ABB Check-In! Post your favorite non-ABB rationalizations

[WillyBrandt]

Those who are long-time ABB or more recent converts check-in. Let's call this the anti-asylum. Note: I've alwys been ABB, ever since my disastrous Nader vote in 2000.

So, what's are your favorite rationalizations by purported progressives who aren't ABB?

Here are mine: (if they aren't terribly logical, don't blame me)

1. No way am I going to vote for that Bush-enabler X. I don't support Bush-enablers. (This require a thick skull or a serious love of irony.)

2. Candidate X has to earn my vote! And there's no way a candidate like X can earn my vote. He has to earn it! (As if giving a candidate a vote is like giving them your virginity, or your last supply of Frankincense and Myhrr. I always thought voting was a civic duty, where you made the choice that you judged best for the public.)

On Edit: Another I just remembered. Someone was mentioning the things must get worse before they get better nonsense. Then they actually said it was like Germany losing WWII, a fall before a riseth again. Good God--people are so wrapped up their emotions and symbols they lose sight even of basic decency and history.

[arwalden]

1. Both Parties Are The Same, Whaaaa!

I refuse to vote for anyone who voted for the war, whaaa!

- Allen

[XanaDUer]

2. Skull and Bones.

eom.

[King of New Orleans]

3. Yep it's the whole Stonecutters thing

eom

[WillyBrandt]

4. I'm glad this is catching on!

:)

[AngryYoungMan]

5. "Things must get EVEN WORSE (for others not me) to prove an obscure point"

eom

[WillyBrandt]

7. W must wreak hell to reach heaven;destroy the village in order to save it

[democracyindanger]

6. I'm going to

vote my conscience because the DLC controls everything and the DNC is corrupt and doesn't find my personal issues valid so we deserve another four years of *.

[waldenx]

8. here is one

vote for who we fucking tell you to vote for or we will mock, belittle and blame you for any failures, because no democratic politician is ever responsible for earning or asking for votes.
Oh yeah, and we don't really mean ANYONE in ABB, we mean 1 Democrat because we don't understand or care about true democracy.

[WillyBrandt]

11. ABB means vote for the eventual Democratic nominee

In DU parlance.

And you're right, I will continue to mock, spite, harague, and blame those who claim to be progressives but do not vote for the nominee. And I feel no guilt in attacking those phony progressives who revel in their own narcissism and myopia. I've got about as much sympathy for them as I do for the stupid clowns in Weimar Germany who felt disappointed with the Social Democrats, and stayed home. (Don't the Social Democrats know they have to earn my vote? Don't they care aout Democracy? Maybe after a few years of this Hitler fellow they might learn, and earn my vote!)

And every ounce of discomfort or rage will or besmirched righteousness they feel will be their fault: it's not my fault when lunatics rage against reality. I'll work to change reality myself, thank you very much.

[DeepModem Mom]

70. Tell it, Brother Willy!

[KCDem]

9. I live in *state* and my vote doesn't matter

Hm, there may be some truth to that... but there might not be. Look at Florida. It's going to be a close election and we have to band together. Plus, even if Bush happens to win the electoral votes... how awesome would it be if he were actually defeated by over 1 million votes?

[lovedems]

10. The "dont tell me how to vote" and in the same breath telling me how

ridiculous I am being for supporting the democratic nominee because he supported NAFTA. Bush-lite and the things will just have to get worse before they get better. They are all my favorites.

[WillyBrandt]

12. That's a good one: I forgot about that. Only my candidate is the savior

Every other one will make me leave the party forever!

[John_H]

13. 4 more years of bush--that'll teach 'em!!!

[arwalden]

16. So What If Bush Wins. Things Must Get Worse Before They Can Get Better...

(along the same lines as yours... justifying "punishing" the wayward party by punishing America and the world.)

-- Allen

[Badger1]

14. Lame ass "progressives"

My first experience with politics was putting up JFK yard signs with my mom & dad. I've seen many elections and know that this is THE most important election of the century. These bastards can not be allowed to ruin this country any further than they already have. This is big folks, and if we return BushCo to power it will be a monsterous mistake for the next generations and we will have no one to blame but ourselves. IT HAS TO BE ABB! We owe it to the future. Swallow yoyr fucking pride and do what you know is right. My guy, Clark, is gone but we must keep our eyes on the prize. Grow up and support the one who can send the shrub back to Crawford, because it's right and we owe it to the future generations, and you know it.

[AngryYoungMan]

15. "Dean/Clark made me 'feel' a certain way; now I'm too sad to care at all"

eom

[arwalden]

17. I Am Not A Sheeple. Do Not Take My Vote For Granted.

[AngryYoungMan]

19. If you're intending to rebut my argument, please be more clear.

Thanks.

No ill will, by the way; I generally like all your posts and respect your point of view.

[WillyBrandt]

20. I think ArWalden was agreeing with you actually

[arwalden]

25. Oh Dear... My Impersonation Was Truly Realistic, Wasn't It??

That's frightening.

-- Allen

[AngryYoungMan]

26. Oh, cool. Thanks.

Sorry etc.

[John_H]

101. Ding. Ding. Ding. A winner! The most absolutely pathetic, infantile

self-absorbed, Stuart Smalleyesque rationalization there is.

[OKNancy]

126. Darlin' I don't know one single Clark person who is not ABB

[NoPasaran]

18. Candidate X's supporters

Were mean to my candidate's supporters on DU.

[cindyw]

21. The lesser of two evils.

What a joke.

[WillyBrandt]

24. What do you mean "What a joke"?

The debt is balooning, kids are dying. What a joke?

[arwalden]

27. How Can I Take You Seriously? You Misspelled Ballooning. I'm voting GREEN!

[cindyw]

111. I think it is crap.

There is no way that Kerry is the lesser of two evils. In my mind a choice between Bush and Kerry is good vs. evil.

[arwalden]

22. You Know, Willy... Many Of These Folks Have Become Caricatures

of themselves with grossly exaggerated proportions.

-- Allen

>> I always thought voting was a civic duty, where you made the choice that you judged best for the public.<<

It is a civic duty! And that's exactly what the final choice is supposed to be!

[NewYorkerfromMass]

87. True that. It's about much more than yourself

it's about community.
BTW: LOL! "I am not a sheeple- DON'T tell me what to do or how to think"
caricatures indeed.

[lovedems]

23. How about the fear factor

Voter turn out will be low if X gets the nomination. Nobody will vote on election day because the excitement will be gone.


GOOD ONE!

[WillyBrandt]

28. Another one. Anyone Can Beat Bush: Follow this Logic, Folks

Really--even a cleft-lipped pimp. Therefore, there is no reason for the party not to nominate my candidate X.

But since the party did not nominate X, that means it is too stupid to see that ANY CANDIDATE can beat Bush, therefore I will not vote for the nominee.

And if the nominee loses, then that's his own damn fault!

[AngryYoungMan]

29. "I can't vote for [frontrunner] since he opposes [fringe liberal position]

[WillyBrandt]

30. Even better: I can't vote for X b/c he opposes [right wing position]

I can't vote for X. X is against the death penalty! Or X is for gun control!

[maxanne]

31. this is a nice

unambiguously positive thread, Willy - congratulations!

[WillyBrandt]

32. It wasn't meant to be positive at all

It was meant to be purposefully angry, and to mock those who make ridiculous excuses for a ridiculous choice.

I don't make positive threads about Bush.

Why should I make positive threads about Bush-enablers, Maxanne?

[maxanne]

33. nice to see you

adhering to the rules Willy!! :hi:

[WillyBrandt]

34. Which rules specifically were violated?

Was this supposed to be a HappyFun thread? When the troops are home, and Bush is out I'll be in a better mood.

Those who don't vote for the Dem nominee in Nov are Bush-enablers. This, you know, is DemocraticUnderground, not wistful progressive underground.

[arwalden]

37. Wistful Progressive Underground!! Oh Dear!! LOL...

Reaching for tissue to clean snortle off of my computer monitor.

-- Allen

[Maddy McCall]

41. Me too! Too damned funny!

:thumbsup: Willy

[fujiyama]

151. Oh my Will...

"This, you know, is DemocraticUnderground, not wistful progressive underground."

Your Haaahvuhd education is showing! ;-) Keep it up! This ISN'T NaderiteUnderground.com
or Ratfuckedunderground.com
or Iwantanegomanialfreaktoenablebushtohaveanotherfouryearsunderound.com

[tedoll78]

63. Careful -

the rules state that insinuating that others here are Republicans is not allowed, and this rule is interpreted very, very loosely around here.

Of course, absolutely 100% of all Bush enablers/accomplices are Republicans.. yeah, right.. (that was sarcasm, to be clear).

[AngryYoungMan]

35. This thread is great!

cathartic AND informative...

[WillyBrandt]

80. Cathartic is the word I was thinking of

It's good to itemize all this crapola!

[foo_bar]

36. *cries in teacup*

My daddy is a repuke and he likes X! X is daddy lite!

edited for pronouns

[Citizen Kang]

38. What about reaching out to those people

who are not ABB instead of mocking them? Wouldn't that help the cause a little more?

Just a thought.

Besides, ABB is not going to get the Independents and Moderate Republicans to vote for the nominee. We've got to make a case to vote FOR someone instead of voting AGAINST someone. ABB is WAY overrated in my opinion. Its not a winning strategy.

[maxanne]

39. stop making sense n/t

[AngryYoungMan]

40. We've tried that

Over and over and over. That's why we're all blowing off steam and commiserating in this fashion.

[Citizen Kang]

49. Well I'm new here

(Somewhat, been lurking for awhile) so maybe I've missed the reaching out to non-ABBers. But I certainly haven't seen in on a national level and posts like these don't help.

Besides, it gets away from my point that ABB is bad strategy. It might get a few Nader voters from 2000 to vote for the nominee, but how does ABB work in the General Election when we are trying to convince Independents and Moderate Republicans to vote for our guy???

[Sean Reynolds]

42. If THIS isn't the biggest slap in the face........

You know I don't care if people do not agree with me not being ABB. BUT I do think it's pretty sad that DUers would attack like this. For the past 24 hours I have been vehemently attacked because of my opinion. I've been told I am stupid, a Republican, a Bush lover, selfish, and among MANY other things. Now you're going to MOCK me because of my decision?

I'm so glad you enjoy putting down other members of this community.

[AngryYoungMan]

44. Our views are no less strongly held and passionate than yours.

DU is supposed to be the home of spirited debate. The fact is, there is a serious difference of opinion that we're addressing here. The issue isn't going to go away. Help us by arguing back, not by condemning what we're doing.

[Sean Reynolds]

46. BIG difference between a spirited debate and an attack.

You're not addressing anything but hate with this post. You're calling out members, which is AGAINST the rules here. I'm sorry, but the lines used above were targeted toward members of this community not only in a mocking way, but a hateful way. You may think it's a solid debate with no one getting smacked, but it isn't. You can address your ABB opinion any time, but I do believe you're stepping over the line when you start a thread JUST to attack members that don't support your ideals.

[The Magistrate]

48. That Is Not So, Mr. Reynolds

Mr. Brandt has specifically opened the floor for attacks against certain arguments favored by some, and that is what has largely followed. These arguments are all extraordinarily weak and foolish arguments, and many have grown quite tired of hearing them proferred in all seriousness by persons who make some claim to political sophistication. Nothing cuts so poor a figure as naivite in a radical, Sir. A radical ought to be, above all else, conscious of the political consequences of his actions, and see to it these strike effective blows against reaction.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Sean Reynolds]

50. You're wrong.

This post was made to mock the anti-ABB crowd, so yes it is an attack. I'm sorry, but in YOUR eyes my argument may be foolish, but in my eyes, yours is. Fact is, I don't agree we should just vote for the lesser of two evils just because I'm told to do so. I want my vote to MEAN something and voting for Kerry and Edwards doesn't give me that. It's my opinion, agree with it or not, but I don't like it being mocked.

[The Magistrate]

62. You Should Not Do It Because You Are Told To, Sir

It should not be necessary to tell you; you should be able to see the sense of so obvious a thing by light of your own mother-wit, Sir. You should have by now sufficient knowledge of the world to understand that it is a place of shifting greys, in which there are no un-alloyed goods, and a great number of damned high karat evils.

What you mean by wanting your vote to "mean" something is unclear to me. Nothing means anything of itself; meaning is ascribed to things by human beings, and occurs in no other way. Your acts may, in fact generally will, mean something different to you than they do to others who witness them, or are the objects of them. Your vote for a left splinter faction may mean moral purity to you; to a Republican reactionary, it means one reactionary's vote unmatched by his Democratic opponent, and a little leg up on victory in the contest. That person's view of what your act means is every bit as valid as yours; you have no controlling proprietary right over what your act means just because it is you who performs it. If you decided to, you could easily see your vote for the Party's nominee meant striking some small blow against the worst elements of reaction in the country.

One a final note, Sir. To ridicule an argument is far from ridiculing the person who makes it. That is an unwarranted stretch indeed.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

66. We ascribe meaning to life?

Good to know! :D







that somebody recognizes that fact

[Maddy McCall]

56. You never cease to amaze me, sir!

Hammer, meet nail head, once again.

:thumbsup: :toast:

[DeepModem Mom]

71. You are a wise man, Mr. Magistrate. (eom)

[jazzsammich]

74. I agree with you in general, but take exception...

...to your characterization of this thread. This thread was not opened for attacks against arguments. That would imply debate, analysis, and logic. This thread was opened instead for mockery of those arguments. Quite the different approach, and unbecoming in a forum such as this one.

Furthermore, as I have done in a different thread this morning, I would like to defend the "I live in State X" argument as being entirely cognisant of the political consequences, given the stubbornly antidemocratic nature of the Electoral College. In a state such as Utah or Wyoming, where enormous Republican majorities exist, it is an entirely salient position to take.

In Utah:
a vote for Bush is a vote for Bush,
a vote for Kerry is a vote for Bush,
a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush,
a vote for Ficus is a vote for Bush.

Those five electoral votes are going Republican regardless of anything Mr. Reynolds may do. In Arizona, where I reside, the situation is considerably different. This is why I will be voting for the eventual Dem. nominee in November despite my sincere and deeply-rooted distate for several, indeed, many of the positions that nominee holds.

That having been said, I am in full and complete agreement with the rest of your statements here. As always, they are thoughtful and well-reasoned.

--Jim K.

[AngryYoungMan]

52. Have we attacked ANYONE by name? Attacked ANYONE specifically?

We're "attacking" the IDEA! It's a big difference.

[ludwigb]

69. Seriously, dude

What is with the hammer and sickle? GO STALIN!!

[WillyBrandt]

76. I am attacking and mocking non-ABBism

It's ridiculous and harmful. I've got no shame in saying so: I take pride in pointing out the obvious.

[CivilRightsNow]

133. Screw em...

They got us where we are.

Now they want to keep us in corporately militarized hell and just put a different face on it.

Pay no mind to the man behind the curtain. Vote your heart, you beautiful soul. It is only with the help of those that can look beyond the box that we have any chance. And our chances are rapidly disappearing.

Refuse to assimilate. Refuse to accept less then you deserve. We have tried it the other way for far too long. Shake free of the dogmas and the fake morality of the herd.

It may not amount to much.. but Im thankful that you are alive not simply existing, like so many others.

[joshcryer]

43. Democracy is about who we want, not don't want.

That's my favorite one.

[Adelante]

45. "He's been annointed"

I simply cannot vote for the DLC/DNC/PNAC/Whatever candidate.

[Guaranteed]

61. It's been less than a month since the Iowa caucuses.

YES...it's true. Did that realization hit you as hard as it should have?

[Adelante]

86. The realization hits me hard

that it's a reason to break my ass to change the way this worked. Is there going to be any changing anything at all if Bush wins? Is there going to be a country left if Bush wins? The priority has to be ABB or NOTHING changes.

[oasis]

47. ABB here. 1,2 and "things must get worse before they get better" are

equal in their level of juvenile b.s.

[Maddy McCall]

51. I don't feel emotionally ecstatic for Kerry--he doesn't do anything for me

It doesn't matter what he can do for the nation, for America as a whole, and screw the fact that if he doesn't win in the GE, we will have four more, four WORSE years of Bush--the greatest issue is that I don't cream in my panties when Kerry speaks. My heart doesn't go pitter patter and I don't faint in blissful ecstasy. Kerry is just too boring. I like my immediate gratification.

It's all about me--NOT US--ME. Since Kerry doesn't excite me, I won't vote--or I will write in the name of the dearly departed charismatic leader--in the GE.

[AngryYoungMan]

53. Good one

n/t

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

57. Oh lord!

I got stuck in the picture right about the time you got to your greatest issues!

(now I'm gonna think about THAT all night!) :evilgrin: Don't know if I'll snap out of it in time to vote in November...hey.....it's original!

[Maddy McCall]

58. LOL!!

[Guaranteed]

54. My favorite rationalization is that as long as we elect someone

other than Bush, we're doing the right thing! No need to look at positions!

[WillyBrandt]

82. Another strawman

Of course we need to look as the positions. That's why we have primaries and debates.

But do you actually deny that all of the candidates are FAR better and FAR preferrable to Bush?

[Jade Fox]

55. I couldn't possibly vote for someone who has EVER compromised...

on an issue, ie. anyone who has ever been successful in politics.

To win my vote they must be pure.

(besides, another Bush term fuels my secret Armageddon fantasies.....)

[Guaranteed]

60. How about someone that has ever stood fast?

Can they be trusted?

[Jade Fox]

65. An effective politician needs to be able to do both....

and know when to do them, IMO.

[Guaranteed]

68. Hear HEAR

And when to do something so drastic?

[joyautumn]

59. question for WillyBrandt

What was your own original reason for voting Nader in 2000, which you now believe was naive?

[JVS]

106. Now that is a good question!

[Tactical Progressive]

64. I vote my conscience.

And my conscience is whatever makes me feel better about myself.

[Langis]

67. Checking in

ABB all the way

I don't have a favorite non-ABB rational, becasue they all really piss me off.

[DeepModem Mom]

72. We must reform the Democratic Party now,

win or lose -- never mind that the country is locked in a chokehold by an extreme faction of the opposition party, with all three branches of our government under its control. Never mind that this faction has our free press under the heel of its boot. If, given another four years, the power of this faction grows until my right to speak freely or vote against it is threatened, or even infringed, I will have done my part in bringing ideological purity to the party of Jefferson, Jackson and JFK, and/or punished that party by voting for a third-party candidate who will get at least 3% of the vote.

[rucky]

73. ABB-ers are bullies.

and judging from this thread, it seems to be true.

[WillyBrandt]

81. I can't be ABB, because ABBers are bullies

[rucky]

98. So I have to share your approach

to agree with the ABB strategy?

Don't assume I'm not ABB because I don't buy into your submission through ridicule approach.

Being right isn't license to be an asshole.

[The Magistrate]

97. Thank You, Mr. Rucky

For advancing one of my favorite bits of the nonsesnse that passes for reasons left and progressive persons should lend support to the criminals of the '00 Coup in the general election. The reason people who advance that idea feel so belabored when taken to task over it is simple, Sir: they know in their hearts it is self-indulgent and destructive foolishness, that cannot survive a moment's serious reflection, or the slightest challenge.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[rucky]

105. But dontcha see, Mr. Magistrate...

To misquote one of my favorite philosophers:

All they're asking, is for a little R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

What does logic have to do with it? ABB is so simple & obvious that it sells itself. So why are the proponents so belabored to sell it & so eager to congratulate themselves for their superior intellect? There's really nothing left to discuss, other than on a purely emotional level. So some folks declare their anti-ABB-ness with various levels of sincerity. But on the other side, some folks are hunting down detractors for sport. People will come around on their own & this alpha-dog tactic will just reinforce their decision - hurting the ABB cause.

If you're really interested in turning a non-ABB-er, listen to them. Read between the lines. There are valid feelings behind the flawed logic.

So let's have the discussion behind the discussion: What role, if any, would you like to see the "left & progressives" play in this party?

[The Magistrate]

109. It Is My Custom, Sir

To give courtesy to all, and respect to what deserves it.

The position advanced by those who would withhold their vote from the Party's nominee in the fall is not deserving of the slightest respect, and accordingly receives none. It seems to me that in one part, your analysis of the matter is in error: some of the people who urge this are in dead earnest, and peddle the thing as a real political line, imagining that somehow the triumph of reaction at the polls will strengthen the hand of the left splinter they are devoted to, more than they are devoted to the good of the people, the country, and the world. That view is mistaken: the good of the people is paramount, and the result of that course would be even further ostracization for the left, and an even greater crippling of its power and potential.

It is, Sir, my desire to see the Democratic Party a good deal more to the left, but that desire does not cloud my strategic judgement of what is possible in present circumstances. Just now, the paramount need is to break the grip on national office of the worst elements of reaction in our polity, who gather under the standard of the Republican Party. These must, and at any cost, be halted from continuing their program of grinding the people like so much grain while crippling the ability of the government to tend to the people's needs by destroying the national fisc. The only means available to do this is electoral politics, and this means collecting the greatest possible number of votes, many of which must come from people who react with visceral distaste to what they perceive, rightly or wrongly, to be leftist positions. A candidacy in a national election which speaks in the terms desired by the most committed leftists among us will go down to defeat of land-slide proportion, and such a defeat cannot be afforded.

What leftists ought to do in this situation is clear. The tactic of Popular Front must be adopted, and any elements willing to unite against the worst elements of reaction must be allied with, and allied with on their face, at the value they give themselves, and with acceptance of the beliefs that they state are theirs. The energy that committed radicals can bring to such a coalition can be invaluable, providing they are willing to exercise some self-discipline, and speak the things that will move people who do not agree with them whole hog, and keep silence concerning things that, while they may be dear to them, would drive many who's votes are needed now away.

It is necessary for the left to develope a new vocabulary with which to address the people. The fact is that, taken on an issue by issue basis, a great number of the people indicate they support leftist positions, but in electoral politics they reject leftists. They do this because they love their country, and feel it the best thing in the world, and feel the left hates the country, and thinks it the worst thing in the world. It does not matter whether that perception is true; it is too widespread to ignore, and there are far too many elements of left discourse that can be cited by hostile propagandists to drive it home as true. It is necessary for radicals to learn to speak the people's language, to find ways to express a left program in terms the people would use themselves, and stripped free of elements that are discordant to the people's sensibilities. Until this is done, the left will continue to sink in influence in the nation's political life.

"An election differs from a civil war only as the bloodless surrender of a force outnumbered in the field differs from Waterloo."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Tactical Progressive]

119. You speak with eloquence to that

which even an uneducated cowhand knows in his gut.

How then is it that my fellow Progressives have such a hard time fitting themselves into such a full range of understanding and experience?

[rucky]

122. The thoughtfulness of your response

shows your respect.

I take the same position. One point on strategy, tho: We need to change our language, as well: as you said the leftist platform has mainstream support, but not the people behind the movement. I don't see how we can move the platform closer to the mainstream without either taking it away from the "radicals" (good cop/bad cop), or - like the GOP has done with their fringe - remarket the "radicals" as mainstreamers. The latter would be more effective, IMO, but we'd have to stop calling them radicals to start.

[maxanne]

75. for some people

the primary season isn't over yet. The zeal to march in formation is a little premature.

Why are people who think for themselves such a threat?

[WillyBrandt]

78. You're attacking a strawman argument

The primaries very much are not over. ABBism, as I was using it, was that one would vote (and hopefully volunteer and work for) the Democratic nominee, whoever s/he turned out to be.

It is not rallying around the frontrunner, regardless of his current lead.

[edzontar]

77. ABB as a personal decison is fine. ABB as a threat is not.

When people start posting "purge" threads and call supporters of non-Kerry candidates "traitors" when the voting is still going on, I consider that to be bullying and intimidation more worthy of the "other" party than it is of a progressive movement.

[WillyBrandt]

79. Who said anything about non-Kerry supporters?

ABB means voting for the Democratic nominee in the General Election, and hopefully doing volunteer work for them too. It has nothing to do with whom one supports during the primary season.

And I don't recall calling supporters of candidates other than Kerry traitors at all. (Did someone say "traitor" in this thread?) Instead, I'm making fun of the ridiculous excuses people make for not being ABB, especially when they claim to be progressives.

[edzontar]

89. Where were you last week?

Those posts and threads caused quite a ruckus.....I am surprised you missed them--they even made it to the ATA forum.

[WillyBrandt]

83. Also, non-ABB seems to be the literal threat.

ABB only threatens the pretender in chief.

(And Ralph Nader.)

[edzontar]

90. I think some folks would like their vote to be EARNED this time....

I don't have the luxury to demand this, since I am voting in PA, which will be very close.


But I think many are sick of their votes beng taken for granted by sell-out , waffling candidates (take your pick) and would like to hear something they actually LIKE fom the campaigns of the remaining "front-runners."

That is certainly legitimate at this stage of the game, or so it seems to me.

Constituency groups are vey active in OTHER parts of the party (DLC, etc.).

What is wrong with progressives demanding a place at the table?

ABB to me equals "the shut up, and eat it " school of politics.

Some of us are getting a little sick of this.

[WillyBrandt]

84. Another: LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA

Credit arwalden for this catch in another thread.

[SerpentX]

85. GLBT/Women's rights aren't in any danger.

[nightperson]

88. "Heightening the contradictions".

An oldie.

[MadHound]

91. And all the ABB sheep get together and go BAA BAA

Jesus H. Christ on a pogo stick, you people are fools. Sitting here in this self congratulatory circle jerk, patting yourselves on the back for enabling the ongoing corporate corruption of our government by both Democrats and Republicans. Gee, you would think that supposedly intelligent people would see the writing plain on the wall before you, but I guess not.

So, are you are going to mock and insult those people who have become so cynical about the process that they are voting for nobody? They are the majority in this country after all. Have you become so desperate that you must resort to fear and intimidation to procur votes? And do you think by mocking and insulting people with real concerns and fears is an effective way to persuade people?

If you folks want to attract people to the Democratic Party you must give them something to vote FOR, as opposed to simply fearmongering into voting against something. By simply saying that Bushco is the worst thing this side of hell isn't going to get you far, that claim has been repeated ad naseum since Nixon. A smart move would to be getting rid of the corporate Dems in the party, and running a candidate who doesn't take corporate cash, like Kucinich. But by opting out for the corporate coranation of Kerry, all the Dems are presenting the public is the same ol' same ol'. Corporate corruption of government, just in a kinder, gentler form. Clinton was that same type of option in '92 and '96, and do I really need to go through the litany of his many corporate sell outs again, we all know them too well. By repeating this mistake again, all that you will achieve is the further demise of the Democratic party.

So mock and flame me if you want, I have a thick skin and don't care. Besides, it all sounds like whistling past the graveyard to me. And you folks have a lot to be afraid of.

[Stuckinthebush]

92. Do you hear this Baa?

It is the sound of pragmatism.

I'd rather not follow the yellow brick road to Oz in the hopes that the Wizard will grant a "true progressive" the presidency. I'll stick to the reality of US politics that says only the Democratic or Republican candidate has any shot in hell of being the president. That being realized, I will vote for the Democrat because the alternative of a third party or write in vote increases the overall percent for Bush which would possibly give him the presidency again. Unlike unwavering ideologues, I understand that the party consists of many different people with different perceptions. I can either secure a place for my beliefs in the Democratic party by supporting and strong arming the eventual nominee, or I can be like that crazy guy downtown who screams at everyone, "The world is ending!" Nobody pays attention to that guy.

[MadHound]

96. And all that your brand of pragmatism will get us

Is a kinder gentler corporate totalitarianism. Or didn't you learn anything from the Clinton years? Here, let me do a quick recap for you.

NAFTA
GATT
WTO
'96 Telecom Act
Pollution credits
Welfare "reform"
soft money contributions

It is no longer about looking for a true progressive. It is about finding somebody who isn't on the short leash of their corporate master. In the '00 election cycle over forty corporations contributed $100,000 to both sides, with Phillip Morris topping the list at 2 million plus to Dems and 'Pugs. This is called hedging your bet, insuring that whoever wins, the corporation already has them on their leash and at their beck and call.

I know you would like to think that the modern day Democratic party is the same wonderful party of your parents and grandparents. But wake up and realize that it isn't, that over the past twenty years it has become just as big a corporate whore as the Republicans. And if you want real, lasting change in this country the only place you will find it is outside of both the Dems and the 'Pugs. Both parties are so corrupted that the only people they are truly looking out for is their corporate masters.

[Stuckinthebush]

107. Here are your options

1. - What you call a kindler gentler corporate totalitarianism (along with it comes the protection of the environment, increased education funding, increased funding for social programs, more moderate to liberal judges, etc.)

2. - A very evil corporate totalitarianism that is bent on destroying everything you and I hold dear.

There is no other possibility here.

For the sake of my children, I choose number 1.

[MadHound]

110. My, you dearly love your blinders don't you?

Do you call the notion of pollution credits, relaxed grandfathering standards for old line power plants, offshore drilling in the Gulf, NAFTA's ongoing pollution of the Tex-Mex border enviromental protection? Do you call voting for the NCLB act a means of increasing educational funding? Do you call welfare "reform" an increase in funding for social services? Do you call judges who back the notion of corporate personhood(with more rights than you or I)moderate to liberal? I want some of what your smoking if you can honestly say yes to any of those questions.

But no, thank you, I will take the third way if you don't mind. Actively supporting and growing a third party that isn't enslaved to corporate interests. After all, I don't want my children or yours to become corporate serfs, which is the vision of both the Dems and 'Pugs.

[The Magistrate]

114. Nonsense, Mr. Hound

The course you advocate, while it may bring emotional satisfaction to a few, will have only the practical effect of ceding the field to the worst elements of reaction, and leaving them in a position of un-challengeabble dominance over the political life of the nation.

Sooner or later, facts must be faced. The overwhelming proportion of the people do not agree with you, and will not be brought to agreement with you by any argument you advance in the style that you use. Even today, the greatest proportion of the people do not see anything fundamentally wrong with the condition of the country, though they may well feel it is poorly managed and directed just now. They have no desire for fundamental change. Indeed, the great mass of people fear fundamental change, and are wise to do so, for abrupt and sudden changes in national life are invariably wrenching and distressing episodes, in which ordinary people usually find their lot considerably more straitened and dangerous.

"Can't nobody here play this game?"

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[MadHound]

117. Not nonsense, just common sense

When you have two parties working for the same corporate masters, where does the voice of the people get heard? Certainly not with the Republicans, and for the past twenty years not even by the Democrats.
Ergo, there needs to be a third party that represents the people, and we need to start now, for the sooner we start, the sooner that we can have our government back.

You say that the people in this country our basically satisfied with the current state of affair in our country. If this is so, why do we hear increasing protests against outsourcing jobs from both ends of the political spectrum? Why do we hear increasing calls for a clean enviroment? Why do we hear increasing protests against the corporate corruption from both conservatives and liberals? Why are the majority of people in this country refusing to vote, BECAUSE THEY SEE NO MATERIAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO MAJOR PARTIES! No sir Magistrate, the people in this country are not happy at all with the current state of affairs, they are simply resigned to enduring as best they can.

What is needed in this country is hope, and the corporate corrupt politicians from either side of the aisle cannot provide it. What is desperately needed in this country are two things, both designed to get corporate cash corruption out of our government. The first is to make publicly financed election campaigns the law in every state(something that well over eighty percent of the people support). Secondly, we need to grow a third party, one that isn't corrupted by corporate cash, into a major party so as to supplant one of our corrupt current parties. You say the people aren't ready for this, I say your underestimating the anger of the populace. We have gone through this kind of change before in our country, and it is time for it again. The question is do want it to go down easy with nonviolence, or continue propping up the corrupt system we have now, just to have it swept away by violent radical change? Myself, I prefer it relatively easy and nonviolent, but hey, that's just me:shrug:

[The Magistrate]

127. Again, Mr. Hound, Nonsense

Your "third party" will garner only a tiny slice of the elctorate, and have no positive power at all to influence events. If it has any effect at all, it will be to leave the worst elements of reaction in unchallegeable control of the political life of our country. Third party movements, from the Populist Farmers to the Bull Moose to Perot and Nader, have never done anything but hamstring the major party they calved off from, and leave their opponents in control. Everything you claim to oppose will only be made worse by the course you propose. That, Sir, is common sense; you are indulging in mere sophistry.

There has never been a time in history when people were not mostly resigned to their lot and got through it as best they could; that is the functional definition of contented in any political system. Those episodes wherein they are not have a distictly different feel than this current day. The few things you mention are not occuring at nearly the volume you imagine, and they are in range of the existing structures to rectify. The fact is, Sir, that people who do not vote do not do so because they have no great quarrel with the way things go in their absence from the polls, and have themselves no great personal interest in politics. It is a taste, you know, like football contests and collecting commerative plates; some have the bug, and some do not. The idea it is a civic duty has long since passed by the wayside, like most concepts requiring identification with a thing beyond the individual.

Public financing of election campaigns is an excellent idea in many ways, and might have some beneficial effects. People resist it for two reasons. One is that they feel politicians can raise their own damned money without drawing on the taxes they pay, and the other is that they do not want to see cranks and loons receive a public subsidy. Any scheme of public financing that could actually be enacted would have the certain effect of placing an even greater stumbling block before the advancement of any such fringe party as you propose, not that any more are needed to doom such efforts to impotence.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[MadHound]

129. You, my dear sparring partner,

Must have been out of the activist loop for a long while if you are ascribing voter apathy to populace contentment. Just a quick experiment for you, go down to any inner city area near you and ask the first twenty people you see who don't vote why they don't vote. I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that ninety percent of them will express the sentiment that it doesn't matter which party is in power, they are all full of it. Furthermore, I'm willing to lay good money down that this sentiment is true across the non-voting spectrum. You know why I know this? Because by working with third party candidates you get to energize people who were not voting, and this is the sentiment that they express every time.

And you are historically inaccurate when you say that third parties don't have vast effects. Eugene McCarthy forced the Democratic party to the left in '68. Back in the depression the Socialists forced FDR into passing Social Security and unemployment insurance. And then there is that third party called the Republicans. Damn aren't they the mainstream now. And where are the Whigs again? That's right, in the dustbin of history.

As far as people not wishing to have publicly financed election campaigns, I would refer you to Granny D<http://www.grannyd.com/>, Jim Hightower<http://www.jimhightower.com/>or the states of AZ, ME, VT or MA, all of whom have publicly financed election campaigns. In fact if I remember right, we have a Maine congressperson who was elected with publicly funds. It is an idea whose time has come, and we all need to encourage it.

[The Magistrate]

131. Wear It In Good Health, Dear

Perhaps you ought to get out of the "activist loop" on occassion and interact with people who collect Franklin Mint commemoratives.

The belief all politicians are out for themselves, a thing people have understood from the dawn of the trade, and the belief things are going as well as can be reasonably expected, are not exclusionary sentiments; indeed, they are quite likely to co-exist in the same mind. Further, where you get the idea that people in "inner city areas" form any predominant portion of the electorate is beyond me, for it is a belief that is false to fact. This had been one of the hobby horses eager activists have ridden hardest into blind alleys over the last several decades. Your invocation of it leaves me unsurprised.

You have mentioned four states, which must total nearly two percent of the nation's populace. You may claim a groundswell for your view when this proportion rises to something over a third. Remember that simple arithmetic is essential to political calculation, and do not waste your time trying to persuade me, or any other, that three is larger than nineteen....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[MadHound]

138. Actually, my wife collects Franklin Mint commemeratives

Dragons to be specific. Lovely things really, but easily broken;)

And I do get out of the activist loop quite frequently, I believe in seeing things from many perspectives, hence I have to get out and about quite a bit. But thanks for the concern.

And I find it funny that you disparage the inner city numbers and opinions, for apparently the Democratic party has considered the inner city one of the backbones of the party for years and decades. I guess the Dems have been riding the same hobby horse as me:shrug:

And while four states, with relatively low populations seems small to you, it is actually quite a fine start, considering that this PFEC movement really only started less than ten years ago. And remember, the abolitionist movement started out in the four states that form the core of New England. And look where that movement went.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

143. The Disparragement, Fellow, Is In Your Own Mind

My comments were concerned with arithmetic, and with your attempt to posit as exclusionary views which in fact are not so. You have not come close to answering those comments, and that is unsurprising. So long as you view political action as a field for demonstrating moral superiority, so long will you remain ineffectual at it. The point of political action is not to display one's superior sensibilities, but to get others to think your thoughts, and feel them their own as they do. The party whose line is greeted by the most people with a cry of "That's just what I think!" wins. So far, the reactionaries are on top of that test in our country's political life, and you would be wise to ponder why that is, and what you could do about it. But you show no signs of treating this serious business seriously, which leads me to conclude it is little more to you than an enchantment with the personal image of a bold iconoclast.

"Can't nobody here play this game?"

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

(on edit: Did not notice wife was still signed in on this machine. No fool like an old fool...Magistrate.)

[Name removed]

118. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

123. Deleted message

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

[Stuckinthebush]

116. If you think you can get a government that will back all of our ideals

to be elected in this country, then I want what you are smoking.

Don't get so dramatic on the corporate serfs concept. I own a business and know a number of people who do as well, so I value the commitment to a capitalistic philosophy in this country. I do have issues with the way that major corporations can control this country, but that won't be remedied by voting for a third party or a write in candidate.

While this is not my number one issue, I will say that Dems are better than the GOP when you are looking for a viable party to critically analyze corporate power. Do you think the GOP will let us into the door to discuss these issues? Hell, no. Will the Dems? Yes because we are one of their core groups. You can work with the system or outside of it - if you chose to work outside of the system you will be banging your head against many locked doors. I prefer to get a friendly president and work from that angle.

[MadHound]

120. We who, do you have a frog in your pocket?

I and many that I know have been working from the inside of the party for thirty plus years to affect change within the party and look what it got us! NAFTA, WTO, GATT, welfare "reform", the list is endless. And so much for being valuable to the Dems because we are the base, hell, the DLC/New Dems came in and kicked all of us liberals and progressives to the curb long ago. Suuure, they'll accept our donations, and positively demand our vote, but will the compromis with any issue in order to return the favors that we have given them? Not just no, but HELL NO!

And if you truly thing that the Dems are any more accesible vis-a-vis the corporate corruption of government, then how do you explain away the Dems supporting NAFTA, which sucks away well paying UNION jobs, along with the WTO and other alphabet "free" trade agreements? How do explain away Clinton's unconstitutional brainstorm called soft money campaign contributions? How do you explain Clinton's bursting the high tech bubble with free trade agreements and loosened H-1B visa, all of which does nothing but add to corporate profit? How do you explain away the '96 Telecom Act? These are the actions of a president and a party that is hand in glove with big business, all to the detriment of you and I, the ordinary working person.

And I am not against capitalism, it is one of the most effecient economic systems devised, and it has made this country strong. However I do object to the corrupt corporate cronyism that is being practiced today by the vast number of politicians on both sides of the aisle. One of our government's functions is to protect the populace from the excesses of corporations. The last time our government failed to do this was in the days of the robber barons, a time known as the Gilded Age. It didn't matter whether a Dem or 'Pug was in the big chair, all were beholden to their corporate masters. This state of affairs didn't end until really the Great Depression, when these corrupt politcians took us right over the edge, and though FDR really helped by picking up the pieces, it took fifteen years and war to restore our country to greatness. We are now entering a second Gilded Age. Do you really want it to end like the first one?

[edzontar]

93. ABB has always been a premature call to support one of the weak,

Uninspiring, DLC selected, Tweedle-Dum, "I am the most electable" candidate (almost always Kerry).

ABB should have meant--pick the BEST candidate.

Instead, at least as I have encountered it here--its is a mantra that pops up everytime there is any real debate.

The goal always seems to be the same: to shut down discussion of specific issues and enforce uncomplaining, unqualified support for the lamest and most generic figures in the race (almost always Kerry).

Please, give it a rest.

[jonnyblitz]

99. good post. I agree although I have decided personally to be

ABB this year. It would never occur to me to demand of others to do the same. :thumbsup:

[MadHound]

100. Thank you for the kind words

It sounds like you are at about the same point I was in the '00 election cycle, sick of what the Dems are doing to our country, but afraid of what Bush would do. Hence I held my nose and voted for Gore.

However after watching the Dems disgusting performance these past three years, I've come to the realization that they are just as beholden to their corporate masters as the 'Pugs are. Putting another corrupt corporate Dem in office isn't going to change a damn thing, he'll just sugar coat the pill before shoving it down our throats.

But hey, we all have to work through these things on our own and at our own pace. Check back in another couple of years and let's see if you're disgusted enough to start working for a real change ;)

[RichardRay]

104. How does NOT being ABB in the GE help effect eventual change?

If you believe it makes absolutely no difference whether Bush or the eventual Democratic nominee gets elected, and you concur that the chances of a 3rd party candidate winning in '04 are non-existent (you haven't said that, so check me there) - then why not go ABB?

Either Bush will win and we'll get 4 more years of Republican input to help put people over the line to you point of view, or, some unnamed Democrat will be elected and no changes will take place, so you'll still get 4 more years of input that would help put more people into your camp. Seems like a win-win for you.

Of course, there is a third possibility. Things might be a least a little better. Heaven forfend.

In the 60's and 70's there were folks on the far Left who proposed supporting the most fascist postions and choices in the U.S. political process to make certain the lumpen got the message faster. It never made sense to me....

[MadHound]

108. Very simple answer here

The time is now, not some indefinite future, to start building up a viable third party. The Greens didn't make the five percent cut in '00, so that is a good goal to shoot for in '04. Continue that on into '06 and '08, and quite possibly by '12 or '16 we will have a major third party to supplant one of corrupt old line parties. This is called taking the long term view, not just going for the short term gratification.

Another point is why should I, or you for that matter, reward the corruption of the Dems with our vote? If your dog, child, cat, etc behaves badly do you reward them? No, you teach them a lesson so that they won't behave badly in the future. The Dems have been behaving badly for years now, so shouldn't we teach them a lesson? Or do you simply want to win, no matter what the cost?

There is an old defintion of insanity, it goes something like this: Doing the same thing over and over again, yet expecting different results. I've gotten to the point in my life where I refuse to continue voting for the Democratic insanity. Instead I will devote my effort towards both sanity and real change in our society.

[John_H]

102. My Baaa makes sure the next three Justices are Non-Fascists.

Your Baaa makes sure they are.

[MadHound]

113. No, your Baa just insures that the next three Supremes

Are corporate totalitarians who define corporate personhood as inherently having more rights than you or I:eyes:

[The Magistrate]

115. Your Course, Mr. Hound, Will Not Change That Either

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[MadHound]

124. Sure it will

If you have politician who take no corporate money, then they are not beholden to corporate interests first and foremost, therefore they can represent their true constituency, you and I the voter.

Easy, Plain and Simple!

[The Magistrate]

128. But They Have To Get Elected, Old Darling

And they will not; they will not have any money....

"War requires funds, you know."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[MadHound]

130. $2000 dollars per person, it works well for the 'Pugs

It can work well for the Greens!

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

144. No One Will Give The Money To You, Dear

People want things for their money, and you will have nothing in your gift to give them.

"Go into the street and give the first man you meet a shilling, and the second a lecture on moral improvement, and discover which will call himself your friend."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

(on edit: Did not notice wife was still signed in on this machine. No fool like an old fool...Magistrate)

[bobthedrummer]

94. This independent is ABB in November.

The aftertaste of realpolitik is so sickening I may join the Democratic Party to work for progress and change in the future, or possibly join a third party after we take out George W. Bush in November.

Right now we must come together in ABB regardless of the cases made against it.

The tide has now turned against the lies and machinations of George W. Bush's pResidency.

All power to the people, like it says in our Constitution.

[vet_against_Bush]

95. Mine: Bush must go

simple.

[nnorman]

103. ABB & ABC (anybody but Cheney)Voters

I believe that any of the Democratic Candidates are far more qualified, honest, and capable of being president than Bush. However, even though we are fortunate to have choices and good ones--the nominee will have an overwhelming task of cleaning up Bush and Cheney's devastating damage. Therefore, the nominee needs to have a wealth of experience with Congress and Washington in order to make the necessary changes and have a good working relationship with both houses. It may take years (or even decades) to clean up the 4 years of mess created by the Bush/Cheney Admin.

As intelligent a president as Clinton was--I do think his lack of experience and connections with the Congress may have contributed to his inability to have been as successful as he could have been. I see Bush alienating the democrats in congress mostly from his lack of experience. The Congress (as a whole) did not give Bush or Clinton the respect they needed.

The nominee has his work cut out for him--the more experience and connections he has in Congress the more successful he will be in gaining their support and cooperation for cleaning up the mess of the last 4 years.

[West Coast Democrat]

112. I am putting all Anti-ABBs on IGNORE starting today

I'm just saving myself from unneeded aggravation reading those assinine posts.

[edzontar]

121. Is there a way we can put those three letters on ignore?

I am so annoyed by this idiotic mantra that I could end up voting for Nader, just out of spite.

I wonder if these folks ever stop to consider that this whole boring effort might be counter-productive?

No evidence of this yet.

[West Coast Democrat]

132. Out of spite toward whom?

What's the old phrase about cutting off one's nose?

[edzontar]

135. I am just sick of ABB either way.

I don't like pledge drives.

I am in PA and have to vote which ever of the two losers is the final pick--isn;t that good enough for you?

It's ABB by virtue of geography.

[West Coast Democrat]

139. Gees....a bit bitter aren't we?

My guy isn't going to be the nominee either, but I'm not going to take it out on everyone.

[OKNancy]

125. People who aren't ABB

just don't hate Bush enough. They would rather have Bush, and all that goes with him. They don't care about Roe v Wade or gay rights.
They don't care if we go on to Syria or Iran. They don't care if the public schools are destroyed. They just have to have their way and by god they want it now.

John Kerry and John Edwards are liberals....got that LIBERAL DEMOCRATS.

[Desertrose]

134. wow...thats a broad brush.....

just because we see things a little differently you think we want Bush? that we don't care???? this is just really scary......holy shit....


I am amazed at this think like me or you're against me mentality here....


DR

[OKNancy]

140. What's scary about it..?

Too many overstatements. That's silly. It's just a post on an obscure corner of the internet. It's not like I or any other ABB are going to do anything about it. We are just expressing our opinion. My opinion is if you don't vote for the Democrat in November, then you are helping Bush and you don't hate him enough to do what it takes to get rid of him.

Maybe it will be DK...that means we will vote for him too.

[West Coast Democrat]

136. Thanks, Nancy. I agree

Not only am I ABB, but I'm excited about voting for the eventual candidate. I LIKE our guys and gals. I will vote with pride in November.

[edzontar]

137. Have you ever considered taking this debate to a more civil level?

You might get more with sugar than with brandishments of the wrath of the gods.

Just a suggestion.

[OKNancy]

141. Your posts doesn't make sense

what bandishments? What wrath? I'm just as civil as the non-ABB crowd.

Did I hit a nerve?

[West Coast Democrat]

142. What's that old phrase about the pot and the kettle?

[WillyBrandt]

145. What the hell? Kick.

[WillyBrandt]

146. Fuck it! Let's mock the anti-ABB guttersnipes. Kick again!

[MurikanDemocrat]

147. Because someone on a message board pissed me off

so now I'm not going to vote for the Democratic nominee.:eyes:

[KFC]

149. That one is beautiful

Probably the same people who trade stocks based on message board info.

[ButterflyBlood]

148. We deserve Bush is we don't nominate Kucinich!

Kucinich is God! Only Kucinich can save the world! Kucinich would carry all 50 states, you're an idiot if you think he's unelectable! If you don't vote for Kucinich you are worthless scum who deserves Bush!

Kucinich supporters have made me almost hate Kucinich, although I doubt he would endorse how childish they act.

[MurikanDemocrat]

150. I've never seen an obnoxious Kucinich supporter

Dedicated ones, for sure, but never with the name-calling like that.:shrug:

[Maddy McCall]

152. Kick

Great thread!