Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Punishing the Democrats didn't turn out so well in 2000."

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 » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-11 11:52 PM
Original message
"Punishing the Democrats didn't turn out so well in 2000."
"Punishing the Democrats didn't turn out so well in 2000. The Democrats themselves weren't punished, but millions and millions of people around the world were. Many at the cost of their lives. This isn't a game." --Russ Feingold
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Lunabelle Donating Member (344 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-11 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. No matter how pissed off I get
I will always vote, even if someone swears to me it doesn't count. I just can't not vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #1
28. Feingold did not say that. Laurence Lewis at DKos did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 02:34 AM
Response to Reply #28
73. It was quoted in another thread in a context that implied Feingold had said it.
From there I thought it deserved attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarLeftFist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-11 11:56 PM
Response to Original message
2. If you don't vote than you have no right to complain.
Edited on Sat Aug-20-11 11:57 PM by FarLeftFist
Edit: ALWAYS VOTE!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xicano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #2
22. That's not true!!!
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 12:21 AM by Xicano
While I myself always vote, I do not believe its right to tell someone who didn't that they have no right to complain.

Often times choosing not to vote is a vote in of itself. Its a vote which says you don't agree with any of the choices, so you abstain. For an extreme example: What if the only two choices were choosing between a murderer or a rapist? Would your not voting for either preclude you from complaining about what the winner does later? No of course not, and especially if you're a tax paying member of society.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #22
88. Abstaining from civic society means one has no influence on it
and no right to complain. Vote at least for some write in.

People on the fringes waste time if they complain. They have a big job to persuade a lot of people to vote their way. It's just complaining to rant on about how they do not.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xicano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #88
93. Voting for "None of the above" isn't abstaining from civic society
And anyone regardless of whether they voted or not has a right to complain about what decision makers do which affect them, especially if they pay taxes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #93
94. Yet it is
The person should run themselves if they have such an ego. And if so few people are willing to vote for a person, that person might want to consider whether they are right on things. People who are right should be able to convince at least a fringe. People doing worse than the tea party need to consider whether they have any valid ideas.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
murielm99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #2
35. I remember telling my brother that years ago.
He moved, and was "too busy" to change his voter registration. He wanted to vote for Carter.

When Reagan won, he did nothing but gripe. I would not listen.

After about the third time that I told him to stop griping, he registered to vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-11 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
3. Abandoning the base turned out well. The Dems got their GOP opposition
Republicans get the blame.

Powder remains dry.

Wash, rinse, repeat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
4. Wraith, really. I understand and appreciate what you're trying to do. But why bother?
I can't tell if the people here constantly screaming that both parties are the same or that they won't vote or whatever are serious or what. Who do these people honestly think that they will hurt if they don't vote? Why do they think that one of the most effective and sought after tactics by Republicans is voter suppression?

REPUBLICANS DON'T WANT YOU TO VOTE. Republicans WIN BIG when voter turnout is low as has been proven over and over and over again. So again, exactly WHO do these people think they are hurting if they don't vote?

The idea that anyone thinks that not voting for a Dem candidate will somehow make more liberal candidates magically appear on their ballots is the battle cry of the unhinged and under-medicated. Getting more progressive candidates on the ballot should be the goal, NOT sitting home and crying like an infant because they're not already there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #4
26. Punishing Democrats by not voting may not be a winning strategy,
but just expecting people to vote for the lesser evil seems to have the same result: people stay home on election day.

The lesser evil tactic would work better if people were legally obligated to vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Telly Savalas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #26
77. I'll take that to heart if I ever run for office.
But since I'm not running for office, my choice is restricted to whether I vote for the best option on the ballot or not.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #4
32. To bad the OP fabricated the part that Feingold said this. Because Feingold said no such thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #32
47. And? Do you think that changes the point I made?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #47
53. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #53
64. Wow. You sound healthy, rational and sane.
My point was in reference to what was said and not who said it. But based on the fact that you are running all up and down this thread "proving" that Feingold didn't say the quote, I'm not surprised you didn't get that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #64
67. Like I said. Post an OP that isn't tainted by this thread, and I'll respond. I refuse
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 01:44 AM by Luminous Animal
to engage in any substantive discussion in a thread that starts out with a disgusting blatant lie. I will not be part of legitimizing Rovian propaganda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SavWriter Donating Member (114 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
5. So we have LBJ two
And we console ourselves that it's the best we can do while we twist arms all over the world to keep our troops fighting and dying in this generations Quagmire. We don't dare commit to a full fledged war. We don't dare pull the troops out. How many more poor rural kids. How many more resident aliens will die trying to earn citizenship? How many inner city kids will join in desperation and die because it's the best we can hope for?

LBJ was a bad choice in 1964. Nixon was bad in 1968. But here is the kicker. We now sound like Nixon. We want peace, and we will reap the fruits of victory after the next escalation. We will achieve peace through slaughtering those who oppose our corporate imperialist rule.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SavWriter Donating Member (114 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
6. So we have LBJ two
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 12:04 AM by SavWriter
Sorry computer duped it. My apologies
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
7. Support DINOs or kill many around the world. That's the choice, eh?
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 12:10 AM by Skip Intro

What a blatant attempt at coercion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hughee99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 02:08 AM
Response to Reply #7
70. Is that the choice, though?
In '08, the Dems took the White House and controlled both houses of congress. Did the killing stop then? Support DINOs doesn't seem to prevent the killing of many around the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quaker bill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 07:26 AM
Response to Reply #7
75. The choice is the choice
describe it however you like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
8. K&R! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roselma Donating Member (297 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
9. I think we're going into 2012 with lots of discouraged
liberals thinking of either sitting this out, or voting for a third party candidate for president. If they sit the election out, then those coattails that would extend to Democrats in congressional races also suffer. Thing is...you won't see Republicans sit out an election. They get behind their nominee even if it means they have to pinch their nose while marking their ballot. If you wonder how Republicans have been so successful, it is because they never dislike their own guy enough to sit an election out. Also, I think they learned with Ross Perot's third party candidacy, that third parties are spoilers. It might feel good to vote for the third party guy, but there is a price to pay. They are probably still kicking themselves over Clinton and swearing that they'll never let that happen to them again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dameocrat67 Donating Member (442 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. in fact the republicans sat out on mccain, dole and george the firsts n/t
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cosmocat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 07:19 AM
Response to Reply #12
101. it took 8 years of the worst president in our lives
and a half senile and painfully desperate presidential candidate and complete flake VP candidate for the GOP to have a SLIGHT downtick in turnout.

Dems get a good, not perfect, but good president and are leaking support all over the place in the base.

Meanwhile, when the Rs had the worst president in our lives in office, they supported that disater 101 percent at least to got him reelected.

Rs are TOO loyal, the Ds not loyal enough.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
10. Feingold didn't say that did he? Isn't that a quote from the author of the article
who is talking about Feingold's statement?

So, those aren't Feingold's words.

http://iowaindependent.com/60363/russ-feingold-out-for-...

Nowhere in this article does it say Feingold said that.

However, in this article, the author does say it...and it is quite obvious that those are not Feingold's words....that quote belongs to the author.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/19/1008728/-Feing...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. Could be, but I wholeheartedly agree with it, no matter whose
words they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. 2000 was the year the SCOTUS gave the Presidency to Bush
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 12:10 AM by Solly Mack
If anyone punished the Democrats in 2000, it was the Bogus Scotus....not the voters.

Feingold would NEVER make such a stupid comment.

And it does matter who that quote belongs to...since it is being attributed to someone who didn't say it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #15
24. It was close enough for them to cheat in the first place. Had
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 12:24 AM by gateley
we walloped him, they wouldn't have been able to even get it to SCOTUS.

They never could/would have attempted it in 2008.

ETA: I still don't care who said the words - it's the sentiment with which I agree. If the OP mistakingly attributed it to Feingold, does that change the actual message?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #24
34. I happen to believe they had every intention of stealing Florida
regardless of how the vote went...with JEB Bush as governor and Harris in office.....the fix was already in. I also have reason to believe that the Bush team knew exactly how those 5 on the Supreme Court would vote.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #24
42. It was a coup, and it is time people wake up to that fact
the counting was stopped by GOP and CIA operatives. The stealing of the election had way too many things in common with operations in latin america.

It is time to stop blaming NADER and blame the GOP... they did steal it, and by the way GORE won.

People forget that he took it all the way to where he could peacefully take it. Listen to his statement the day he conceded. The next step was civil war.. and he wasn't willing to lead that.

It was a coup...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #42
82. And the Democrats for the most part were silent
and all too eager to embrace the SCOTUS appointment. I can not ever forget or forgive that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #82
91. I guess that was one of the reasons Gore was not willing to
go beyond where he did. There was zero support, except for the Black Caucus really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demosincebirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. +100
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #14
31. And you have no problem with the OP flat out lying?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #31
79. Ah, therein likes the difference between us. You're eager to judge and claim some
one a liar, when I believe the OP was mistaken. I trust my fellow DUers and we all make mistakes frequently (present company excepted?).

I saw the OP from which this was taken, and it could have easily been misconstrued as part of the Feingold quote - it wasn't clear that it was the author.

So what DOES bother me is someone baselessly calling someone else a flat-out liar, assuming the worst in others, and being judgmental.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #14
72. Honesty and accuracy would be desirable, don't you think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #72
80. Of course, but I saw the OP from which this was taken and it seemed
as though this was part of the Feingold quote -- which I thought it was, too. There's no lack of honesty in this OP, just an honest mistake.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #10
16. You are correct. It is a quote from the author of a DKos article that also quotes Feingold. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #16
19. But it will fly all over DU as a Feingold quote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #19
29. I'm sure you'll be flying all over right behind it crying "foul".
Honestly, I don't think this is going to go viral. If it does, it does. People who agree with it (me) aren't going to all of a sudden discount it because it was said by some writer.

People who don't agree won't all of a sudden think it's right just because it may be attributed to Feingold, as evidenced by some posts upthread (before you noticed the inaccuracy).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #29
37. Well, I guess if people are OK with a lie. Have at it!
It's not about agreeing or disagreeing with the quote...it's about lying about who said it.

Of which I have made perfectly clear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #37
87. It was a mistake - not a lie. I'm not okay with people judging others
without basis. I saw the OP from which this came, and I thought it was from Feingold, too. Honest mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:35 AM
Response to Reply #29
40. Feingold is a well respected Democrat. His opinion has weight. Attributing this quote to him is a
flat out lie. The OP should be taken down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #40
84. I couldn't agree more! eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #29
43. A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #29
46. Is that the tactic? Wasting our time debunking lies? Is this what we have to look forward to?
Obama supporters making things up in order to support their positions?

Really, you have to utilize lies? You support using Republican tactics against your fellow Democrats? Ugh. Pathetic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #46
58. Why not? It works for the Republicans, so why not the DLC. er,
Third Way, uh, New Democrats?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #10
30. Feingold did not say that. The OP is flat out lying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #30
39. I know. But well..you've read the thread. You see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #39
41. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #41
48. It's an appeal to authority...and insulting to Feingold.
Course, I'm sure the people cheering would never have a problem with words they didn't say being attributed to them. Snort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #48
50. The Wraith's post at the top of a google search. Congratulations to Wraith for catapulting the
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 12:49 AM by Luminous Animal
propaganda; i.e., a flat out blatant lie.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #50
54. I more amused than anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #54
55. I'm stil pissed. I still have hope that DU has more integrity than FR.
Though, I am thinking, now that we are allowed to make up quotes, I sure I can come up with 1000s of fake Obama quotes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #55
57. Don't do that. (Please) That would only feed into the bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #57
59. My OP is deleted. Thanks. I am a hothead paisano.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #59
60. Nah...just passionate. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dameocrat67 Donating Member (442 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
11. not surprised he advocates obama now
he did in 2008 as well.

as for 2000, there is little if any proof much would have changed if Gore won. Lieberman was his vp. All dlcers supported the iraq war resolutin and Gore was chairman of the dlc.

i doubt naderites thought it was a game. i also doubt they were punishing gore. they just did not like him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #11
36. Fake quote. Feingold never said that. NEVER.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #11
62. Gore was never Chairman of the DLC - he was a member, but
turned his back on them during the 2000 campaign, which kind of screwed things up as it wound up with a continuity break in the management of his campaign. It also meant that hardcore DLCer Lieberman was less than enthusiastic in supporting his own running mate. It left Gore with a mixed message that did not resonate with either the DLCers or the old Democratic base - and despite that he won anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RegieRocker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
13. The responsibility of satisfied democrats lies solely on the backs
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 12:08 AM by RegieRocker
of the elected democratic representatives period. They are to blame for any dissatisfaction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demosincebirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
17. True. We elected Nixon twice, because we were pissed at the Dems for
the Vietnam war
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OffWithTheirHeads Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. Who we Kimosabie?
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 12:18 AM by OffWithTheirHeads
I had the Dicks picture on my toilet seat so I could piss on him at every opportunity!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dameocrat67 Donating Member (442 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #17
23. wrong in 72 it was the war hawks that abandoned the candidate
who was antiwar George McGovern. The protoneocons like Richard Perle and Bill Kristol were responsible for that loss and we have been pandering to those shits ever since.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demosincebirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #23
95. No sir, we dems knew (I guess not you) that McGovern didn't have a
snowballs chance in hell to win. And yet, a certain faction of the Party pushed and pushed for his nomination and certain defeat at the polls. What good did that do? The war lasted another four plus years. Same thing happened in '68, but a different scenario all because a certain faction of the Democratic Party wanted it their own way come hell or high water. And guess what? Nixon elected for four years instead of Humphrey
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demosincebirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #23
98. Nah, we lost the election ourselves by bitching over whining. And that
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 10:13 PM by demosincebirth
riot we caused in Chicago...that kind of turned people off. You remember that. Or maybe we forgot who our enemy was. Not Democrats, the Republicans! The demonstrations, that turned into a big riot, should have been held at the Republican Convention, not at our Convention! Or maybe not at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #17
38. TheWraith is mistaken. Feingold never said that. The quote is from a DKos diary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #38
69. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
demosincebirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #38
96. I still agree with the statement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
20. How did expecting people to vote for the lesser evil work out?
If politicians don't earn votes, they won't win elections.

Punishing Democrats may not work, but just expecting people to vote how you want them to works about the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmallind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #20
76. It got us the last half of the Clinton miracle - fringe leftists whined about him too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:22 AM
Response to Original message
25. We won't face that dilemma if we nominate a credible candidate.
To wit: someone who isn't tied to the mistakes of the past and who isn't the prisoner of a flawed, non-Democratic ideology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:26 AM
Response to Original message
27. Feingold did not say that. Laurence Lewis at DKos did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU GrovelBot  Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:29 AM
Response to Original message
33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##



This week is our third quarter 2011 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

Click here to donate

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:40 AM
Response to Original message
44. So who was it, besides the far right, who was "punishing the Democrats"?
Feingold says...

"The entire political climate is more infected by the domination of very wealthy individual and corporate interests than perhaps at any time in our nations history. That is why I founded Progressives United, an organization devoted not only to overturning the Citizens United decision but to challenging those involved in the political process who, for short-term political gain, are willing to seek and accept unlimited corporate contributions. This practice should be strongly opposed regardless of party..."

It's clear he's saying corporatists are the problem. Which I agree with 100%. But is the OP intended to imply the corporatists punished the Democrats? How? By foisting Obama on the Dems as the candidate? I don't think so - that's not how Obama got the nomination.

As far as Laurence Lewis, he seems to be saying that, even though corporatists are the real problem, that we must necessarily support them, because they threaten us with even worse if we don't. He sounds like every other dipshit that tries to sell us on the "my way, disaster, and nothing else in the ENTIRE UNIVERSE" scenario. I automatically mistrust him, even before I read the article in detail and research whatever assertions are fact-based enough to be testable, though there isn't much.

And FWIW, neither article says anything whatsoever about the source or meaning of the "punishing the Democrats" meme.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:42 AM
Response to Original message
45. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:47 AM
Response to Original message
49. Unrec and alert. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:49 AM
Response to Original message
51. YOU made me hit YOU!!!!!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indurancevile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:50 AM
Response to Original message
52. unrec for false attribution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkhouston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:08 AM
Response to Original message
56. False attribution doesn't turn out so well, either.
Way to shoot your argument and your credibility in the foot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
61. pants on fire
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:35 AM
Response to Original message
63. Unrec.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:40 AM
Response to Original message
65. The Democrats WON in 2000. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:41 AM
Response to Original message
66. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:56 AM
Response to Original message
68. The Reality Based Community has left the building..
The "quote" in the OP is a blatant fabrication.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 02:17 AM
Response to Reply #68
71. Appears so. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnyxCollie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #68
90. Catapulting the propaganda.
It's not just for the GOP anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 03:00 AM
Response to Original message
74. Kicked and Recommended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
78. The cake is a lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 10:54 AM
Response to Original message
81. Unrec for putting words into Feingold's mouth.
:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
83. Even if Feingold didn't say it, the sentiment is correct.
"Punishing" the Democrats by withholding support only gets Republicans elected, and gets the American people and the rest of the world ass-fucked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnyxCollie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
85. So an OP lie can stand,
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 11:30 AM by OnyxCollie
but pointing out that it's the same tactic used by Lee Atwater gets deleted?

How much should I donate to continue "catapulting the propaganda?" :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #85
97. Nice, eh?
x(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
86. How do you influence your party?
When you have very little time or money, what leverage do you have aside from your vote?

When it comes down to it, many who threaten to withhold their votes are doing just that - threatening to gain some sort of influence. You can argue that following through with that threat is detremental to your own cause, but it is equally detremental to the party to ignore a significant base of their donors, volunteers and voters.

Responding to the threat with "then enjoy President Palin" will NEVER convince someone else to change their stance, because their need is for their voice to be heard and others - however logical their argument may be - are responding by shutting down the one thing they're seeking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
89. You are twisting the facts to suit your agenda
no one punished the Democrats and Russ did not say that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
92. Rewarding the Democrats in 2008 hasn't turned out so hot, either -
- and its still not a game. So, what's your point??? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 06:44 AM
Response to Original message
99. K & R
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RegieRocker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 07:02 AM
Response to Original message
100. Stop the spin...
Democratic politicians f##k ups hurt themselves in 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-11 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
102. "Punishing the Democrats didn't turn out so well in 2000."
Just like this thread.

The ideology behind it stinks....
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 Sat Jul 12th 2014, 04:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion 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