died, balanced the state's budget for 11 consecutive years -- although Vermont is the only state in the union that does not require a balanced budget.

more

[deutsey]

1. Go Dean!

:bounce:

[Voltaire99]

80. From a Kucinich supporter: Bravo, Dean

Dean's too mushy a centrist for me, but this was a splendid move for him.

Not cowed by the DLC smears of recent weeks, he took well-deserved aim at the party's appalling drift into conservatism, its sour concessionary warmaking Liebermanism, and he fired. Good shot! Please, take a few more. :-)

And he had better reload fast. That's the great taboo he uttered today, of course, pointing out that the party has sold its soul for the chimeras of bipartisanship and electability. The knives will be out.

[disgruntella]

2. tell it like it is!

I don't know if Dean will win, but I sure appreciate his style!

[bloom]

3. yes

:D

[mhr]

4. Unelectable

Why, because he is too centrist!

The democratic party needs to move back to its traditional roots.

Kucinich is the man for the job not Dean.

[ThorsteinVeblen]

10. ???

Have you seen the guy? I suggest going to CSPAN and finding his stump speech in Iowa.

The guy is about as inspiring as Gary Bauer. In fact, if you ignore his politics, he IS Gary Bauer.

[Ripley]

11. You think Kucinich is more electable than Dean?

hahahahahahahahah!

:+

Which poll are you basing this on?

[JohnKleeb]

14. I agree and sorry you got spewed

He really does have some great ideas that I have never heard anyone talk about, I like his health care plan very much, democrats have been trying something like this since Harry Truman, his preschool and college education plans are just great. Remember what Truman said about republicans and democrats who act republican.

[maxsolomon]

91. i was in cleveland a couple months ago

and people who used to vote for him when he was moyor think he's a loon. & that's his home turf.

secretary of labor.

dean/clark will get the job done.

[Chico Man]

15. @ the Phish festival IT in Maine,

Which drew 80,000+ people, Dean was all over the place. Stickers, pamphlets, etc. There was no word of Kucinich. Nor the green party for that matter.

Dean has penetrated so many bases!!! The Dean machine is humming quite nicely.

[Emboldened Chimp]

33. Really? I didn't see that.

I saw one Dean sticker there. Maybe it was the wine...

BTW, great shows.

[Chico Man]

86. Yeah I saw quite a few Dean stickers

And many flyers at vendors alongside the merchandise.

[Chico Man]

89. Did you see the control tower jam?

Luckily I parked my van close to the tower and when the jam started I woke up and witnessed the whole thing.

[Emboldened Chimp]

96. I missed it!

I took a redeye from LA and was near complete exhaustion after day one, so I slept right through it! BTW, it's not on the downloads. Anyone record it?

[Umbram]

77. If they were good Kucinich Dems they'd...

have not left trash 3 feet deep all along the turnpike.

Bouncin' around, Bouncin' around, Bouncin' around the room.

[Chico Man]

88. Somebody did a great job cleaning up

While driving home the roads looked clean.

[corgigrrl]

18. I too wish Kucinich supporters would show some ###

Kucinich is at the bottom of virtually every poll except MoveOn.

Voices like Dennis are needed, but not representative enough even of the party.

He has less than 1/10th the MeetUp supporters of Dean, and that's a free thing, nothing to stop anyone from planning a MeetUp.

So I just want to see the math on the Dennis wins idea, not just the sentiment, altho i admire the Kucinich supporters' loyalties.

I myself could never ever support a candidate who'd ever taken a position against a woman's right to choose, even if he's reversed it, it's too bedrock a principle. I wonder how widely that part of Dennis' record is known.

[JohnKleeb]

23. well people were cynical about Dean and look where he is

Look on Kucinich and choice he really did NOT flip flop, yes we know that, also what happened was, a couple of years back, Dennis stopped voting on abortion issues, and realized that he was pro choice and he wants to reduce abortion through common reasons. All of the Kucinich supporters are fully aware of this. I am not gonna get mad but why can Dean flip flop but Kucinich cant look at part of the past and realize maybe choice is right. The reason why we are so low imo is because the media never really focuses on him imo, even though hes been at the scene in many important things, he opposed the patriot act and will being introducing legislation to repeal it and also he organized 112 democrat congresspeople to vote against the war. All the candiates have their flaws but Dennis has something special and people dont realize it or they dont care.

[Umbram]

78. God forbid someone change their mind

Appearently women should have the right to choose, but politicians shouldn't have the right to change their choice.

What the hell?

I have all kinds of friends who are pro-peace, etc, etc, but won't vote for Dennis for this ridiculous reason.

I'll support Dean if he gets the dem's nod, but the hype is out of hand. If the guy would suck it up and commit to cutting into the military budget, then maybe it'd be something to think about.

[Kolesar]

27. Wasn't Gephardt pro-life for many years?

Just for comparison

[JohnKleeb]

31. yeah I think so

changed in the 80's and he was still a good man, maybe not someone I would support for the presidency but someone I could call a good man, I still like Dick hes in the middle on my list.

[loyalsister]

40. Apparently he's famous for it in OH

My state representative told me that she has talked to people in Ohio who consider him right wing. I'm sure that that position has defined him for many people. His position on the flag was pretty radically right, too. He's also very outwardly religious.
When people haven't taken the time to learn a lot about him, the more memorable positions are those that are inconsistant with the party. Kind of like Leiberman. The knee jerk perceptions matter.
When people do get to know him nationally, the more salient characteristics will be those that are characterized as radical left wing.
I see him as a person in denial. The global community is interacting more and the development of business relationships is an inevitibility. The resistance to this is exactly the same nostalgic principal that drives the right wingers who want to return to the 50s. Middle America is living in the reality of everyday life and our best bet is to learn from Clinton's mistakes correct them, and plan for contingencies better than he did.

[gate of the sun]

79. I agree that he is too centrist

and somehow has bought the left vote. Something I can't figure out. Well the fact is somehow he has attained Guru stature. This is a bit frightening though I suppose most people would jump me for implying such gibberish. It's how I see it. I can't understand what is going on. Well, anyway Dennis is really the best man, that is for me anyway. I don't care if people want to jump the dean bandwagon but they are fooling themselves about who he is..........That seems to be true to me and in that light the whole thing falls apart he ain't no saviour. I guess I will sit and watch this whole thing play out. I've wanted but haven't said much......well anyway this is my one time to say I think it's a mistake to support Dean. who know's maybe I'll speak out more later.....

[PROGRESSIVE1]

5. But, But, But.......

Lieberman said that we should all be Republican-Lite. Remember?????
We should go along with Bush on foreign policy, Remember??? We shouldn't challenge him. We shouldn't look at the real threats. We should get ourselves an easy victory!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

6. My husband

listened to Larry King last night. This morning, he said that not only would he support Dean, but that he'd donate money to his campaign, something he's never done before.

And I know that he's not the only one.

Dean can be elected. He's a good choice for the job.

[mandan]

7. Swing to the left bay bee

[Robin Hood]

8. About Foooking time, someone starts moving the debates to the center.

The center is not liberal, the far right is not the center. The more I hear what Dean has to say, the more i like him.


Go Dean!!

[joeybee12]

13. Hey Liberal Guerilla!

Are thsoe real posters you can buy somewhere?

And now to a general commnet--had to laugh about Holy Joe commenting about how the Dems are going too far to the left and will be in exile! Dems now don't control the Legisltaive, Judicial or Executive branches of government for Chrisssake! What is his friggin' definition of exile????????????????????

[Frances]

45. Well said

n/t

[xchrom]

9. oooh -- he said it

you know i don't really know who i'll vote for{i'm in calif, so the decision about who the dem candidate is will be made then} -- but i love it when dean says stuff like that. it's like he reads the ''tea leaves'' -- and nails it.
i don't think the dlc and lieberman can get ahead of him on this. he's feisty -- and manages to come out slugging and sounding really good on top of it.
i just like him.

[RedSock]

12. go dean go

i have also sent money to dean -- first time doing that in any race.

and for any dean campaign people lurking here:

your man is doing EXACTLY what many, many, many dems want to see.

keep it up!!!!!

[MODemocrat]

58. We are enthralled by Dean at our house

and it's our first time ever to contribute to any campaign. We can't
explain it, nor do we feel compelled to.

````````GO Howard Dean```````

[xxqqqzme]

46. U may not have heard

California primary in in March, '04 on 'Super Tuesday' so it will not B 'decided' elsewhere.

[David__77]

16. Good responses.

We need to push the "center" to the left. Bush still has an aura of "centrism" about him in the media, if only for alluding to his being such. Dean and others must do the same from the left.

[loyalsister]

44. Dean has been calling him RADICAL!!

I love it! He has an amazing understanding of the public's perception of these loaded words! This is what could win the general. Anytime Leiberman fires this too far left business, he calls him too far right center<< right<< radical.
On the spectrum, Dean has the greatest distance from Bush, but he's actually about where Bush pretended to be, which is further left than Leiberman would take them. So, maybe he captures Bush voters who were fooled, AS WELL AS people voted for Gore, AND Nader voters. hmmm.

[LeftHander]

17. Bush too conservative for America

That is the winning strategy.

[Guaranteed]

36. You're right...that's it ;) Good call n/t

[Guaranteed]

37. In fact...Bush isn't even conservative...he's way past that....

He's just reckless- to be even more specific and blunt.

[wildwww2]

41. Radical to be even more blunt about it.

Bu$h Inc. has us all in for some hard times and most of us don`t even know it yet. Would it bother Bu$h and his Supreme Court installers if we had another depression. Hell no! They are all rich enough to stay just as rich or get even richer. And believe me staying rich and in power is their main concern.
Peace
Wildman
Al Gore is My President

[nolabels]

74. Radical Foreign Interventionalist Cheap labor Conservatives

These people and * needs the warm bodies of your sons and daughters to send to their next intervention. It will help him and the rest of the corporate cronies on the roll in the cash. Give him your social security assets and the promise of your next born so he can spend in on more in bombs to kill innocent people in countries you never even heard of. Everything that pertains of the slime reeks of another slogan, the triumphal chicken hawks, my Hero’s ! ! !

[ThorsteinVeblen]

19. Brilliant Man

And our only chance in 2004.

[cprise]

20. "too far to the right:" -is right!

If your vehicle (or your country) just goes forward-right-forward-right-forward-right...

.... then you're just going around in circles.

[dolstein]

21. Boy was that a stupid remark

The Democratic Party has moved too far to the right? I know that Dean's a doctor and all, and probably took science classes rather than POLITICAL science classes in college, but how someone who went to school in the 60's could say that the Democratic Party has moved too far to the right is beyond me. The Democratic Party lurched way to the left in the 1972 election and, despite the heroic efforts of Bill Clinton, still hasn't found its way back to the vital center.

It seems to be accepted wisdom among Dean's supports that the reason the Democrats haven't done better in national elections is because they haven't fielded more liberal candidates. But the fact is, the more liberal candidates have fared the worst -- McGovern and Mondale, both liberals on social issues and doves on foreign policy, suffered humiliating defeats. I for one don't care to go down that road again.

[Forkboy]

24. You're right

Lieberman is the answer to avoid humiliating defeats.

[dolstein]

26. He'd do better than Dean

I think Edwards and Graham (and possibly Wes Clark), as Southernors, have the potential to do better than Lieberman. But Dean? You've got to be kidding. Yeah, he'll get the Birkenstock crowd, and all the flashback hippies still celebrating McGovern's "moral victory" over Nixon in 1972. And yeah, he'll get the Democrats who hate Bush enough to vote for ANYONE on the Democratic line. But that still doesn't get him anywhere close to what he needs to win the election. And Dean's talking about appealing to the Perot and McCain voters is just that -- talk. McCain hasn't had many kind words to say about Dean, and I suspect Perot feels much the same way.

[Chico Man]

28. Think this is the Birkenstock crowd?

Look at the fundraisers going on in Rhode Island.

http://www.rifordean.org

[Khephra]

42. Don't bother yourself. You're talking to Dolstein

He's a Lieberman supporter. He wouldn't know what a Dean meetup crowd actually looks like if he was sitting in the middle of one. Birkenstock crowd indeed... That's the mistake of someone who has been reading Liberman speeches and RW editorials about Dean.

[primavera]

34. Why do you think that?

I'm not looking to ignite a flame fest, but from what I'm hearing in the news, it sounds like Lieberman is trailing in the polls, it doesn't sound like he's inspiring much enthusiasm on anyone's part. Certainly amongst the activist community, as we all know, there is very little support for Lieberman.

Don't get me wrong, I'm respectful that a certain amount of compromise is needed to find a candidate behind whom all Dems can rally, which is why, as much as I love what Kucinich has to say, I don't consider him a good candidate - because I know only too well that more conservative Dems will feel like he doesn't represent their interests. But the same holds true for Lieberman on the opposite end of the spectrum. He too, like Kucinich, is a divider, not a uniter. Just look at the vitriol he generates amongst the left wing of the party; hell, there are Dems who would practically vote for the shrub before they'd vote for Lieberman. Do you really imagine that Lieberman can unite Dems from both ends of the political spectrum together to oust the shrub? Or do you imagine that enough Repukes would defect and support Lieberman over the shrub to compensate for the losses on the left he could expect? What makes you think that's realistic?

In contrast, what's wrong with Dean, who seems to be making a genuine effort to appeal to both conservative and liberal Dems? I don't support the death penalty, so the fact that Dean will tolerate it at all stands as a mark against him in my books. But that he is in favor of increasing safeguards against its application to potentially innocent people is enough of a bone to throw me that I feel like I'm getting a little something out of it, while death penalty proponents can feel content that Dean isn't moving to outlaw one of their favorite issues. Ditto for gun control. I personally would rather see all guns outlawed period, but I recognize that's not going to happen and any effort to bring it about would alienate a lot of Dems who happen to be really into guns. Dean seems to be again trying to find a way to keep both sides happy, by recommending a greater role for local governments in gun policy, which to me means that I can choose to live in a place which has more civilized gun control laws, and the gun nuts can live in communities where the gun control laws are more to their liking. Again, at least a little something for everybody. That sure sounds like a uniting kind of approach to me.

In contrast, what has Lieberman done to reach out to liberal Dems whose support, whether he likes them or not, he needs if he's to oust the shrub? All I hear from him is criticisms and attacks on his own party for being too liberal. So I ask again: how do you peceive this to be a unifying strategy?

[Chovexani]

47. Cheers

You said it much better than I ever could have. This is exactly why I'm so gung ho about Dean.

[dolstein]

48. Here's why I think that

In order to win a presidential election, a Democrat needs to get the support of around 85% of registered Democrats, around 50% of registered independents, and around 5% of registered Republicans. (By the way, I'm not pulling these figures out of thin air -- this is pretty close to what Al Gore and Joe Lieberman got). A liberal nominee may be able to get enthusiastic support among the activist Democrats who participate in primaries, but those activists represent only a fraction of registered Democrats. The most liberal Democratic nominees in the past thirty years -- George McGovern and Walter Mondale -- both suffered massive defections among Democrats. But moderates like Clinton and Gore were able to hold their own among registered Democrats AND appeal to independents in a way that no liberal Democrat could.

I understand this is very hard for DU'ers to accept, but the electorate is NOT made up primarily of ideological liberals. And Democratic defections are more likely to come from the center than from the left. A moderate Democrat can hold onto the base and attract support from independents and even some moderate Republicans. But a liberal Democrat will alienate large numbers of independents and will have trouble holding onto the base. The supports of Dean claim that he'll energize liberals and bring new voters into the process, but the fact is, having Bush on the ballot will energize liberals plenty, and I haven't seen anything that would suggest that a liberal candidate will attract enough new voters to offset defections among more moderate Democrats and independents.

I saw these things not as a moderate Democrat but as a political science major who studied the decline of the Democratic Party between 1968 and 1988.

[primavera]

59. Interesting

I'll grant you, that bears thinking about. I have no illusions that the electorate is made up of ideological liberals either, but I think centrists discount the left at their peril. Your claim that "Democratic defections are more likely to come from the center than from the left" may well be true, but I think voter turnout is a huge issue for us Dems. Repukes can unfortunately be relied upon to turn up faithfully at the polls in fairly high percentages; the same sadly cannot be said for Dems. While I don't seriously fear that many Dems would vote for the shrub over Lieberman were he to become the Democratic candidate, I do fear a repetition of the voter apathy demonstrated in the 2002 elections, in which voter turnout scarcely passed 30% in many parts of the country. If your figures are correct, Lieberman needs 85% of registered Dems and, frankly, I'm skeptical he could get it given how many people pretty much hate his guts. Alternatively, how would it influence your figures of required independent and Republican crossover votes if there was a Dem candidate who could entice 100% of registered Dem voters to the polls? I'm also not sure I agree with your claim that Clinton and Gore were able to "hold their own" with the Dem base. If you will recall, the '96 election in which Clinton shifted so dramatically to the right marked the beginning of increased support for the Greens, without whose influence in 2000, I think we all agree Gore's victory would have been beyond question.

I also find myself wondering about your examples of McGovern and Mondale. Sure, they lost, but is it safe to attribute their losses solely to their more liberal agendas? Are the conditions today the same as existed then? It just seems like there are so many variables at play there that you can't necessarily equate McGovern's experience with the experience a different candidate like Dean, running under different circumstances, might have. But it's an interesting point nonetheless and I'll give it some thought.

[dolstein]

64. A few responses

<<Your claim that "Democratic defections are more likely to come from the center than from the left" may well be true, but I think voter turnout is a huge issue for us Dems. Repukes can unfortunately be relied upon to turn up faithfully at the polls in fairly high percentages; the same sadly cannot be said for Dems.>>

Actually, the Democratic turnout was higher than the Republican turnout in the 2000 election. Al Gore, a New Democrat, received unusually strong support from key Democratic constituencies -- especially African Americans and labor households. I simply don't buy the argument that it takes an ideological liberal candidate to generate strong turnout. A competitive election will certainly drive turnout more than an ideological liberal (especially one that is trailing badly to Bush in the polls).

<<Alternatively, how would it influence your figures of required independent and Republican crossover votes if there was a Dem candidate who could entice 100% of registered Dem voters to the polls?>>

I don't deal in fantasies. Nobody is going to increase Democratic turnout to 100%. Turnout has never been 100% -- even when the electorate consisted almost exclusively of white male landowners. And no Democratic candidate can get the support of 100% of registered Democrats anyway -- Gore's 85% is pretty close to the maximum, from a historical perspective. And I certainly wouldn't expect Dean to match that figure. I'd expect him to suffer the same kind of defections that McGovern and Mondale suffered. People who argue that Gore/Lieberman was too centrist fail to realize that more than twice as many moderate and conservative Democrats voted for someone other than Gore than did liberal Democrats.

You also assume that the Democrats who aren't turning out at the polls are more liberal that those who are, when typically it's the less ideological voters who stay home.

<<If you will recall, the '96 election in which Clinton shifted so dramatically to the right marked the beginning of increased support for the Greens.>>

I volunteered for Clinton in 1992 -- there was no shift to the right in 1996. As for the beginning of increased support for the Greens, Ralph Nader got 0.71% of the popular vote in 1996. Perhaps that was more than the Greens got in 1992, but then I'm not even sure the fielded a candidate in 1992. I think the increase in Nader support between 1996 and 2000 has far more to do with Nader actively campaigning (which he didn't do in 1996) than it did with disenchantment among liberals. People around here fail to realize that 25% of Nader's support came from "Nader or nobody voter" and another 25% of Nader's support came from "third party only" voters. Only a third of Nader's vote, amounting to less than 1% of the popular vote, actually came from disaffected Democrats. And again, I need to stress that Al Gore received historically high support from registered Democrats. So again, this talk about widespread defections on the left if the Democrats nominate a moderate simply doesn't have historical support, whereas there is substantial evidence of widespread Democratic defections when a very liberal candidate is nominated.

[ibegurpard]

61. A Political Science major...that explains a lot

In my opinion that is one of the things that is wrong with the Democratic Party...the party establishment is in the chokehold of people who think that politics can be distilled to a formula. These people have strangled passion and innovation in favor of slavish devotion to polls and number-crunching. They are political pharisees who are so enamored of "ritual" that they have lost sight of WHY they are involved in politics.

[primavera]

62. Hey, go easy on us!

I did poli sci for my graduate work and we're not all abstract theoreticians! :D

[dolstein]

65. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it

I'm no fan of focus groups and snap polls. But exmaining historic voting patters can provide valuable insight into the shifts in the balance of the major political parties.

I'm always amazed at how many "enlightened liberals" actually prefer to wallow in ignorance instead of facing facts.

[ibegurpard]

66. And those who refuse to see anything BUT history

will be swept away by change.

[Larkspur]

87. "political pharisees " a great adjective

and an appropriate one that describes Lieberman and his breed of Democrats.

[Jacobin]

70. Nice Try

Several problems. Lieberman is not a democrat. He is a radical RW PNAC supporting republican. He is a warmonger who supports the invasion of countries who don't threaten the U.S.

And your assumption that people will vote for Lieberman in an ABBB thought fart is highly suspect.

I for one, don't know if i could forgive myself for pulling the lever for a PNACer like Lieberman. There are MANY others who feel the same way.

What, exactly, is so "liberal" about any of Dean's policies and do you buy into the Jeff Christie meme that there is something "wrong" with being liberal?

[Julien Sorel]

71. A thoughtful analysis.

One problem is, 'the center' is an ill-defined, moving target. Where exactly 'the center' is is the real topic of debate here. Dean thinks it's to the left of where, say, Lieberman is, and personally, I tend to agree with him; you clearly think Lieberman is correct. It's a difference of opinion, not a defined fact; moreover, a strong, charismatic leader can change where the center is by the force of their personality. Reagan did it (like it, or him, or not), FDR did it.

Dean has defined himself as a centrist (A little dig for someone else: he must be dying with self-loathing, the poor man). You (and Lieberman) are continuing to try to paint him as a liberal. Ultimately, it's the voters who will decide where the center is. Looking at Dean's stands and record, the only really 'liberal' position I've seen him take is opposition to the war; everything else makes him a moderate Democrat. To me, that means it's up to him, his skill as a campaigner, to make certain the voting public sees him as he wants to be seen, and not how his enemies try to smear him.

As an aside, you would do well to keep in mind that leadership is about more than a collection of policy initiatives. You pointed out in another post how Lieberman's positions were similar to Clinton's. The problem is, Lieberman isn't Clinton. Clinton had a flair, and a story ('The Man From Hope') that Lieberman does not, and never will have. The public bought into Clinton the man, manifest flaws and all, as much as they bought into Clinton, the New Democrat. If you think the public will buy into Lieberman anywhere near to the same degree, you see something in him that I do not.

[stickdog]

94. Dean can easily get the 50% independents

More than 50% of independent voters are pissed about Iraq.

Lieberman would lose both the independents and the base.

Maybe he could break the 5% Repuke barrier, though. I'll give you that.

[hippiechick]

67. Now, Kevin, you're making SENSE ! Stop it !

You don't expect Dolstein to be able to coherently respond to that, do you ?


:hi:

:hippie:

[primavera]

69. I know, what was I thinking?

Hi, Lisa! :hi:

[Larkspur]

43. You have the same problem as Lieberman

You both suffer sclerosis of the imagination and objective reasoning.

Lieberman has NO CHARISMA. Dean does. Dean has not only excited his supporters but taught them the basics of politicking 101. Dean has encouraged his supporters to be participants in his campaign and that only generates more excitement and that translates into momentum for Dean.

[Eloriel]

49. Oh yeah?

Dontcha just love these people who take others' wrong-headed ideas (political pundits, who have done NOTHING but get it wrong about Dean so far, altho they're beginning to wake up) and spout them as if they're the truth?

Take a look:

BRAND New Democrats for Dean
http://brandnewdemocrats.blogspot.com

Independents for Dean
http://deanindependents.org/

Republicans for Dean
http://republicansfordean.blogspot.com/

And should you REALLY want to know what the Dean campaign is all about someday, check out the reader comments in the Official Blog for a few days, which you can get to from his official website:

http:www.deanforamerica.com

Nevermind -- here it is: http://blog.deanforamerica.com/

Eloriel

[CWebster]

57. The FDR voters would suit me just fine.

*

[TankLV]

39. Hahahahahahahahahahaha! Boy, that was a good one. Thanks for the joke.

The "right" is soooo far to the right, that nowadays anything not in lock step with Hitler is considered to be left wing. That is how far the discourse in this country has shifted.

And thanx for the tips on the "winning" strategy. Sure worked last couple of times - let's see - we've lost the congress, white house and the judiciary. Yep. Move further right. That's the ticket.

Oh, and don't forget to mention to not be too confrontational or actually be an "opposition". Or be critical of this pretzledent, or mention his lies, or (lack of) war record, or anything else. Yep. Repuks failed miserably w/that too. No, wait. Ever since the repukes started that scheme, they've WON MORE SEATS, and now control all 3 branches of government.

[stanwyck]

53. AGREE. AGREE. AGREE.

Even "left" isn't "left".
Leiberman can kiss my big J-Lo diva butt.

[Voltaire99]

81. Not too far to the right? Wake up and smell the Lieberman!

But surely that's a queer argument, having little to do with history generally and even less to do with the history of the Democratic Party.

The party's 20-year rightward drift is too well-documented for anyone who cites McGovern and Mondale to be unaware of it. From the enabling of Reaganism by a Democratic Congress to embrace of welfare "reform" under Clinton to the slavish bipartisanship that signed off on not merely the Patriot Act but also the Bush tax cut for the rich and the war in Iraq, these are but sorry highlights of that fatal shift.

And here is the genesis of what you imagine to be today's "vital center." LBJ was right that signing civil rights law would cost the party the south, and such was the case as quickly as 1968. Nor did the trauma of Vietnam and the sexual revolution fail to play a central role in the reelection of Nixon on illusory promises of hardline social control by the vastness of "the silent majority" in 1972. Oh, it was pretty big, and it went for the bill of goods. And it contained that so-called center, filled with its mean view of national responsibility and its anxious love of the gun and the badge and the untaxed dollar.

The "vital center" is seldom to be found, really, other than in a voting booth pulling the lever marked GOP. Clinton seems to have bucked it, but only if his first election isn't put in context: he benefited greatly from GWB's dishonesty about taxes, flubbing of the economy, and cold patrician remoteness. Sexy Bill might have out-charmed any Republican, given the chance, but he surely had in GWB a dud opponent--a Republican Mondale, you might say, a man whose talents seemed invisible the moment his mouth moved; and the Dot Com/Dow bubble soon arrived to ensure reelection. Little heroism did it take to ride that out.

No, you do not "want to go down the road" of liberalism again, you say. Do you wish LBJ hadn't signed civil rights legislation? His doing so, of course, was an act of the most daring liberalism, and it has impaired electoral chances ever since, codifying the redneck vote for the GOP. Do you wish the Great Society had never occurred, and the miseries of the great northern migration had been ignored? That was liberalism, too, imperfect yet unable to look away from sorrow and want. Can you say that you do not wish the party to go down the road of fairness, decency, equality, and justice? Is it enough simply for your bulemic version of the Democratic Party to agree with its Republican "colleagues," Tweedle Dee to Tweedle Dum, deregulate a bit here, cut taxes recklessly there, sign on blindly for military depravities, and break into a sweat whenever those with principles demand you show some?

If so, if winning elections is all that counts, then why settle for Bush-lite with Lieberman? You might be happier drinking from the spigot of Rove.

[CWebster]

84. Wow...if I can get through the molasses this site is mired in...

that was a really excellent post.

[lordwhorfin]

90. Well . . .

I think that you'll find Dolstein is pretty hostile to the Civil Rights Act, and indeed, most of the New Deal.

[WyLoochka]

85. Dolstein, did you take your

POLITICAL science classes at Bob Jones U?

[stickdog]

92. Yeah. Almost as stupid as talking about vouchers to the AFL-CIO

or mounting a kamikaze attack on the Democratic base as part of your primary strategy.

[tjdee]

22. That is NOT what he said last month!

Ooh yeah, moving sooo far to the right....

Meanwhile, when Al Sharpton said LAST MONTH that "It is the right-wingers that call themselves centrists who are the special interests. We need to stop their stronghold on this party"--and "that the party has lost control of the government during 12 years of leadership by the centrists and called for an end to appeasing conservative swing voters", among other things, what was Dean's response?

"I don't agree with Al about the DLC."
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20030712-0007-democrats-women.html

So now is it that he DOES think these amorphous "some" are moving to the right? Who is this "some" if its not the DLC?

I'm sure that someone will tell me this is consistent and in fact exactly what they believe to be true.

[JohnKleeb]

29. whoa someone changed their mind and thanks for the link

proves there is a concrete difference between gay marriage and civil unions and I could use it, I agree with Sharpton, I know that McGovern and Dukakis lost and you know what, it was NOT their politics that caused this. By the way I hate to be a jerk, would that be wafeling? and if Dean firmly believes this, why hasnt he in the past acted more progressive, Kucinich really hasnt said much about the DLC really but his records shows otherwise that he is a progressive who is in the same party as the democrat heroes of yesteryear.

[Chico Man]

32. The "he said / she said" stuff is really boring

I'm not sure if it makes one candidate more attractive over another.

Dean has the ability to create momentum.

[CWebster]

52. no mystery

Sharpton's remarks are the mirror image of Lieberman. To speak from the middle would span the greatest cross-section of the Left. We don't like them and they don't like us, but at this point we are all in this together.

[cprise]

25. THAT my friends is worth a good $25!

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=contribute_central

[SEAburb]

30. Then why has Dodgy Dean spent the last two weeks

moving to the right? I guess he thinks it's harder to hit a moving target.

[CWebster]

55. where is the evidence of

this?

[Guaranteed]

35. Right....ON!!

Totally agreed. Democrats have become much too attached to their corporate sponsors and have corrupted their integrity. They no longer speak for the little guy. We NEED a serious turn left, not only to distinguish ourselves from the Republicans and draw the poor folks back into the voting booths, but to do the RIGHT THING for the country. WAY TO GO DEAN!! HELL YEAH! Lieberman can take that and stuff it up his wazoo.

[realFedUp]

38. What is the center anymore?

Howabout an intelligent description of what the center is right now.

[ibegurpard]

50. Apparently it's "vital"

:shrug:

[Frances]

51. I think the center changes

When I was born, the country was still in a Depression that was so bad that the voters elected a progressive President and Congress. They gave us social security and electricity for rural areas (I had friends without electricity as a child) and the idea that government was meant to benefit ordinary people.

After World War II, the progressive Congress gave returning GIs enough money to go to college. I would guess that most of these people were the first in their families to attend college.

When I went to college in 1959, I had a National Defense Education Act loan that had a very low interest rate. I could cancel up to half the loan by teaching for 5 years.

In 1980, many families that had been lower middle class were now middle class. They no longer saw the government as benevolent; they saw it as taking their money. Reagan who had moved from a very poor childhood to a very comfortable lifestyle as a GE (largest corporation in the world) spokesperson was one of those people. He sold the American people on the idea that it was OK to blame those who were still poor for their poverty.

The center moved right under him. It has moved much further right under Shrub.

But now the middle class is being hurt and it is willing to listen to a man like Dean because he is speaking up for their interests, and their interests are being threatened.

[xxqqqzme]

54. good suggestion -

the 'center' (as far as I'm concerned) would have:
relied on the UN & its inspectors;
kept & Xpanded the budget surplus;
would have a national energy policy weaning the population off oil dependence;
'fiscal corporate responsibility' would B enforced;
education would B funded & the trend in class size reduction would B encouraged;

That's a start!

[stanwyck]

56. Excellent question

the center has moved. Left. That's why the momentum is behind Dean. Lieberman is not even an alternative to Bush. Well, he's smarter. With this much unemployment, corporate corruption, questionable foreign policy, evasive and dishonest administration, and, of course, WAR...the "center" has moved. Left. Lieberman is stuck on the wrong side of the center line.

[primavera]

60. It's kind of hard to keep track of, isn't it?

It just keeps scooting farther and farther to the right as the Repukes are allowed to drag, without opposition, the entire political spectrum to the right. It's kind of the hazzard of trying to build an ideology based not upon one's own ideas, but upon offering a moderated version of whatever someone else is doing.

[Darranar]

63. Thanks, Dean!

Though I support Kucinich, I am proud that we have someone who is challenging those DLC fools.

[goforit]

68. Yaaa Hoooo!!!......Way to sock it to ya Lieberman!!!.....Go Dean!!

Lieberman ....why don't ya just go and whine to your two buddies,
Bush and Blair.

As far as I am concerned your Bush's other poodle!!!

Woof wooof!!!!


Outstanding DEAN......You're the guy with the Chutzpah!!!!

[grasswire]

72. Dean

Dean--he's everything Bush pretended to be.

What a great campaign slogan.

[dArKeR]

73. Dems make a mistake saying, 'left, right' 'liberal, conservative' it's

'honest, dishonest', 'truth, lies'

Dems. should remove these words from their vocabulary and let the Media Whores use them.

Dean should respond with, 'I don't know what 'conservative and liberal mean.' 'But I do know the difference between 'corruption and honest American liberty'.

Dean should be tagging Repukes with negative words and Dems. with positives.

[Muddleoftheroad]

75. Scary

It is scary to me that anyone considers himself a moderate by allowing the Constitution to be decided on a state by state basis.

I don't know who I am voting for, but I know it won't be Dean.

[Aaron]

82. 2nd amendment issue you're talking about right?

If you have or find a Dem' candidate that you think is better on gun rights than Dean let me know. Right now he's the best we have IMHO (I do understand, and share, your concern regarding taking a state's rights view on it I think generally he's for less gun control than all of the other candidates). IIRC there's at least one 2nd amendment case on its way to the Supreme Court at some point in the next few years. My thinking is that the USSC may handle this for us - either the court finds an individual right so that the state can't make 'unreasonable' restrictions or it finds a collective right that the state can heavily regulate. Either way, the policy impact of Dean's state's rights view would be nullified by the decision because the USSC will say it is a state's rights decision and at which point none of the presidential candidates(if elected) could approach it differently than Dean, or they say it's and individual right and Dean's state's rights argument isn't a threat.

[Muddleoftheroad]

83. Yes, 2nd Amendment

And we need to take the issue off the damn table. It has hurt us before and will hurt us again. Dean's solution is no solution at all. It is a dangerous precedent that the BFEE would love to apply to other rights.

[stickdog]

95. Don't You Get It? With the BFEE going full bore ahead, states' rights now

offer a refuge of relative sanity.

Gun control lost TN for Gore. It would lose VT for Dean. His stance is the height of political sanity.

[nolabels]

76. The part I like best about the article is .......................

When He doesn't back down like them wimps that snivel at * 's bootstraps. Pathetic, jeezz what next, exchange of of Xmas gifts?


Democrats like Sen. Joseph Lieberman, also a candidate for the nomination, have criticized Dean, saying that his opposition to the Iraq war, in particular, would cost him against President Bush. Lieberman said Monday that nominating Dean would lead the party "into the political wilderness" and would be a "ticket to nowhere."

Dean said such criticisms don't get to him, and defended his opposition to the war.

[DeathvadeR]

93. You think?

<http://www.bushflash.com/dlc.html>