I have a serious and sincere question

[LTRS]

... why do we demonize the candidate who put it ALL out there for us and busted his ass for us for over a year, doing the best he good (and almost unseating an incumbent "war time" president) -- instead of directing our anger where it is deserved? That is, to the vicious, lying, hated filled, greedy, ignorant as dirt republican party?

That's a sincere question. Why in the world do we do that, and what is to be gained by it? You won't have Kerry to kick around any more, so what is the point?

[shelley806]

1. Dear One I am with you; I don't demonize Kerry. I love what he stands for

and the fact that he was defeated is incomprehensible now...to alll of us. One more triumph of evil over good...but it never works out that way in the infinite plan...

[troubleinwinter]

2. you forgot conniving & criminal

.... :shrug:

[JimGinPA]

3. I Find More Fault With The Media Than With Kerry

I believe one of the major obstacles in this election was the way that Kerry was portrayed by the media. You have to give that slimey bastard Rove a lot of credit on the one hand for their spinmasters being able to completely dominate the media, but in my opinion a great deal of the blame for the outcome of this election, and its eventual unimaginable effects on all of us, lies directly at the feet of the media. And they're the ones who should be held accountable.

BushCo didn't "define" Kerry (as was so often intimated by the press), the media did. They didn't let any momentum build after the Democratic Convention by running with the "Swift Boat" story, even after they KNEW it was all completely false. Instead of debunking it as they should have, they put Kerry on the defensive, from which he never fully recovered in the minds of a great many people who may have considered him a viable alternative to Dubya otherwise.

FOX NEWS - Everyone is aware of their agenda, but rather than the rest of the press strongly admonishing them for their bias and calling them on their outright lies, several became imitators instead. Thank God for 'Air America' finally coming along to challenge them for their deceptiveness and misrepresentations (although with their late start and with the limited access to their broadcast their effect was minimized). As they grow I suspect they'll eventually become a force Fox will be have to answer to, but it's pretty sad that until they came along the only broadcasts to call them on their bullshit have been Comedy Central's "Daily Show" and HBO's "Real Time".

Nearly as much to blame as the media for the Fox spin are the Democrats and other "progressives" who let themselves be used by appearing on their programs. They should be completely boycotted. They will have no "debate" if they are made to only talk amongst themselves.

Not only that, but their sponsors should start being seriously pressured as well. If they want to advertise on Fox their products and services should be boycotted for supporting their garbage.


MSNBC - They have become 'Fox Light'. How much more transparent could they have been than when they "covered" the Democratic Convention and debates with nearly ALL republican operatives on their "panels". Nearly every report on Kerry contained a disclaimer at the end ripped straight off the pages of Roves "talking points".


CNN - Not a "respected" or "trusted" news source for years, but when they chose to keep that treasonous slimeball Novak employed on their network after he outed Valerie Plame, not much more need be said. Their "pundits" were absolutely shameless throughout the election.


CBS - Possibly the "fairest" of the networks, they committed such a major gaffe with the "forged document" scandal that it not only kept the "Swift Boat Liars" in the news for weeks but kept the entire Abu Ghraib debacle from barely even being mentioned for the rest of the election cycle.


NBC - Possibly my biggest beef with them (other than their parroting the Rove talking points daily) is with how "Meet the Press" covered the election. That punk Russert, after slamming Kerry and Edwards with non-issues time and again, showed such deference to the chimp it was nauseating.


Finally, I'd like to give special "credit" to all the rural and Evangelical voters, especially in all those "red" states, who voted en mass for the president-select. They've destined not only themselves to a bleak economic, sociological and environmental outlook with their stupidity, but dragged the rest of us down in the eyes of the rest of the world with them. With their strengthening of the republican grip on the congress and the guaranteed right-wing makeup of the supreme court for decades, our very liberty is in jeopardy now.

[LTRS]

4. Yep, and I don't know what we do about that

I know from experience that the media just will NOT believe they are ever wrong about anything. If they think they are fair and balanced, then by gawd they are as far as they are concerned, and nothing is going to convince them any different - not facts, not a million letters from viewers, nothing.

[chicagojoe]

24. But not the Liberal Media !

Sarcasm !

[leftofthedial]

5. many feel betrayed by his concession

he vowed to fight until the last vote was counted

and then he flip flopped

ironic, eh?

it always elicits more anger to be hurt by someone you trust and like than by your enemy

[LTRS]

8. It's mathematically impossible for him to win

even after the votes are counted, and they WILL be. What did you want him to do, refuse to admit defeat for a few more days just to be a baby about it? Nothing is going to change - there aren't enough uncounted ballots to change the result.

In the old days when elections weren't so close and absentee ballots not so prominent they set the absentees aside and didn't even count them if the margin of victory was not more than the outstanding absentee ballots yet to be counted.

No offense to you, but seems to me all of us need to grow up and accept the facts and stop taking our anger and dissappointment out on the one guy who gave it all for us.

[leftofthedial]

11. no, it's not--that is disinformation

CO, IA, and NM are still too close to call. Boulder County in CO and other outstanding early and provisional votes could, mathematically, change the outcome.

FL, OH, VA and MO (and possibly others) have grounds for legal action challenging the putative result in those states.


Kerry quit, not because of mathematical impossibility, but because winning would be a "long shot." He conceded prematurely. Unless he has some sort of quiet strategy to pursue remedies behind the scenes (which he didn't even allude to in his speech), he quit too soon.

I don't think that once all the votes are counted, that he will win, but technically, it is not over yet just because some haircut on TV announced it was.

He gave it not quite his all. And I'm plenty grown up.

[LTRS]

15. CO, IA, and NM don't mean shit

With OH or FL we win, without either one we don't. We could litigate forever if we had a shred of proof, but we don't. No paper trail. What ticks me off is that dems voted for HAVA without making sure that a paper trail was law. You can't put all the blame for that on Kerry.

Shit, if half of our reps in congress even read the damn bills they vote for we would all be better off. And I am not kidding, they don't even read the actual language of the stuff they vote on. I have seen that over and over. People say to me, yeah, but they have aides for that. Yeah, 25 yr old kids making 25K a year. You get what you pay for.

[leftofthedial]

17. It is very unlikely to happen, but

if CO, IA and NM go for Kerry, he wins. Do the arithmetic.

[LTRS]

20. Ah, you're right, my bad

But yeah, very unlikely (given the current climate). All look getable in future elections.

[chicagojoe]

23. He still should never have conceded. Tradition be damned.

Bush won't admit his mistakes, so there should never been a concession. PERIOD.

[UdoKier]

6. 90% of our anger is at repugs.

But Kerry isn't beyond reproach. He didn't listen to US. He listened to Shrum and Cahill.

I emailed over and over again about a better approach to the "flip-flop" issue, as did many others, and he NEVER dealt with it. He NEVER came out and called the Swifties what they are- a bunch of LIARS who never MET HIM.

Bartcop warned him about goofy-looking photo-ops, so he kept doing them.

Sad thing is, there's probably not one aide on the Kerrry staff who even reads Bart or DU, even though they are the big sounding boards for dems.

I'm pissed at Kerry, and I'm pissed at us for not nominating Clark.

[LTRS]

10. Yeah, he made some mistakes

Why did you think he would be perfect? Who is? Bush was a hell of a lot worse as a candidates and made many more mistakes. You know, this is not a science. There are strategies to pick and decisions to make and ultimately you make choices - some which work and some which don't. They aren't all going to be right. While you were telling him to do A, hundreds of others were telling him to do B.

For instance, Clinton decided to go on TV and address the charges of pervious affairs during the primary. Some people thought that was insane and others thought it was a great idea. It was a crapshoot either way at the time.

Monday morning quarterbacking serves no purpose at this point. The next campaign will present different decisions and choices.

[RafterMan]

7. Do you really think there's nothing to be gained

by analyzing Kerry's failure? Or feeling passionate about not making the same mistakes?

That's the Bush Iraq strategy.

[LTRS]

12. No, not in the context of JFK, you boob

or you let us down or whatever. No, I really don't. The focus should be on finding a winning message, because when it comes right down to it the democrats are right in their beliefs and are best for the country. We need to find a way to make people understand that and message it in a way that resonates. Blaming and cursing JFK has nothing to do with that.

[RafterMan]

13. I guess what you see as blaming and cursing

I see as dissecting and analyzing. So what if it's not pretty. A lot of people have hidden their reservations here in the name of unity for a long time -- now is the time to be honest again. And coming to honest conclusions about what we're doing wrong is at least half the battle for the program you propose. Finally, why is it necessary to spare JFK's feelings on this board? You don't think he's reading, do you?

You boob.

[LTRS]

16. You may be dissecting and analyzing

... but seems to me lots of people are demonizing. All this "JK, you let us down stuff" is hard to see. It's not about sparing his feelings because you're right, he will probably never see it. For me it's about all this undeserved scorn for a guy who really put it out there for us. It's just not right.

How would any of us feel to know he was sitting in Boston somewhere cursing folks who volunteered for him for not working hard enough. We ALL did our best. Including, and especially, JK.

[bliss_eternal]

9. You won't find any 'Kerry' finger pointing here either...

I don't know that any ONE entity is to blame. It is definitely a matter of several entities that worked to support each other, whether that was their actual intent or not.

The media. Hell yes! Fear and ignorance, again big old yep. Preying on those fears and raping the belief system of a group of people--oh yeah.

In spite how I felt last night, and how I feel even now, I still don't see this as a complete loss. When I look at all the people that DID come out to spport Kerry, and even those that just wanted to vote against Bush--that is HUGE. We can't allow ourselves to be taken out by this.

[flaminbats]

14. I stopped kicking Kerry around during the primaries..

He did far better than I expected, I also believe if Kerry had been nominated in 2000 instead of 2004 he would have won. IMO Kerry ran a stronger campaign than Gore, and focused on more relevant public issues.

I also plan on giving Kerry another chance in the Senate. Before I thought of him as a cross between Lieberman and Cleland. After this campaign, he has earned the right to replace Daschle as minority leader.

[LTRS]

18. Thanks - nice to see someone say that (eom)

[Awsi Dooger]

19. Kerry definitely would have won in 2000

Ousting an incumbent is entirely different than running with 8 years of great economy at your back in an open race.

I can't imagine running for president. Nearly two full years and literally thousands of appearances and decisions. Any one of them can be isolated by your opponent and make you look like a fool or worse in a commercial. I'm sure Kerry didn't think twice about that "voted for the $87 billion, before I voted against it" line in West Virginia, until it was on every TV screen for months.

I have trouble not being distracted or annoyed while writing a DU post. How the hell is someone supposed to be on go all day, every day? Flying across the country and meeting people who will remember that moment and what you were like, and judge you primarily by that 3 seconds. Not for me, pal. I give Kerry my utmost salute. He dominated the debates and gave us everything he had.

[JimGinPA]

21. The Media Ran With It

And he never really stopped the bullshit spin. Al Franken explained it away easily on his program but Kerry never really did effectively and he had a great opportunity during the debate to make it a non-issue and he bumbled it.

[Awsi Dooger]

25. You're right, it was easily explained and Kerry repeatedly fumbled

"I made a mistake in talking about the $87 billion..."

What the hell was that? The funding difference of the two bills would have wiped out the issue once detailed. Maybe turned it in Kerry's favor. I couldn't believe he botched that simple opportunity, in the first and second debate.

[chicagojoe]

22. He conceded.NEVER concede ANYTHING. EVER.