We have only had 2 primaries

[Mass_Liberal]

2. How can we call a race after two tiny states. None of the big states have spoken. Do we really have a right to say our decision is made? To not let the majority of Democrats at least have a chance to make their voices heard? I sure as hell don't think so. Once all democratic voters have had their chance, then, and only then, should we declare the nominee.

[For PaisAn]

1. I agree

All the candidates should be stressing this, including the current "front runners".

[polmaven]

2. Agreed!

Kerry supporter here checking in. This is the second time the pundits are trying to declare a winner with very little basis to do so.

The first was before even a single vote had been cast, when they declared Dean to be unbeatable, and pronounced Kerry dead. Now, as you have pointed out, with two small states under our belts, they have done a 360 degree turn-around.

I, of course, don't like it for different reasons than you. I don't want my candidates voters to stay home because, since it is all safely wrapped up, there is no reason for them to stir out of their nice warm living rooms on a cold night.

You don't like your candidate being declared the loser as prematurely as this. In politics, anything can happen, and often does.

There remain 7 candidates in this race, and each is a valuable asset to the party and to the political dialog which will help the Democrats win in November. To shut down any of those voices is dangerous.

[Mass_Liberal]

4. Wow this is a first

A Dean supporter, Clark supporter, and Kerry supporter all agreeing on something. This warms my heart.

[JohnKleeb]

We have more in common than we think

People just let stuff divide us, its a shame really. I agree with you too. I hated it when people in December called on the others to drop out because Dean winning seemed inevitable and I hate it now.
To quote Gephardt's concession speech, "never give up"

[polmaven]

14. Now, this is the way its SUPPOSED to be

Democrats are Democrats. We are all looking for the same end, we just sometimes disagree about the route to get there. And THAT is what it is all about.....I hope we haven't all misplaced that old, reliable "Agree to Disagree" phrase. It has worked all these years...It should never go away.

[Mass_Liberal]

19. amen

n/t

[texasmom]

5. Great post!

It doesn't serve democracy or our party, for many reasons, to buy into the media's message that the primaries are now over.

[ogminlo]

9. Don't you mean a 180 degree turn?

[polmaven]

22. Yes...well

What is 180 degrees between friends?

[lastknowngood]

3. and of Feb 3rd we have a few more but all are RED

states. I ask again why are we letting the republican states pick the Democratic nominee?

[Mass_Liberal]

6. because there are democrats in those states

that want a voice. In any case, the states I was talking about were NY, California, Pennsylvania and stuff.

[disenfranchised]

7. Edwards supporter totally agrees

This is disturbing me as well. Two predominantly white, rural states have voted and they are declaring the winner. How is that democracy?

[DjTj]

20. Welcome to the Edwards camp!

:hi

This race is far from over... I feel some Palmetto-mentum coming on...

[Mass_Liberal]

21. wow, your sig pictures are freakin me out

he looked eerily like the guy on That 70's Show. EEEEEEK!!!!

[PVnRT]

8. That's intelligent

I guess Democrats in states with more Republicans have no right to help choose the party candidate. What a way to unite the party.

[texasmom]

10. We need a candidate on top

that can garner support all across the country--in all regions. Even if a state isn't in play for the electoral votes, there are down-ballot choices that are dependent on a strong candidate at the top of the ticket. There's a bigger picture here than just the presidency.

[andym]

11. Agreed, but ...

But this primary season was designed to produce an early winner. That's why Dean's/Tripp's strategy was brilliant. Invest heavily in Iowa, win it. Use the momentum to take NH, and use the momentum to recharge his finances and sweep to the nomination.

The problem was that his poorer than expected showing in Iowa, allowed Kerry to execute the exact same strategy. Now, the only way to slow him is for others to win. For example, if Dean is to have a realistic chance, it is imperative that Kerry not sweep super tuesday. If Dean can't win a state on Tuesday, then someone else better win at least one. Ironically, I think if Clark and Edwards can each win a state (or two), it would help Dean's chances. Why? kills the inevitability of Kerry and if they only win a max of 2 states, they won't be the frontrunner, and because there is more than one, there won't be one anti-kerry. This would keep it open for all. Naturally, for Clark and Edwards to have a chance they must win at least one state as well.

[54anickel]

12. This thread has warmed my heart. Thanks, and a kick.

[jpgpenn]

13. This is very true but remember something

When Al Gore endorsed your candidate many of your fellow supporters alienated alot of folks by saying the race is now over. I remember it well and was offended by it.

This race is far from over. Iowa and NH are long away from what the demographic majority America is made of.

[Mass_Liberal]

16. I didn't think it was over

hell, both statements are ludicrous. On behalf of Dean supporters everywhere, I want to say sorry that we offended you. Clearly anyone who said it was over and that Dean was def. going to be the nominee was wrong.

[jsw_81]

15. You'd be singing a different tune...

...if Dean had won. You'd probably be calling for everyone to drop out and endorse the triumphant Vermonter. And you know it.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mass_Liberal]

18. edit: sorry

got angry