You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #152: Yes, I was. Thanks. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-03-07 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #139
152. Yes, I was. Thanks.
"You're trying to spin the sources away - even going so far as to DENY the sources - which was expected. In fact, calls from the left for sources are usually an exercise in futility because they're never good enough. For example:"

No. Your sources never addressed my points. That's not my problem, it is yours.

"Which certainly didn't prevent him from writing about the things happening before then, including a foreshadowing the next campaign."

It did prevent him from analyzing events in 1944 with the same scrutiny as earlier events, since he died before he could write much about that period.

"Should be obvious to anyone. In the middle of war, the White House isn't going to broadcast the VP is revealing secrets and badmouthing the president. Of course he'll public ally back Wallace."

Oh, you mean like Lincoln backed Hannibal Hamlin?

Wait, never mind. :eyes:

"Already have and it's well documented. The left consisted of people like Sinclair, Norman Thomas, and Robert La Follette and Phil La Follette. In fact, in 1938 when the Dems lost 81 seats in the House, 8 seats in the Senate, and 13 governorships, FDR said he was happy that Phil La Follette and the Farmer-Labor party had been eliminated."

Great. Doesn't change the fact that FDR incorporated many of their ideas, particularly in his expansion of New Deal government programs. I'd be happy if the Green party ceased to exist but that doesn't make me any less of a liberal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -What if Hillary Clinton loses the election? StudentsMustUniteNow  Jun-29-07 07:39 PM   #0 
  - How about you say something nice about YOUR candidate  aquart   Jun-29-07 07:40 PM   #1 
  - Unless something has changed... HRC "is" Student's candidate..  larissa   Jun-29-07 07:48 PM   #3 
  - Are you being sarcastic? n/t  StudentsMustUniteNow   Jun-29-07 07:49 PM   #5 
  - I think she is confusing yours with a similar username. You are an Edwards die-hard no?  Buck Rabbit   Jun-29-07 08:00 PM   #10 
     - Hmmmm... Do we have another Students/etc/etc/etc ?  larissa   Jun-29-07 08:06 PM   #12 
        - I don't have a clear preferred candidate at the moment  StudentsMustUniteNow   Jun-29-07 09:47 PM   #25 
           - Biden? with the disdain you have shown for the DLC?  rinsd   Jul-02-07 02:03 PM   #80 
  - Erm... UMass student here... WRONG!  nothingtoofear   Jun-29-07 09:59 PM   #28 
  - For as much reading as you do, you don't have a clue do you?  William769   Jul-02-07 12:52 PM   #51 
  - WORD!  ronnykmarshall   Jun-29-07 08:48 PM   #21 
  - Our roots?  wyldwolf   Jun-29-07 07:45 PM   #2 
  - I want another LBJ. Great Society n/t  StudentsMustUniteNow   Jun-29-07 07:49 PM   #4 
  - Unfortunately LBJ Great Society came bundled with LBJ Vietnam War  NoPasaran   Jun-29-07 08:11 PM   #15 
  - "I want another LBJ. Great Society"  durrrty libby   Jun-29-07 10:11 PM   #31 
  - No offense  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 01:27 AM   #161 
     - Imagine that! Proudpoppy means no offense! First time for everything, I guess.  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 04:59 AM   #176 
  - Johnson followed Kennedy and that was a tough act to follow  lyonn   Jul-02-07 01:33 PM   #68 
  - Oh brother.  fudge stripe cookays   Jul-02-07 09:39 PM   #149 
  - Remember When Democrats Were Democrats?  MannyGoldstein   Jun-29-07 08:02 PM   #11 
  - Revisionist history - the 60s were the only time Democrats were Democrats??  wyldwolf   Jun-30-07 07:02 AM   #41 
  - The only one revising history is you.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 01:08 PM   #59 
  - I think the revisionism is more on your part  onenote   Jul-02-07 05:02 PM   #126 
     - Nope, and once again, I have evidence to shred your silly claims.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 05:27 PM   #131 
        - Nope, and once again, I have evidence to shred your silly claims.  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 06:17 PM   #143 
           - Your post didn't say a single thing about JFK's Vietnam policy.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 01:10 AM   #154 
              - Please don't confuse wolfie with facts  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 01:38 AM   #163 
              - proudpoppy - still in the magic world of make believe.  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 04:56 AM   #174 
                 - Too bad you can't refute anything on a factual basis.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 05:07 AM   #180 
                    - to bad you have to restort to arguing with published authors.  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 05:48 AM   #187 
                       - Too bad you never addressed my points.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:04 AM   #194 
                          - I let the published authors do it for me  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:09 AM   #199 
                             - Try again. My points remain unaddressed.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:14 AM   #202 
                                - succeeded the first time. Don't need to "try again."  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:16 AM   #203 
                                   - You succeeded in creating straw men, which is all you ever do.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:17 AM   #205 
                                      - LOL! Getting touchy, huh? I'll trust the published authors. How many books have you sold again?  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:18 AM   #207 
                                         - Zero. The same number of times you addressed the points about FDR.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:21 AM   #211 
                                         - That's right.. You've sold ZERO books. But the authors I used to address your points have sold many  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:23 AM   #213 
                                         - Except one small problem. You never addressed my points.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:27 AM   #215 
                                         - the bigger problem for you: They were addressed. You just didn't like it  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:28 AM   #217 
              - So? Since when do you set the agenda? As you said: Game Over, Thanks For Playing  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 04:55 AM   #173 
                 - I don't. That was Kennedy's agenda. Do you read anything?  Alexander   Jul-03-07 05:04 AM   #178 
                    - you tried, by attempting to dictate how to discuss it. Do you read your own posts?  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 05:49 AM   #188 
                       - You tried to tell me something about JFK that was untrue...  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:05 AM   #195 
                          - you're arguing with published authors. Looks desperate for you.  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:08 AM   #197 
                             - Not only are you creating straw men and arguing with published authors...  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:13 AM   #201 
                                - ah. Playground antics. I demonstrate how you're arguing with published authors...  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:17 AM   #206 
                                   - This from the guy who repeated himself over 50 times in a thread.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:23 AM   #212 
                                      - There's another example of your playground antics.  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:29 AM   #218 
  - right. And don't forget that JFK proposed cutting tax rates on the rich  onenote   Jul-02-07 04:53 PM   #123 
  - exactly right.  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 06:18 PM   #144 
  - And who raised taxes in the first place?  Alexander   Jul-03-07 02:32 AM   #171 
     - "It means nothing" because it undercuts your argument.  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 04:57 AM   #175 
        - No, it means nothing because Democrats raised taxes to that point...  Alexander   Jul-03-07 05:06 AM   #179 
           - and it undercuts your argument  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 05:47 AM   #186 
              - Progressive taxation undercuts my argument?  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:06 AM   #196 
                 - the fact JFK did something associated with the Right undercuts it.  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:10 AM   #200 
                    - Not really, because of Vietnam...  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:16 AM   #204 
                       - he lowered the taxes on the rich because of Viet nam? LOL!  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:19 AM   #208 
                          - No. Obviously you just can't read very well.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:25 AM   #214 
                             - hey, I'm only repeating what you said.  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:31 AM   #219 
  - As if the DLC would give a shit about  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 01:40 AM   #164 
  - Revisionist?  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 01:37 AM   #162 
     - Proudpop's daily agenda: First, find posts by wyldwolf. Proudpop has a crush on wyldwolf, ya know  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 04:53 AM   #172 
        - I don't hunt out your posts, wolfie,  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 12:51 PM   #222 
  - Abortion. Gay Rights. Civil Rights. Public Services.  Donald Ian Rankin   Jul-03-07 12:29 PM   #221 
  - WORD 2  ronnykmarshall   Jun-29-07 08:48 PM   #22 
  - Carter would've won in a landslide...  Hippo_Tron   Jun-29-07 10:12 PM   #32 
  - You may be right about Carter and Hart...  hughee99   Jul-02-07 12:59 PM   #56 
  - shoulda, coulda, woulda  onenote   Jul-02-07 05:06 PM   #127 
     - Because of Mondale's use of the Wendy's "Where's the beef?" slogan...  Alexander   Jul-03-07 02:24 AM   #169 
        - 20/20 hindsight  onenote   Jul-03-07 10:29 AM   #193 
           - Mondale's convention "bounce" was negated...  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:09 AM   #198 
  - I'd call Carter a centrist  seasat   Jul-02-07 01:52 PM   #76 
  - Nope wolfie  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 01:26 AM   #160 
  - Then It's All Over For Us  MannyGoldstein   Jun-29-07 07:52 PM   #6 
  - Don't forget how long since a sitting Senator was elected.  jaysunb   Jun-29-07 08:14 PM   #16 
  - We have to go back to work convincing voters that the idea of  MGKrebs   Jun-29-07 07:54 PM   #7 
  - You've got it!  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 01:42 AM   #165 
  - You are so fucking obsessed with HRC, I'm worried for her  durrrty libby   Jun-29-07 07:56 PM   #8 
  - If our candidate, whomever that is, doesn't win the White House, it's not the end of  pinto   Jun-29-07 07:57 PM   #9 
  - Any Democratic President will have profound changes on the political dynamics.  Old and In the Way   Jun-29-07 08:56 PM   #23 
  - We haven't had a primary yet.  wakemeupwhenitsover   Jun-29-07 08:08 PM   #13 
  - IT would be a Win Win for the DLC  wakeme2008   Jun-29-07 08:09 PM   #14 
  - If we nominate her, we will lose the presidency.  Oregonian   Jun-29-07 08:27 PM   #17 
  - Groan - blah  emilyg   Jun-29-07 08:32 PM   #18 
  - I am so ashamed of some women. They are pathetically ignorant  durrrty libby   Jun-29-07 08:42 PM   #19 
  - Many are ignorant...both men and women  calteacherguy   Jun-29-07 10:27 PM   #35 
  - I tend to agree, at one time I also thought Democratic party would be assertive.  gordianot   Jun-29-07 08:45 PM   #20 
  - Perhaps consideration of her as our nominee should make you think.  MGKrebs   Jun-29-07 09:05 PM   #24 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Jun-29-07 09:48 PM   #26 
  - I truly pity your students and hope you get charged for your crimes  durrrty libby   Jun-29-07 10:06 PM   #29 
     - What crimes? nt  calteacherguy   Jun-29-07 10:25 PM   #34 
  - Hillary lose? Dance, dance dance. Time to party!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  illinoisprogressive   Jun-29-07 09:52 PM   #27 
  - Still feeling looosey? hehe heh  durrrty libby   Jun-29-07 10:07 PM   #30 
  - I don't think we need to go back to our roots, I think we need to move forward  Hippo_Tron   Jun-29-07 10:19 PM   #33 
  - Agree. We need to move forward. A Dem Prez w/ a Dem Congress will enable that.  pinto   Jun-29-07 10:28 PM   #36 
  - OK, for a start  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 01:51 AM   #166 
  - Who are the other DLC candidates in the primary race?  PBass   Jun-30-07 01:19 AM   #37 
  - Half are or were associated with the DLC  seasat   Jul-02-07 01:45 PM   #72 
     - All the major contenders then are DLC  lyonn   Jul-02-07 02:00 PM   #78 
     - Misspeak like Dean?  Le Taz Hot   Jul-03-07 08:56 AM   #190 
     - Indeed true  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 01:54 AM   #167 
  - ...then we are fucked  sampsonblk   Jun-30-07 01:22 AM   #38 
  - What is Hillary tenacious about?  lyonn   Jul-02-07 02:14 PM   #87 
  - She is going to lose the primaries, because of the type of question you just asked  Nimrod2005   Jun-30-07 06:18 AM   #39 
  - Buck up, mateys!  Perry Logan   Jun-30-07 06:40 AM   #40 
  - I'm greedy, I want it all.  lyonn   Jul-02-07 02:25 PM   #90 
  - I don't think she'll make it out of primaries  tammywammy   Jun-30-07 11:19 AM   #42 
  - I'm confused?  sleipnir   Jul-02-07 11:05 AM   #43 
  - You forgot 1992 and 1996  Freddie Stubbs   Jul-02-07 11:52 AM   #44 
  - Different era n/t  StudentsMustUniteNow   Jul-02-07 11:58 AM   #45 
  - Different indeed. Democrats are now smart enough not to nominate candidates who were so far to the  Freddie Stubbs   Jul-02-07 12:05 PM   #46 
     - You mean like FDR?  Alexander   Jul-02-07 12:52 PM   #50 
        - FDR was hardly "to the left." Discuss?  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 12:57 PM   #55 
           - I have a feeling you have heard the last of Alexander...  SaveElmer   Jul-02-07 01:07 PM   #58 
           - By all means, feel free to chime in...  Alexander   Jul-02-07 01:16 PM   #61 
           - FDR threatened to drop out in 1940 if Henry Wallace wasn't his running mate.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 01:15 PM   #60 
              - No he didn't.  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 01:22 PM   #64 
              - Or pandering to southern racists to dampen their opposition to the New Deal...  SaveElmer   Jul-02-07 01:32 PM   #67 
              - While at the same time ensuring that black voters would remain Democrats for decades...  Alexander   Jul-02-07 01:47 PM   #73 
                 - In other words then...  SaveElmer   Jul-02-07 02:04 PM   #81 
                    - Adding countless new federal programs was "triangulation"?  Alexander   Jul-02-07 02:27 PM   #92 
                       - Triangulation...  SaveElmer   Jul-02-07 02:41 PM   #96 
                          - Triangulation is avoiding taking a position on either the "left" or the "right"...  Alexander   Jul-02-07 03:06 PM   #100 
                             - ...  SaveElmer   Jul-02-07 03:13 PM   #104 
                                - ?  Alexander   Jul-02-07 03:40 PM   #108 
                                - "Triangulation" is a misnomer  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 01:56 AM   #168 
              - Again you expect me to believe YOU over quotes from FDR's own mouth...  Alexander   Jul-02-07 01:38 PM   #69 
                 - what have you posted that came from FDR's own mouth?  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 02:09 PM   #84 
                    - Step 1) Read post #69. Step 2) Read the bold text.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 02:31 PM   #93 
                       - you posted someone's paraphrasing of his words  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 03:10 PM   #103 
                          - Did FDR not threaten to refuse the nomination without Wallace in 1940?  Alexander   Jul-02-07 03:32 PM   #107 
                             - Since you're using "quotes from FDR's own mouth..." as a selling point...  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 03:44 PM   #109 
                                - I find it odd that you can't cite your "pages of info" you supposedly have  Alexander   Jul-02-07 03:57 PM   #112 
                                   - I've seen no need to. Since you've stated "quotes from FDR's own mouth..." are the only...  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 04:04 PM   #115 
                                      - Your dishonesty continues - I have said no such thing.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 04:18 PM   #119 
                                         - You're the dishonest one  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 05:14 PM   #129 
                                            - Not quite. Your sources don't say what you claim.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 05:46 PM   #132 
                                               - Spot on accurate  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 06:06 PM   #139 
                                               - Exactly. FDR did not view himself as a liberal.  Zynx   Jul-02-07 06:52 PM   #147 
                                               - So? East Germany saw themselves as a "Democratic Republic".  Alexander   Jul-03-07 12:58 AM   #151 
                                               - Yes, I was. Thanks.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 01:03 AM   #152 
                                               - Again, you're tryin to spin the sources because they undercut your argument  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 05:04 AM   #177 
                                               - And again, you can't refute anything I've said.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 05:16 AM   #182 
                                               - don't have to. The books I cited did it for me.  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 05:46 AM   #185 
                                               - No, you addressed completely different issues.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:20 AM   #209 
                                               - no, you shifted once I cited the sources  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:21 AM   #210 
                                               - 1) FDR threatened to drop out in 1940. Still no source refuting that point.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 11:28 AM   #216 
                                               - My sources refuted you overall points on Wallace.  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 11:32 AM   #220 
              - He gave up on Wallace in 1944 in favor of Truman.  Zynx   Jul-02-07 06:00 PM   #137 
                 - almost exactly. FDR was strongly considering it for several years  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 06:07 PM   #140 
                 - One thing I got out of the Truman biography is that FDR didn't have  Zynx   Jul-02-07 06:12 PM   #142 
                    - he struggled with it, but there was evidence to suggest Wallace was...  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 06:22 PM   #145 
                       - I think one can objectively conclude from a variety of incidents that  Zynx   Jul-02-07 06:50 PM   #146 
                          - Despite the mindless parroting you guys like so much...  Alexander   Jul-03-07 01:09 AM   #153 
                 - You yourself said he was "pressured" into it.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 12:55 AM   #150 
  - You forgot that Hillary doesn't have Bill's charisma.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 12:50 PM   #49 
  - No candidate does, but you can bet he will be doing a lot of campaigning for her  Freddie Stubbs   Jul-02-07 02:55 PM   #98 
     - So? He's not the candidate. She is.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 03:08 PM   #101 
  - Bill Clinton won  Le Taz Hot   Jul-03-07 08:59 AM   #191 
  - Slick Willy and hundreds of millions of dollars  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 12:55 PM   #223 
  - Kerry was not "DLC"  MH1   Jul-02-07 12:08 PM   #47 
  - yes he was  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 12:12 PM   #48 
  - Tell that to James Carville...  Alexander   Jul-02-07 12:53 PM   #52 
     - Don't need to  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 12:55 PM   #53 
        - So why did Carville tell his wife about Kerry's election night strategy?  Alexander   Jul-02-07 01:17 PM   #62 
           - what does that have to do with Kerry's membership in the DLC?  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 01:24 PM   #65 
           - I never claimed he wasn't a member...  Alexander   Jul-02-07 01:52 PM   #75 
              - this is what happens when someone answers for someone else  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 02:11 PM   #86 
                 - What I said remains accurate. Kerry is not welcomed by very many in the DLC.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 02:34 PM   #94 
                    - you have no proof of that  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 03:08 PM   #102 
                    - So I guess Carville's potshots at Dean don't constitute proof?  Alexander   Jul-02-07 03:45 PM   #110 
                       - no, Carville is not an elected Democrat or a board member of the DLC  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 03:53 PM   #111 
                          - Exactly...  Alexander   Jul-02-07 04:01 PM   #113 
                             - what in the world does this have to do with John Kerry being in the DLC?  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 04:08 PM   #118 
                                - I'm simply pointing out the extent of his relationship with the DLC.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 04:25 PM   #120 
                    - Facts are stubborn things  BlueDogDemocratNH   Jul-02-07 05:59 PM   #136 
                       - Carville, From, etc. have made no secret of their contempt for progressive Democrats.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 01:14 AM   #155 
           - Why did Kerry's campaign tell carville?  MonkeyFunk   Jul-02-07 01:45 PM   #71 
              - Because Kerry thought Carville was a loyal Democrat?  Alexander   Jul-02-07 01:49 PM   #74 
                 - Or maybe  MonkeyFunk   Jul-02-07 02:10 PM   #85 
                    - Do you have any source or evidence indicating that?  Alexander   Jul-02-07 02:40 PM   #95 
                       - No, I don't have proof that it wasn't a secret  MonkeyFunk   Jul-02-07 04:04 PM   #116 
                          - Maybe it was a secret, maybe it wasn't.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 05:00 PM   #124 
                             - So because Carville disagrees with Howard Dean....  MonkeyFunk   Jul-02-07 05:13 PM   #128 
                                - Because he said Dean was "incompetent" in 2006  Alexander   Jul-02-07 05:50 PM   #133 
                                   - You're making quite a leap...  MonkeyFunk   Jul-02-07 06:04 PM   #138 
                                      - You're creating a straw man...  Alexander   Jul-03-07 01:17 AM   #156 
  - "Kerry was DLC"  BlueDogDemocratNH   Jul-02-07 05:55 PM   #135 
  - Oh, please!  Le Taz Hot   Jul-03-07 09:04 AM   #192 
  - She goes back to the Senate?  ronnykmarshall   Jul-02-07 12:56 PM   #54 
  - what about 1992, 1996  sabbat hunter   Jul-02-07 01:01 PM   #57 
  - Yes, Bill Clinton had something called CHARISMA.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 01:19 PM   #63 
     - a trait which seems absent in MOST politicians. Your point?  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 01:25 PM   #66 
        - It isn't obvious? Politicians with charisma WIN.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 01:59 PM   #77 
           - the DLC recruited Clinton and he ran on their policies  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 02:06 PM   #83 
           - So? He won mainly based on his own charisma.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 02:49 PM   #97 
              - there is no evidence of that. And Perot was not a factor.  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 03:22 PM   #106 
                 - No evidence of his charisma? How about the name "Slick Willie"?  Alexander   Jul-02-07 04:04 PM   #114 
                    - no, no evidence that that won the election  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 04:06 PM   #117 
                       - By that token, there's no evidence pro-DLC policies won the 1992 election.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 04:27 PM   #121 
                       - actually, there is  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 04:45 PM   #122 
                          - There's no evidence those issues caused Clinton to WIN.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 05:02 PM   #125 
                             - of course there is  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 05:16 PM   #130 
                                - That's not evidence. That's bullshit.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 05:53 PM   #134 
                                   - it's bullshit to you because you hate to be wrong  wyldwolf   Jul-02-07 06:10 PM   #141 
                                      - Deleted message  Name removed   Jul-03-07 01:22 AM   #158 
                                         - nope. Not denyiny Clinton's charisma. But you're denying the effects of his platform  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 05:08 AM   #181 
                                            - Deleted message  Name removed   Jul-03-07 05:20 AM   #183 
                                               - because it isn't 1992 anymore.  wyldwolf   Jul-03-07 05:45 AM   #184 
                       - That is exactly what won Clinton the election  Ethelk2044   Jul-02-07 06:55 PM   #148 
                          - Thank you - good to see some common sense in this thread.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 01:24 AM   #159 
           - Exactly, I voted against those 3 for that very reason  lyonn   Jul-02-07 02:57 PM   #99 
  - the Democratic candidate will WIN the election  AtomicKitten   Jul-02-07 01:42 PM   #70 
  - Agreed.  Alexander   Jul-02-07 02:01 PM   #79 
  - Forget it, AK.  rinsd   Jul-02-07 02:05 PM   #82 
  - If the Democrat is going to win, no matter WHO we run.....  ClassWarfare2008   Jul-02-07 02:16 PM   #88 
  - My prediction will come true. EOM  lojasmo   Jul-02-07 02:20 PM   #89 
  - Personally, I don't worry too much about whether a candidate is DLC  seasat   Jul-02-07 02:26 PM   #91 
  - What if the sun doesn't come up tomorrow!  churchofreality   Jul-02-07 03:19 PM   #105 
  - That would mean  ProudDad   Jul-03-07 01:22 AM   #157 
  - Then we enjoy what President Gore has to offer.  Alexander   Jul-03-07 02:29 AM   #170 
  - More Scooter Libbys to pardon.  sleipnir   Jul-03-07 08:40 AM   #189 
  - Locking  The Magistrate   Jul-03-07 01:01 PM   #224 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC