Head out of sand: a cold hard look at the facts.

[HFishbine]

Disclaimer: I campaigned for Kerry harder than for any candidate ever. Phone banked, distributed signs and bumper stickers, protested against Bush, wrote letters to the ed, donated money to the DNC, registered voters, went door-to-door before and on election day. I did my part.
-------------

Can we finally admit that Kerry and Edwards aren't "being smart" by laying low until the truth about Ohio is known? That there isn't some great behind the scenes effort that is going to turn things around unexpectedly? That what we saw when Kerry delivered his concession speech is exactly what we got?

It's time to face the facts. Kerry couldn't beat the stumbling, bumbling moron in chief. He lost to an idiot. He failed. Democrats who insist on continuing to cast blame elsewhere or defend their notion that Kerry "should" have been president are a drag on the party's future -- if it has one.

It's time to wake up and change. Learn from this. Get you heads out of the sand and recognize that the people and processes that delivered "the most electable" candidate failed. Do it the same way again and you'll get the same result.

If you don't have an honest-to-goodness, progressive, different-as-night-and-day alternative to the Republicans in 2008, you'll lose again. And you'll keep on losing until there is a candidate who has some damn vision and the personality that can inspire people to share it.

[KittyWampus]

1. Wrong. The Democrats Had A Strategy Yesterday & It Worked.

They already HAVE legislation to deal with Voting Issues.

Rather than subconsciously trying to convince DU that DEAN would have won or fought the fraud and won... how about recognizing what was accomplished yesterday by Activists and Democratic Congressmen/women.

[HFishbine]

3. It worked?

Bush is out? Or did it not work?

[Orangepeel]

8. it did what it was supposed to do

the actions of yesterday were designed to shine a spotlight on the need for voting reform. whether or not this works will depend on whether the process of voting is closer to fair next time.

you are correct that people who thought that yesterday the Democrats were going to be able to do some magic trick that would overturn the election results were deluding themselves.

I think that very few people actually thought this, however. People who are angry are angry that the symbolic challenge wasn't bigger and more contentious.

[Skidmore]

13. That would be more believable if they

had stood by their point with actual votes. We all got the point that this objection was to provide an opportunity to highlight and debate the issue of needed election reform. However, what makes it hollow for me is that only a few were willing to put their votes out there. These folks I have respect for. Sometimes you need to just stand up for what is right, and this was right.

[Q]

17. But as soon as the Democrats left the building...

...the Bush Bullies shut down the spotlight. The Democratic 'success' lasted until the proceedings ended.

[Individualist]

18. Exactly

CBS didn't even mention it on the news last night, although they reported on weather and silly warning labels. Some spotlight!

[KittyWampus]

23. So Make Some Freaking Videos Of The Proceedings & Send Them Out

instead of bashing those who spoke out... THE WAY THEY PLANNED TO.

[Orangepeel]

25. it is too early to judge success..

if voting procedures are made more fair for the future, it was a success. If not, then it was not.

[RapidCreek]

24. Gosh I must have missed it! Kerry is the President now?

RC

[BlueEyedSon]

2. The MEDIA beat us. Garbage in ==> garbage out (of voters heads).

If the media was independent and reporting truth (vs propaganda), a wet bag of mice would have beaten Bush. To Wit:

Oct 21 04

Bush Supporters Still Believe Iraq Had WMD or Major Program,
Supported al Qaeda

Agree with Kerry Supporters Bush Administration Still Saying This is the Case

Agree US Should Not Have Gone to War if No WMD or Support for al Qaeda

Bush Supporters Misperceive World Public as Not Opposed to Iraq War,
Favoring Bush Reelection

Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%). Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points.

Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions.

These are some of the findings of a new study of the differing perceptions of Bush and Kerry supporters, conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes and Knowledge Networks, based on polls conducted in September and October.

Steven Kull, director of PIPA, comments, "One of the reasons that Bush supporters have these beliefs is that they perceive the Bush administration confirming them. Interestingly, this is one point on which Bush and Kerry supporters agree." Eighty-two percent of Bush supporters perceive the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63%) or that Iraq had a major WMD program (19%). Likewise, 75% say that the Bush administration is saying Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda. Equally large majorities of Kerry supporters hear the Bush administration expressing these views--73% say the Bush administration is saying Iraq had WMD (11% a major program) and 74% that Iraq was substantially supporting al Qaeda.

Steven Kull adds, "Another reason that Bush supporters may hold to these beliefs is that they have not accepted the idea that it does not matter whether Iraq had WMD or supported al Qaeda. Here too they are in agreement with Kerry supporters." Asked whether the US should have gone to war with Iraq if US intelligence had concluded that Iraq was not making WMD or providing support to al Qaeda, 58% of Bush supporters said the US should not have, and 61% assume that in this case the President would not have. Kull continues, "To support the president and to accept that he took the US to war based on mistaken assumptions likely creates substantial cognitive dissonance, and leads Bush supporters to suppress awareness of unsettling information about prewar Iraq."

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_10_21_04.html

[RafterMan]

15. Edward Gibbon said

"The wind and waves are always on the side of the ablest navigator."

The media is part of the terrain. It was a well-understood factor long before the campaign. Either deal with it, or get out of the way.

[BlueEyedSon]

21. So you have a secret way of getting your talking points on

the daily FNC memo....?

[el_gato]

4. Kerry is a product of the establishment and look where we are

the calls for getting in line and supporting the "party" are bullshit
do we stand for our beliefs in freedom and democracy or are we party hacks? I'll stand for my beliefs thank you.

[janx]

5. Fishbine, I'm glad you posted this.

And I might add that people would do well to stop expecting government (or some political hero candidate) to save them and to do something, themselves, to correct the problem.

It doesn't have to be full, hard-core activism. It doesn't take much time. Send a letter or two, make a phone call, send in a couple of bucks.

[Nederland]

6. Your head in still in the sand

George Bush is not a "stumbling, bumbling moron in chief". He is not an idiot. He is a reasonably smart and capable politician whose ideology I violently disagree with. More importantly, he has Karl Rove who is much more than reasonably smart and capable. Until we wake up and admit that Republican's are smart, cunning people that we happen to disagree with we will continue to lose elections.

[HFishbine]

7. Perhaps

Stumbling? Check. Bumbling? Check. Idiot? Debatable. But did we lose because we underestimated the Rs? (Serious question.) What would have been different if we had admitted that "Republican's are smart, cunning people?"

[pberq]

10. Massive grass roots effort needed

"If you don't have an honest-to-goodness, progressive, different-as-night-and-day alternative to the Republicans in 2008, you'll lose again."

This is the answer. However, it's going to take a massive grass roots effort to get this. Corporate money just has too much pull on Dems right now.

I was thinking back on the campaign and the many times Kerry was trying to have it both ways: sound populist to get as much of the base as possible, but at the same time don't say too much that would offend his corporate paymasters.

[0007]

9. Republican in name only! It is an organized crime family that

has the best attorneys money can buy. And I resent you using the word "WE" - whom do you support?

[leyton]

11. Some times the good guys lose.

People here need to accept that, and stop acting like the only thing standing in the way of a Democratic landslide was/is voting machines. Personally, I can believe that Bush won since I still don't know what we stood for even though I paid close attention.

[HFishbine]

14. Oh, don't get me wrong.

Kerry is one of the good guys. No doubt. Just wasn't of the right ilk for this race. And he would have been far superior to Bush. Heck, that's why I worked so hard for him. But you are right. We have to quit blaming voting machines and the media. Both are problems that need to be rectified, but they are problems that should have been surmountable by a superior candidate.

[leyton]

20. Sorry, wasn't referring to you!

I agree with your original post, and yeah, Kerry is a good guy. But the campaign could have been a lot better, so I don't find it so unbelievable, like some, that Bush won.

[RafterMan]

12. True

Another fact: pointing this out doesn't mean you think Kerry is evil, or need to "bash" him. You can be a fine person and still be unable to connect well enough with the electorate.

There are many possibly-good responses to what happened -- standing pat isn't one of them.

[loudsue]

16. Thank you for all your hard work, Fishbine....

You, and millions like you, are what helped John Kerry to have the greatest number of votes in this election.

The fact that black boxes, crooked republican politicians and rightwing political operatives STOLE that vote is NOT your fault!!

We DIDN'T lose this election. It was STOLEN. Kerry won NOT because he was too conservative or too liberal.... massive numbers of people turned out to vote for him to get bush out of office. A different candidate wouldn't have made any difference in this election.

And, until we take care of fraudulent elections, it will continue to be the case in 2006 midterms, and 2008. The republicans have ALREADY told us they will have a fillibuster-proof congress in the 2006 elections. If the fraud isn't addressed, that is EXACTLY what they will do.

:kick::kick::kick:

[imax2268]

19. what happened yesterday

is that the topic of a flawed voting system was brought into the light...and watching it yesterday...it's clear to me that the repuke's just didn't get it...

it will also show that BushCo was yet again elected under a cloud of suspicion...

[adigal]

22. It's in the history books

What happened yesterday will always be an asterik in the history books - just as Clinton's impeachment and Bush's coronation by the Supreme Court in 2000 will be. So now BOTH of his "reigns" will be under a cloud, and the more that comes out over the years, the cloudier it will become.

One of the best things about yesterday was imagining Bush whining, stomping and being seriously pissed about the harm to his "legacy." He had to care - it will forever be a footnote, even if during it, MSNBC talked about "Holiday Sales."