Polls, Dean, Television and Radios vs. Internet

[liberalmike27]

Clearly the polls have been all over the place. While we all like to see our guy at the top, certainly the wild swings they show, not only demonstrate the fluidity of situations now, but also the fact that they can't really be trusted completely. I know Dean supporters have the largest loyalty of any group, so that bodes well for him in caucuses. Often polls are used as a manipulative device, and can cause certain people to choose, or not choose a candidate. This is why I've not trusted the ARG poll, certainly it seems their is a motivation in that poll to show Dean as doing more poorly, and lift up other establishment candidates like Clark, Gephardt, and Kerry.
But I can't possibly be surprised that they show Dean dropping. Dean has received constant negative coverage, often on issues without merit, with very little mention of all of the good he's done. Much of it simply represents him bringing truths out that the media doesn't want openly discussed, like racial issues in the South, and how the safety here in America wasn't influenced by Saddam's capture in Baghdad, proven true just days after, by increased threat levels, canceling flights, and jet-escorts of incoming planes. Do you think he would have been reelected five times in Vermont if he didn't have myriad good qualities? I know in Alabama, if a governor gets through one term unscathed, he's doing well. But all negative all the time, will kill a candidate.
This whole Democratic Primary has been kind of an Internet against the other-media thing. The Internet is still David to the radio/television, right-wing Goliath. Many are wising up to the fact that the conventional media likes to mold the brains of the easily influenced people, like so much clay. They've certainly been doing a number on Dean supporters, present or future, trying to squeeze-out the will to vote for Dean. But people are waking up to the fact that the news media, every station, to some extent only represents the interests of the very wealthy. They are beholding to their advertisers, including all companies in the leviathan corporate-structures, so we can't really count on them to pick the candidate, can we. If anything, we should run toward any candidate that they are demonizing, Dean currently their horned, red trident-bearer, that creates their temblor of corporate fear.
Why are they so critical of Dean? The rarely published truth is, Dean's support is from poor to middle-class people, both on the Internet, and outside of the Internet, his average contribution being around $100, stupefyingly less than Bush's $2000 a plate appearances, or substantially higher amounts to fellow primary candidates. These corporate behemoths, are inordinately afraid that Dean will break up the media, for one, and that he might actually do things that will help people, especially America's workers. We all know, that if you help people, cut pollution, assure good wages, make sure folks have insurance so hospitals don't have to absorb indigent-care costs, and show concern for humans on a host of other issues, it hurts corporations. So, when Dean caught fire, corporations started to worry, and set about with their talking-head punditry extinguishing the looming corporate inferno. People are willingly herded to a candidate, like Clark (Republican), or Lieberman (nearly republican), or perhaps two of the most ingrained Insiders like Kerry or Gephardt, both nearing three decades in Congress, and on the receiving end of incredible amounts of corporate largesse. Corporations safe, the people have to wait another four years, perhaps longer for a people's candidate like Dean, American workers and America in general suffers more corporate rule, the Democratic Party continues to suffer, from the loss of soul involved with their support of corporate power, and the trend toward merging with Republicans.
Vote for Dean. No matter what comes out of their corporate mouthpieces, he is perhaps our last great chance to restore America to the fine example for the world, it once was. If you don't like him, at least try Edwards, who has had the least exposure to Washington, and has talked about many of the root-cause issues of the symptoms of America's corporate hegemony, like lobbyists, and campaign contributions. About all you can trust these days on the news is the weather. We have the power, as Dean is so fond of repeating, but if we give it away to the influence of the bearers of the corporate message, then we deserve the shoddy government we get in return.

[billbuckhead]

1. But isn't Dean the most Republican of the 2004 Dems?

10% of Vermont voters voted for a more liberal candidate in Dean's last election, he's had 8 NRA "A"'s, states rights, his Cato Institute speech where he said he's different kind of Democrat, his Confederate flag flaps, his anti-affirmative action stands.

[mouse7]

2. All of the BIG 6 candidates are to the right of Nixon

They are all moderates.

So, once you realize that NONE of them are really going to be to great on the issues, you're left with who can at least stop rightward creep the most. Dean has stood up loudly against the neo-cons. Clark is bright, seems to speak his mind, and would have wide coattails. Edwards has run an honorable campaign and has never run from his voting record.

Kerry and Gephardt have tried to be on both sides of the issues. Lieberman looks like he really believes some of the neo-con nonsense.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

3. How is Dean not the establishment candidate? He's a typical politician

using typical political tactics.