HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I've never seen such a di...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:16 AM

I've never seen such a dismal losing candidate.

Not only has Romney disgraced himself post election. But I have never seen a candidate become such a pariah so soon after an election.
All the losing Dem candidates I have seen in my life have still been honored after they lost. Humphrey, McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis (criticized for a bad campaign, but not his character or ideology), Gore (well not really a loser) and Kerry. All still venerated and respected by the Dems.
And as far as I remember the Rep.s were still respected after losing. From Goldwater to Dole and McCain.
But Romney has shown himself to be such a cold, plutocratic twit, that he has quickly brought both parties together in their disgust.
I guess he really was bipartisan.

108 replies, 8251 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 108 replies Author Time Post
Reply I've never seen such a dismal losing candidate. (Original post)
edhopper Nov 2012 OP
demwing Nov 2012 #1
BlueStreak Nov 2012 #29
edhopper Nov 2012 #31
peace frog Nov 2012 #70
cilla4progress Nov 2012 #42
lunatica Nov 2012 #56
cilla4progress Nov 2012 #69
kardonb Nov 2012 #36
demwing Nov 2012 #86
MineralMan Nov 2012 #2
Tippy Nov 2012 #3
salinen Nov 2012 #21
Ineeda Nov 2012 #22
GoCubsGo Nov 2012 #46
salinen Nov 2012 #97
Wednesdays Nov 2012 #99
salinen Nov 2012 #108
Cha Nov 2012 #94
BlueMan Votes Nov 2012 #26
wtmusic Nov 2012 #37
Hamlette Nov 2012 #51
wtmusic Nov 2012 #55
BlueMan Votes Nov 2012 #89
Hamlette Nov 2012 #50
WinkyDink Nov 2012 #60
Hamlette Nov 2012 #72
Hekate Nov 2012 #88
BlueMan Votes Nov 2012 #91
DallasNE Nov 2012 #39
vaberella Nov 2012 #52
marew Nov 2012 #63
2on2u Nov 2012 #4
awoke_in_2003 Nov 2012 #66
peace frog Nov 2012 #80
Wednesdays Nov 2012 #100
warrior1 Nov 2012 #5
edhopper Nov 2012 #6
Wednesdays Nov 2012 #102
surrealAmerican Nov 2012 #7
Wednesdays Nov 2012 #103
The Velveteen Ocelot Nov 2012 #8
oldbanjo Nov 2012 #13
BuelahWitch Nov 2012 #28
edhopper Nov 2012 #30
Wednesdays Nov 2012 #104
thelordofhell Nov 2012 #9
world wide wally Nov 2012 #45
NRaleighLiberal Nov 2012 #10
fil62793skx Nov 2012 #75
proud2BlibKansan Nov 2012 #11
Ineeda Nov 2012 #24
Wednesdays Nov 2012 #105
union_maid Nov 2012 #12
reusrename Nov 2012 #34
Mira Nov 2012 #14
regnaD kciN Nov 2012 #15
spooky3 Nov 2012 #18
edhopper Nov 2012 #20
femrap Nov 2012 #35
pitbullgirl1965 Nov 2012 #101
femrap Nov 2012 #107
karynnj Nov 2012 #59
Bigmack Nov 2012 #16
The Velveteen Ocelot Nov 2012 #17
peace frog Nov 2012 #76
KharmaTrain Nov 2012 #19
onethatcares Nov 2012 #23
femrap Nov 2012 #40
peace frog Nov 2012 #78
femrap Nov 2012 #92
peace frog Nov 2012 #95
Wednesdays Nov 2012 #106
RepublicansRZombies Nov 2012 #25
RepublicansRZombies Nov 2012 #38
Hulk Nov 2012 #27
melody Nov 2012 #32
Salviati Nov 2012 #33
Liberal_in_LA Nov 2012 #41
burnsei sensei Nov 2012 #48
BarackTheVote Nov 2012 #57
coalition_unwilling Nov 2012 #85
treestar Nov 2012 #53
Andy Stanton Nov 2012 #43
titanicdave Nov 2012 #44
peace frog Nov 2012 #82
burnsei sensei Nov 2012 #47
HopeHoops Nov 2012 #49
marew Nov 2012 #65
HopeHoops Nov 2012 #73
rzemanfl Nov 2012 #54
edhopper Nov 2012 #58
Kalidurga Nov 2012 #61
adieu Nov 2012 #62
Overseas Nov 2012 #64
marew Nov 2012 #67
DFW Nov 2012 #68
immoderate Nov 2012 #71
Midwestern Democrat Nov 2012 #87
immoderate Nov 2012 #96
cyglet Nov 2012 #74
Politicub Nov 2012 #77
reflection Nov 2012 #79
Hekate Nov 2012 #81
coalition_unwilling Nov 2012 #83
ginnyinWI Nov 2012 #84
DCBob Nov 2012 #90
Raine Nov 2012 #93
sadbear Nov 2012 #98

Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:21 AM

1. UPDATED: He's a Uniter.

Last edited Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:09 PM - Edit history (1)

More so that W ever was...

UPDATE - What I meant was that everyone is united in their dislike of Romney

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demwing (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:46 AM

29. The difference is that absolutely nobody wanted Romney in the first place

It is just that all the stronger candidates (Christy, Daniels, Jebbie, etc) decided to wait until 2016. And that left the GOP with nothing but clowns. Romney was the least among clowns, which I guess is another way of saying he was the most serious candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #29)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:47 AM

31. I don't think any of those

are particularly strong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Reply #31)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:27 PM

70. Jeb is the strongest of the lot, which isn't saying a great deal

It's not clear whether voters will be ready to elect yet another Bush to the WH in 2016. He's not the teabaggers' choice, and mainstream Republicans will see his name and remember the unmitigated disaster that was Dubya.

Jeb's path will be particularly difficult if running against a strong, widely popular Dem candidate,,,, or one whose husband fits that description.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #29)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:01 PM

42. I think it was just to get rid of him (Rmoney)

once and for all!

They knew he and his money could buy their way into the nomination, as they did. I think they (Rethugs) assessed that despite the weak economy, Obama was a formidable opponent, likeability ratings, foreign policy, and all. And most Americans STILL blamed mostly Bush for the bad economy.

So yeah, I agree, the candidates who wanted to make a serious run decided to keep their powder dry for 2016. That's why the
R field was such a hot mess this time around!

No surprise they want to put the bad taste of Rmoney out of their collective gaping pieholes as soon as YESTERDAY!

Consolation prize indeed!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cilla4progress (Reply #42)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:34 PM

56. Their powder may be dry but in their cleverness they've lost the party

The teabaggeratti took it over.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunatica (Reply #56)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:25 PM

69. And a few might be "turning" on them!

Christie, Jindal.

Will be interesting to watch!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demwing (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:53 AM

36. uniter

he sure united both parties in no liking him from the start .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kardonb (Reply #36)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:10 PM

86. yep, exactly my point /nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:24 AM

2. HerMitt Romney

He's going to hole up in one of his houses and save his toenail clippings in a big jar. You watch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:24 AM

3. Romney has Mental problems...no if and or buts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tippy (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:27 AM

21. It is so obvious that he does

 

and he came way too close to the White House. The reason he received 48% says something gruesome about this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to salinen (Reply #21)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:30 AM

22. Yes. Gruesome, demoralizing, and quite frightening. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ineeda (Reply #22)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:11 PM

46. In more ways than one.

When you look at how some of these 48% are behaving in the wake of his loss, it's obvious there is a fat chunk of them who also have serious mental problems that are as bad or worse than Romney's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoCubsGo (Reply #46)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 09:06 AM

97. We all know some of these people

 

mental illness is a pandemic, with Faux News types as the vector. And I don't understand myself that when someone tries to convince me that he's a muslim non-citizen, I just smile instead of telling them they should seek a mental professional.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to salinen (Reply #97)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 09:53 AM

99. That's because you couldn't drag them to see a mental health professional

People in the mental health profession are all part of the conspiracy, don't you know?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wednesdays (Reply #99)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:42 PM

108. oh, riigghhtt

 

I almost forgot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to salinen (Reply #21)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 08:52 PM

94. To me..it says something Gruesome about that 40 something % and the brainwashing

hate emitting from the airwaves that spurred so many of them on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tippy (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:40 AM

26. well...DUH.

 

he's a MORMON.

it's a pre-requisite.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueMan Votes (Reply #26)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:54 AM

37. Raised in a different environment

he would have shown a lot of promise, IMO.

That's a weird-ass way to grow up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Reply #37)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:27 PM

51. Harry Reid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hamlette (Reply #51)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:32 PM

55. Harry was raised agnostic. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hamlette (Reply #51)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:43 PM

89. EXACTLY.

 

Look how he let himself get played by mitch mcconnell over the past two years...

that never would have happened to a Methodist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueMan Votes (Reply #26)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:26 PM

50. Harry. Reid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hamlette (Reply #50)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:56 PM

60. Was Harry Reid's father the son of a (literal) outlaw who RENOUNCED U.S. CITIZENSHIP?

Ithought not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #60)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:23 PM

72. and why should someone's grandfather be the critical factor in how we judge people?

Judge people by the "content of their character" and their actions not the color of their skin, their grandparents, or their religion.

There are a million and one reasons to hate Romney but to blame it on his religion or grandparents just stops intelligent conversation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hamlette (Reply #72)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:39 PM

88. Thank you Hamlette

An awful lot of the people who founded this nation were NOT pious Pilgrims, but second sons, rapscallions, and fortune hunters. Bill Clinton's whole family was quite dysfunctional for who knows how many generations, and we know how his story has turned out.

Hekate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hamlette (Reply #50)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 06:39 PM

91. Very Good Point- Look at how easily he was played by mitch mcconnell-

 

that never would have happened to a Lutheran.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tippy (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:57 AM

39. That's Why I Kept Comparing Him To Nixon n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tippy (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:28 PM

52. Both his wife and his son admitted this publicly. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tippy (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:17 PM

63. Without a doubt!

He needs help! Right now!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:26 AM

4. Ahhhhh, four years from the now the totally new, totally redesigned Romney 3.0 will be out much

 

the same way your favorite vehicle that was the best that could ever be will be totally redesigned next year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2on2u (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:19 PM

66. They may recycle primary losers...

but never one who lost the real thing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #66)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:45 PM

80. Exactly right

GOPer powers that be expect their losers to G-O-P: "Get Out of the Picture", permanently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #66)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:02 AM

100. Yeah, the last time they ran a loser from the previous election was Dewey

64 years ago.

(Nixon ran a second time in 1968, but that was after two election cycles. Plus, when he lost in 1960 it was by a relatively small margin.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:27 AM

5. McCain is one of these

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to warrior1 (Reply #5)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:34 AM

6. One of these what? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Reply #6)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:11 AM

102. I think warrior means McCain is another poor loser

Which may be true, but rMoney is in a whole 'nother league...if not universe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:41 AM

7. This is because running for president was all he had.

Look at your list: most of those former candidates had a career in public service long before their loss that continued long after. Romney was a one-term governor a number of years ago, and not a particularly accomplished one. He doesn't have a long enough or admirable enough record to honored.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to surrealAmerican (Reply #7)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:21 AM

103. He will never want for cash as long as he lives

I'm sure he'll get a lucrative lobbying position, or top-dollar commentator spot on Faux News. Or he'll find some businesses to exploit while he gets greasy palm quid pro quo with his buddies still in the government.

After all, he deserves those billions, doesn't he?
Now excuse me while I try to figure out how to pay for this month's prescription bill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:43 AM

8. Biggest sore loser ever.

-although McCain is running a close second in the Sore Loser Derby; he still seems to be holding a big fat grudge from '08. But all the other "losers" that I remember never whined about losing; they just went on to other things. Carter has had a distinguished career with Habitat for Humanity and as a diplomat-at-large. Mondale (who took a far worse shellacking than Romney) practiced international law and then was appointed Ambassador to Japan. McGovern (who also lost badly) went back to the Senate, and later became involved in world hunger agencies. Al Gore is famous now for his significant work on climate change. Dukakis didn't sulk, either; he just continued to serve as governor of Massachusetts and is now a college professor. John Kerry went back to the Senate and has become more effective than ever. Bob Dole made commercials (notably Viagra) and appeared on The Daily Show, where he was pretty funny. Even Poppy Bush didn't whine and sulk like Mittens after he lost to Clinton.

It remains to be seen whether Mittens will do something useful with himself like these other losing candidates, or whether he'll fade into well-deserved obscurity as a private equity parasite and professional whiny loser.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #8)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:01 AM

13. Hopefully he'll go to jail

for being a crook and be an example (to the World) of what the Republican Party has become.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #8)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:44 AM

28. Nixon in '62 comes close

When he lost the CA governor's race: "You won't have Dick Nixon to kick around any more!" Too bad he didn't keep that promise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BuelahWitch (Reply #28)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:46 AM

30. But he was still respected enough

to win the 68 nomination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #8)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:26 AM

104. Poppy Bush didn’t whine in '92, that's true

But he sure worked hard behind the scenes to undermine Clinton and Gore ever since. It's a classic case of "Don't get mad, get even."

As for what will happen to rMoney for the rest of his life, see my post #102, above.

The last Republican with some degree of dignity after losing, IMHO, was Gerald Ford.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:52 AM

9. He lost every state he has a residence in...........

Massachusetts, California, New Hampshire..........I do believe that's a record

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thelordofhell (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:05 PM

45. You left out Michigan

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:54 AM

10. he is a multidimensional loser. as a noun. as a verb. as a adjective!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NRaleighLiberal (Reply #10)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:37 PM

75. agreed

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:55 AM

11. I've never seen such a dismal presidential candidate.

Worst candidate and worst campaign ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:33 AM

24. And on the Rethuglican heels of

the worst president ever. Now there's a record!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ineeda (Reply #24)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:41 AM

105. And yet he won more than 20 states

Now that's depressing...and demonstrates the tremendous power of propaganda emanating from the airwaves and print media.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:58 AM

12. They got to know him?

Don't forget, no one really wanted him. He lost to McCain who was a suspected moderate (almost the same as socialist in RW world) in 2008. He probably won the nomination this time around because all the contenders were, shall we say, ass-clowns, and at least he looked like someone who might play the president on TV. And also it seems that any prolonged exposure to Mitt Romney results in a deep loathing of the man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to union_maid (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:52 AM

34. He was only nominated due to the electronic vote flipping in the primaries.

 

First Huckabee, then Paul, Gingrich, and Santorum. Any one of them would have beat Romney save for the electronic vote flipping.

This should be the story of this election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:07 AM

14. Love your last line -

written with tongue firmly planted in cheek.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:08 AM

15. You obviously weren't around several decades ago...

After his 1972 loss, McGovern became an "un-person" in his party for over ten years, with the moves toward "party unity" (i.e. purging the "McGovern liberals" from positions of any power) starting practically the day after the election.

For that matter, after losing to Reagan, Carter was treated as a pariah for years -- as late as 1996, he was complaining that Clinton wanted to prevent him from appearing at the Convention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to regnaD kciN (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:13 AM

18. I agree. Also, Republicans may have no feeling one way or the other about Romney as a person but

may react to him and others simply as winners and losers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to regnaD kciN (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:24 AM

20. I was around

I campaigned for McGovern. And that is not how I remembered it.
Carter was respected and not turned away from right after the election. It's true that he did not have a good relationship with Clinton. But he is one of the most honored ex-Pres. we have had.

It's the immediate reaction to Romney I find unprecedented.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to regnaD kciN (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:52 AM

35. I remember...

 

McGovern was my first vote for President. I was 19. I truly admired him and his quest for Peace. Then came Watergate and I felt our nation had learned a lesson. We would never elect someone like Nixon again.

I admired Jimmy Carter as well. He was intelligent and spoke the Truth about 'The Energy Crisis.' But Americans don't want to hear the Truth. If only people had listened to Jimmy, we would be on the road of Sustainability. He had solar panels installed on the WH.

Alas, along comes a B-rated actor from Hollywood who had thrown all of CA's mentally ill into the streets. He was 'Papa' and he told all his children that everything would be OK.

And there began The Beginning of the End. America has been in decline ever since. I am glad that we have someone in the WH who does care for the less fortunate. This may help lessen the pain to so many.

W put us into a spiral of debt that we may not be able to recover from.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to femrap (Reply #35)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:10 AM

101. IA. President Carter was great

I was 11 when he was elected and I remember very well how pro environment is was. So sad he lost to that bastard Reagan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pitbullgirl1965 (Reply #101)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 11:14 AM

107. Yep,

 

Raygun started the End.

Welcome to DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to regnaD kciN (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:51 PM

59. It was not uncommon to see bumper stickers saying "Don't blame me, I voted for McGovern

or buttons saying the same - I had both and STILL have the button. Do you think there will be anything like this for Romney?

The difference reflects that there was a - not all that insignificant - group of people who respected McGovern. It is true that Carter never wanted anything to do with him and he was never considered for an administration role - to my knowledge - and never again spoke at a convention again. I have NEVER seen a campaign with less real content. As such, he could and did not socialize their current ideas.

That I think was the norm - as could be seen by Mondale and Dukakis. The fact is that Gore and Kerry were different - maybe because they were respected as having come close and still having powerful messages they could give. Gore, likely could have gotten the 2004 nomination as many felt he was cheated (cuz he was), Kerry, who has given prominent speeches at the last 2 conventions.

An almost more important difference between Romney and Kerry is that all the 2008 candidates ran on variations of Kerry platform planks and Kerry/Feingold (just lengthening the time periods). There is NOTHING Romney really ran on consistently - other than he should be President and Obama was not a good President. Kerry's platform built on Gore's which build on other past Democratic platforms. (I'm not speaking of the official party platform, but the ideas the candidates spoke of') Even in 2004, the majority of people agreed on most issues with Kerry and the Democrats - but they were still to traumatized by terrorism and too many bonded to Bush.

In 2008, I wrote the following after reading a great NYT oped by Bill Bradley. Link t Bradley's oped. http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0330-26.htm


One question that can be asked, after reading former Senator Bill Bradley’s March 2005 NYT op-ed “A Party Inverted” in the previous JK blog post, is whether or not we have created a more favorable environment for our 2008 Democratic nominee than we had when the op-ed was written.

In “A Party Inverted”, Bill Bradley speaks of how the Republicans can still succeed even with a weak candidate, because the party provides him or her with a message and ideas to run on. Their chosen nominee has the support of a partisan media which communicates the ideas from permanent think tanks with constant funding by big donors and foundations that continually develop and test ideas and messages. All a given Republican Presidential candidate has to do is to personalize the existing message.

The equivalent Democratic candidate in a given election cycle does not start out with this sort of pre-existing infrastructure, making it difficult for him or her to communicate and sell new ideas or messages in the short time available. This leads to Democratic candidates running on charisma and catchy slogans, rather than on ideas and messages.

The Bradley article illustrates why it was much harder for a Democratic candidate to win under those circumstances. However, while little may have changed in terms of infrastructure since 2005, the Democrats running for President this time did not have to start entirely anew. They had the advantage of building upon the ideas and messages that John Kerry put forth during his 2004 campaign.

More than any Democratic candidate in decades, in 2004 Senator Kerry ran a campaign that was heavily based on ideas and messages. As Bradley notes, communicating ideas and messages in the environment of a modern Presidential campaign is harder than running on catchy slogans and shallow style. And in the 2004 election cycle, many voters never got to hear the ideas and messages from Kerry that they would have otherwise have responded to positively.

But the ideas and the messages he based his campaign on did gain acceptance from those who heard them. In a way, Kerry’s 2004 campaign became the functional equivalent of a think tank, giving the current crop of Democratic candidates many excellent proposals that had already been given some exposure and tested in 2004. The validity of those ideas and messages has been proven with every one of the many “Kerry- was-right” moments we are seeing today.

The similarities between the various Democratic plans in 2008 exist because so many of them are actually slightly tweaked versions of plans from Senator Kerry’s 2004 campaign. John Edwards’ 2008 campaign was stronger than his 2004 campaign for the Presidential nomination — in no small part because it was notably closer to Kerry’s own 2004 campaign, which greatly improved Edwards’ positions on many issues.

In 2004, Edwards called for health insurance for children only, saying that Kerry’s far more expansive program was unaffordable in one of the final debates between them. In 2008, his expanded health insurance proposals were much closer to what Kerry’s had been. Edwards also greatly expanded his environmental program in 2008, an approach that had been Kerry’s in 2004 as well.

On Iraq, every Democratic presidential candidate in 2008 echoed Kerry’s words from 2004 (as other Democrats had also done in 2006.) Every Democrat this year has spoken of the need for a regional diplomatic summit to solve the instability problems in the area. They have also spoken of how it will only be when the Iraqis believe that we will not stay there indefinitely that they will make the tough compromises needed to succeed. Kerry’s views on the need for a new foreign policy in dealing with our adversaries – a need that he has been consistently articulating even since his famous 1971 speech to the Congress – resonate even better today.

On the war on terrorism, even a person as conservative as George Will conceded that Kerry was right in 2004 when he spoke of how he would deal with non-state terrorism mostly through shared international intelligence and law enforcement, and occasional strategic military efforts only when necessary. Nearly every Democratic candidate has said something similar in 2008.

On the environment, Al Gore’s Nobel prize-winning work combined with Kerry’s positions on energy independence and the environment have become so much the dominant opinion that in 2008 even the Republican Presidential candidates “plagiarized” Kerry’s 2004 campaign platform points: that our country’s addiction to oil was financing both sides in the war on terror, and that we needed to develop alternative energy sources in order to be less dependent on an unstable Middle East.

All the Democratic candidates have taken this position as well, adding that investing in our developing alternative energy sources and more efficient technology would also lead to cleaner air, cleaner water, better health and the good jobs that would come from selling these new products and technology. Kerry made those points in all of his events and speeches on the environment during the 2004 campaign.

In fact, he and his wife Teresa made that the fundamental focus of their environmental book “This Moment on Earth,” and they both spoke extensively all across the county on those issues when their environmental book was released. It was also Kerry who represented the US Congress at the Bali conference last winter, when he again emphasized his longstanding positions on climate change and energy policy that the other Democrats are now espousing.

On healthcare, John Kerry argued in 2004 that it was our moral duty to ensure that people had access to health care. This is now the dominant position among Democrats in 2008. In addition, Senator Obama has made Kerry’s innovative concept of providing catastrophic re-insurance to protect those whose health is most at risk a key piece of his own healthcare policy in 2008.

If we Democrats succeed in 2008, it will be because the American people can see that our ideas are what this country needs, and that the ones carefully crafted by the Republican think tanks have led us to the brink of disaster. It will also be because the ideas and messages they hear this year will sound familiar, and therefore comfortable and easy to believe in, because John Kerry has been pushing them into the public sphere for the last 4 years and more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:10 AM

16. Don't forget Dumbya.....

.. I don't think they even mentioned him this year.

... and he was their winning candidate!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bigmack (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:12 AM

17. I will give W credit for simply disappearing

which is what Mittens ought to do. Immediately.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #17)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:39 PM

76. He's convinced history will laud his greatness

but has said "we'll be dead" before that happens. Yes of course, history will never exonerate or exalt him, but as long as he fervently believes it he will live a comfortable, untroubled life. More's the fricking pity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:17 AM

19. It's Was A Pleasure To Watch...

I knew the second Willard didn't deliver the White House, the rushpublican bus would roll over him and his inept campaign. At best he had a codependency thing going on with most wingnuts...their hatred of Democrats and the "colored fella" superceded all else, but the veneer was thin...Willard's support was a mile wide and millimeters thick.

All you had to do was watch how the clown car primaries transpired. Willard never had more than 20% of the support and only won the nomination because his campaign didn't suck as bad as the other clowns. A visit to freeperville in those days showed ZERO support and lots of contempt for Mittens and it wasn't until a lot of "soul searching" that the great unhinged tepidly signed on to support him.

There are a lot of rushpublicans who feel Willard sold them a bag of shit. He said he had the resume and skills to put that "colored fella" in his place...had the full support of Bullshit mountain and the unhinged were expecting a big victory. Instead...Willard ran an inept campaign...if he wasn't shooting himself in the foot then one of his surrogates was. We witnessed one of the worst campaigns and campaigners of modern times. Deep down inside most rushpublicans knew it as well...and when he failed to deliver, they tossed him like bad garbage...his name will be uttered less than george herbert hoover dubya bush...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:31 AM

23. ask any repuke

what rmoney had over the rest of the gop flock that made them support him.



Then sit back, take a nap, wash your car, take your s.o out for a movie and dinner,



you won't get an answer.


They've already forgotten who their other candidates were during the primaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onethatcares (Reply #23)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:57 AM

40. During the

 

Repugnant Primaries, I just wait to see who Papa Bush endorses.....that is who is chosen. McLame, the last time and now RobMe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to femrap (Reply #40)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:42 PM

78. His pick in 2016 will undoubtedly be Jeb

ergo, Jeb will be the nominee? You betcha. **wink**

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to peace frog (Reply #78)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 07:24 PM

92. Papa Bush will

 

be gone by then!!! Or I will. I cannot endure another bush.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to femrap (Reply #92)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:33 PM

95. The world cannot endure another Bush

and you never know, Poppy Bush might hang on long enough to see "the smart one" make his run for POTUS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to femrap (Reply #92)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:58 AM

106. Well, if Poppy kicks the bucket

Like any crime family, the mantle passes on to the next generation. So that means...Jebby?

Wonder who he would support for the 2016 nomination? Hmm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:35 AM

25. The Corporate media IS Mitt Romney, they cannot separate themselves so easily

 


I can see they want to blame him, but he was nothing without them.

The media sold, and is still selling, all the same BS.

Until they separate themselves from his lies about our economy, they need to be held accountable as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RepublicansRZombies (Reply #25)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:54 AM

38. So Romney the moron is gone- we are still stuck with the stupid ass media that pushed him on us

 

Romney did not act alone- The media and R party need to be held accountable for his stupidity

I understand that people like a scapegoat, but as someone else made the perfect analogy:

'The Republican party farted out Romney and now they are all trying to run away like they had nothing to do with it'

Romney was a result of the corporate criminal media supporting liars in the Republican party.

He couldn't have done it without the media and they need to be held accountable.

We can't let them put all the blame on him, and keep pretending they are liberal or impartial.

Now is our time to expose the Corporate media full of Republican liars, they are going down with the Romney ship as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:41 AM

27. Gonna miss all those horse stories that could have been...

...and watching queen anne with her pity package and grand admiration for her five spawn who have so nobly served their country by doing missionary work ....somewhere in a safe land.

Oh God, how close you brought us. How wonderful it is to have "four more years" of the man who offers us real hope for change. He needs to keep delivering....he ONLY has four years left!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:51 AM

32. Everybody in the GOP HATES him -- ask anyone active around either party n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:51 AM

33. He was a pariah before the election.

No one liked Mitt Romney, not even the republicans. If they had thought that they had a legitimate chance at this election, there is no way Romney would have gotten the nomination in the first place. They needed a sacrifice for 2012 and found it in Mitt Romney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 11:59 AM

41. He wanted to win very very badly. at any cost. Loss is sending him over the edge

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_in_LA (Reply #41)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:18 PM

48. He lives in the rose-colored world in which

success is almost completely assured.
Plenty of resources, plenty of means for carrying out whatever project you have.
Achievement is meaningless to him because he has had so much of it.
To achieve, in his well-heeled ambition, is to satisfy a desire, nothing more.
And ultimately, where achievement means only gratification for the moment, and where it happens over and over again, it becomes absurd.
What a hollow empty life. How inevitable it was that he, in his age, should be a hollow man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to burnsei sensei (Reply #48)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:46 PM

57. +1 awesome quote, burnsei!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to burnsei sensei (Reply #48)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:07 PM

85. Well put! - n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_in_LA (Reply #41)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:28 PM

53. It might even be shaking his faith

He may have believed he was the White Horse Candidate. Now he has to believe it is going to be someone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:01 PM

43. But they still agree with him

All this criticism from Republican politicians is BS.

The truth is they agree with him 100%. Tax cuts for the rich, destruction of social programs, anti-gay, anti-labor, anti-hispanic, anti-black are STILL the Republican positions.

For the GOP moderation is a dirty word.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:02 PM

44. Excellent Point

but remember, Rmoney is a corporate CEO bully and is used to getting everything his way with no questions asked.....and the country is not a business so therefore, we do not need a CEO bully in the White House

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to titanicdave (Reply #44)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:54 PM

82. You just described my esteemed governor

Rick Scott, the Man Who Would Be King of Florida. Or should I say, became supreme monarch because he sure as hell has run Florida like his own private fiefdom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:14 PM

47. In my journal, some time before

the election, I called Romney an unadulterated horror.
I'm very suspicious about his extreme confidence in winning, and his extreme disappointment in losing.
Did he have a plan for rigging the election itself?
His Republican comrades did everything they could to manipulate the electorate, why wouldn't they attempt to manipulate the election?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:18 PM

49. rMoney and Queen Ann believed they were in the line of rulership.

 

Wake up morons, being rich doesn't make you anointed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeHoops (Reply #49)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:18 PM

65. Amen!

They absolutely forgot to factor in 'arrogance'!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marew (Reply #65)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:28 PM

73. Well, there was a time in France where a sharp blade would have dealt with them.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:29 PM

54. The "not really a loser" should be behind Kerry too. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rzemanfl (Reply #54)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:48 PM

58. Don't disagree

With Kerry there is good evidence it was stolen. But not as yet proven.
With Gore, he out right won the popular vote and the eventual recount in Florida. There can be no dispute that he won the election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:08 PM

61. It was the worst campaign I have ever seen on a national level

The person Mitt reminds me most of is David Duke. Who also got way more of the vote than he should have when he ran for Governor. He almost had 40% of the vote. Way too close for comfort. Now Mitt needs to just go away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:15 PM

62. I wasn't sure that the title wasn't referring to

Allen West or Scott Brown or Joe Walsh. But clearly Romney is one big fat example.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:17 PM

64. McCain is giving him a good run for the title. Even 4 years later!

Trying to slam the president because his UN Ambassador didn't reveal all the details and speculation about an incident the moment it happened.

If she had done that, then McCain would be shouting that the UN Ambassador Revealed Classified Information or UN Ambassador Inflamed the Situation with Speculation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Overseas (Reply #64)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:19 PM

67. True! So very true!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:24 PM

68. Hell, they "won" twice with W, and they STILL don't want him to emerge from the darkness

It's just the nature of the beast(s).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:38 PM

71. Scary how close he came.

With an incumbent in office. And a popular one too, the more serious Republicans chose to keep their powder dry. With enough gerrymandering, vote rigging, and payoffs Romney came within 3% of winning.

That's far too close for comfort. If Nixon, Reagan, and W. could win, it appears that there is no standard for governance of the country. What were these people (the 48%) thinking?

--imm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to immoderate (Reply #71)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:11 PM

87. With the unemployment rate where it was, it was baked in the cake that any

establishment Republican candidate was going to get about 47-48% of the vote by default. It wasn't fair that a sizeable number of voters were going to blame Obama for a situation not of his own making, but we knew this from the beginning. This is why nobody is trying to spin that Romney and the GOP did "pretty good/came pretty close" - they received no more votes than what they were guaranteed at the beginning of this year - Romney could have ran a front porch campaign and probably wound up with the same number of votes that he did.

Could a better GOP candidate have won the additional three percentage points needed to win the election? For a number of reasons, I suspect not - which is why the GOP is in full meltdown mode right now - otherwise, they'd just be dismissing it as "Romney was just a shitty candidate".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Midwestern Democrat (Reply #87)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 10:48 PM

96. No offense -- but this is not comforting.

Not your fault.

--imm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:33 PM

74. Most of them STFU

after losing.

Yes, McCain seems to be airing his sour grapes now, too.

Maybe aspiring to be a party of whiners.

Romney and Ryan make themselves look worse by blaming the "urban vote" and "gifts" rather than admit they were out strategized.

Of course, part of me thinks that 47% video was absolutely what turned it....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:41 PM

77. He has become unhinged

Now it just feels awkward.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:44 PM

79. A fitting end for a terrible campaign.

Romney is the worst Republican candidate I've ever seen in my 40+ years. That he got 47% is more of a testament to the stupidity of the average voter than anything he did. Obama was fortunate to face such an empty suit, even though in a world of thinking people he would have destroyed Romney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:52 PM

81. At least Nixon had the sense to bury himself for awhile...

... after snarling at the press corps that they "wouldn't have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore."

Then he returned, shedding graveclothes like Lazarus, and softly laughing "Bwahahaha, here's the New Nixon."

He was smart -- he knew that no one could miss him until he was gone. I hope Romney is not that smart -- by all means, keep telling us how you really feel Mitt. Don't let anyone have the chance to forget that you despise half the country for not being as lucky as you are.

Hekate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:56 PM

83. Saturday piece in Buzzfeed put it quite succinctly:

 

"Romney is now a toxic asset to unload," the historian Jack Bohrer remarked Saturday. "The only interesting thing left to his story is how they dispose of him."

http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/why-republicans-want-to-make-mitt-romney-go-away

Full article well worth the read, btw.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:01 PM

84. Well they never really wanted him in the first place.

He was just the last one left standing. All of that hoopla was so manufactured and fake! I'm sure the ad-makers were happy raking in all that money, but nobody else really was.

So it's, "throw him under the bus".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:56 PM

90. He would have been an even worse winning candidate.

I knew Romney would have been a terrible candidate from the beginning. I actually think Santorum might have done better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 07:41 PM

93. No one has ever liked him, probably he was the most unlikable person

to ever run for Prez. Even the repukes had no actual liking for him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 09:19 AM

98. He did concede on election night.

I give him credit for that. Many of us, me included, thought he would hold out for a few days or possible challenge the results in court. But since then, you're right, he has made a complete ass of himself, which kind of vindicates us for thinking he wouldn't concede.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread