Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Deleted message

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 11:31 PM
Original message
Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
goobergunch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. We ran too dirty a campaign
IMHO one shouldn't run a dirty campaign against an outsider candidate...it reinforces the perception of insider vs. outsider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Bullfeathers
Arnold is married to a Kennedy, has meetings with Rove and Lay, and you think he's an outsider?

The Dems problem was that they weren't agressive enough, and didn't take the challenge seriously enough.

New leadership is needed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-03 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. Are the Cal election rules for this site over yet?
because this type of observation has been disiplined by the mods as pro-bush since they took effect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-03 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #1
11. We didn't run a dirty campaign at all - we should have!!!
Anyone who thinks that the Democrats ran a dirty campaign is crazy!

The only thing that made it into the mainstream media against Arnold was at the very end of the campaign, and that was after everyone had already made up their minds.

Arnold attacked Davis constantly, going so far as to compare California under Davis to Iraq.

You people are crazy if you think that Democrats needed to be "nicer" to win.

This fucking party will never learn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-03 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Nobody said they needed to be nice
but the groper nazi stuff looks over the top. You should have gone after him on Enron.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-03 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. I agree with you on that
We should have made it clear that supporting Arnold is supporting Bush and that Bush is the one who screwed California in the first place.

The Democrats weren't willing to go all the way to win - they wanted to be "nice" - fucking Feinstein was pushing her "positive" campaign bullshit early on.

Voters do not want a positive campaign - when Arnold shouted down Arianna at the debates, his popularity went up.

When will Democrats learn that the voters want people who are willing to be assholes and fight for something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 11:37 PM
Response to Original message
3. The Dems are like lambs to the slaughter.
They should have offered a strong alternative to Davis. I think this is just a prelude to 2004.

MSNBC said Bush had a 50% approval rating in the exit polls. It's going to be very hard to win in 2004 but I don't expect the Dems to put up the strongest candidate. That would require thinking and strategy which is definitely not one of the Dems strong suits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. absymally
but it may not end up having mattered. We should have run no Democrat at all on the second ballot. This should have been presented to Californians as the coup it was and they should have been forced to choose between Davis and Schwartzeneger (sp). But given the fact he may well have gotten more votes than Davis, if early returns hold up, it may not have mattered. We need to give him 30 days (the time that Davis got) and then initiate the recall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John_H Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 11:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. The campaihn was marked by an odd combination
of arrogance, which was the prevailing characteristic of the Davis administration at all levels, and wimpiness.

At the height of their powers the davis administration dismissed entreaties on a host of issues from a wide range of "base" organizations, often with utter dismissiveness--and today it bit them on the ass turnout wise (check the "big" turnout numbers tomorrow. Wanna bet it's mostly idiots voting for the Terminator?).

Arnold should also have been attacked for the boob he is from day one--laughed at continuously--instead of being treated like a real live candidate.

The good news--I bet there's more than a few political people trying to remember how to do old fashioned politics instead of raining money right now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snellius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-03 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
6. Clinton's vaunted politcal acumen is overrated
Clinton told Davis to stay calm and act gubernatorial. Sign lots of bills. And say things like "They want to be the governor but I am the governor." Duh! They just weren't listening. I heard it in California for two years. Davis was a scapegoat sop even when it wasn't his fault. What good was it to act like the governor when that's exactly what people didn't want to see. They wanted to see a new Gray Davis.

But there wasn't one. Clinton's other dumb advice was to go all or nothing on the recall. They needed more than Bustamante. But with Feinstein out (and she bears a large responsibility for preferring her cozy state in the Senate over the hard duties in Sacramento), there wasn't much choice. Democrats everywhere have to start looking for unconventional candidates outside the old party machine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RichM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-03 12:12 AM
Response to Original message
8. I live in Calif, & assure you: the Dem campaign STUNK. The worst
failure was that they NEVER made clear why the budget deficit ballooned as it did. One of the main causes of the deficit was of course the Enron-Bush-Cheney theft of $9 billion dollars in spring of 2001.

But to drive home this point, the Dems would have had to make direct accusations against the Bush-Cheney-Enron crowd. This would have taken nerve -- & the Dems of course do not have this. So they made the point timidly, peripherally, & ineffectively. It got lost in the noise.

Secondly, they didn't really go after Arnold's ignorance & unfitness for office; they didn't explain which interests Arnold is a front-man for; they didn't explain what kind of politics Arnold would represent. They more or less let him pretend he was a populist cowboy, riding into town to "clean up" Sacramento.

Third, they relied on last-minute sex-Nazi smears, to try to pull the bacon out of the fire. This smelled bad.

Finally, they never made a case against the media favoritism of Arnold; against the silliness of celebrity-worship.

On balance, their campaign stunk. They certainly should have run a respected figure like Leon Panetta, if they were serious about winning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-03 12:16 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. If you say anything bad about the sex/nazi smears
the mods will get mad! They sure have at me. They say it is pro-arnold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RichM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-08-03 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. LOL! It wouldn't surprise me a bit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Dec 21st 2014, 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
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