The so-called DU "Chicken Littles" WERE correct in 2004

[brentspeak]

Many of us (myself included) watched in dismay as Kerry's campaign did everything wrong on the way to Election Day; we could feel a Kerry presidency slipping away. But when we discussed all the mistakes, and possible solutions to them, there was an even more vocal contingent of DUers whose apparent mission (with orders from...??) was to respond on these forums like so:

"Kerry knows what he's doing, you don't."

"He's up in most of the polls, quit worrying."

"It's in the bag, I'm telling you. Kerry will win. There's nothing that needs to be done."

"Kerry has very talented people surrounding him; Bush is toast."

"Yawn. And the sky is falling."

Deja vu all over again.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

1. Voter suppression and Diebold are what did Kerry in.

[muffin1]

7. Obviously, those two things hurt us,

but after four years of Bush-the asshole, moran, war criminal, Kerry should have swept up votes like a Dyson. It should have been a freaking landslide in every state.

[Lorien]

11. Indeed. n/t

[Rosa Luxemburg]

78. The 2004 election was stolen

[MarjorieG]

12. You forget Bush was at 50 or more throughout, Katrina or continuing Iraq hadn't happened.

Actually, Kerry did better than expected, except to those running in 2008 and people who would rather blame others. Like Dems who didn't help out.

We need the whole Dem party to win this for us, but will they work it?

[muffin1]

19. WHY was Bush at 50 though?

And a great many people realized (or should have been made to realize by Kerry) that Iraq was a total sham by then.
I just remember screaming at my teevee for him to hammer them into the ground. I truly feel if he had fought harder and louder he could have done it.
And now that Katrina and continuing our debacle in Iraq has happened, and poverty is at an all-time high, unemployment is at an all-time high, bankruptcy filings are at an all-time high, and I could go on forever (as I'm sure we all could), things should be looking better for us by now.
I hope the whole dem party WILL step up, and not let this slip away from us again.

[babylonsister]

25. Because fear of terra worked, and that's what he was peddling. nt

[dmr]

83. Fear and Smear - what a combo!

Imagine an honest media debunking the ridiculous instead of propagandizing it ...

[LooseWilly]

95. Kerry was the un-Bush, but..

The problem was manifold (and painful to watch).

1. Kerry was too intellectual/"patrician" in his speech, and made for an easy target that way.

2. Bush was a sitting "war-time" president, and the MSM was only beginning the tentative process of pulling its collective head out of its collective ass.

Of course, a string of irrefutable (or at least not satisfactorily irrefutable for any but the 'mindless-foot-soldiers-of-conformity') string of incompetencies had not yet occurred either... and implications of impeachable offenses had not yet come to light... and the record numbers of days of vacation... and record numbers of days travelling (is there overlap?, I'm not sure)... and... well... there was the ease of painting Kerry as a Hippy (the favorite boogeyman of the right) because of his activities after returning from Vietnam... and his mistake of not taking seriously just how many mouth breathers out in the electorate might take the "swift boat" mis-representations and twisting of the facts seriously.

All told, Kerry's run, to me, seemed reminiscent of the courage it must've taken for him to jump off that little boat and charge the dude with the rpg back in Vietnam.
There was an air of a suicide charge on a bunker from a Clint Eastwood movie about the War in the Pacific to the whole campaign from the start.


I can't, and couldn't back then, help but notice that Hillary opted not to charge that particular electoral nightmare.


That aside. This time around, there are a number of things about the Republican position that are considerably weakened... and Obama seems to be an incredibly intelligent man and absurdly quick learner. He seemed to learn from NH in the primaries, and he seems to me to have learned a lot more from the Hillary attack machine... I suspect that his quickness to learn, the clumsy (almost ham-fisted) approach being taken by McCain, and the essential difference of the ending of the "benefit of the doubt" that might've aided Bush when he and the Republicans had just begun their rampage to completely fuck up and gut the country, as opposed to now when even the MSM seems to have caught on to the fact that most of the country has been bled nearly dry by this sack-of-meat with reservations on Airforce One...

I think it's safe to say that the only hope for McCain is to scare the piss out of the electorate... make the "darkie" scary.
Ironically, I'm lately getting the feeling that portions of the Democratic party are falling for it.

What the hell though?, right? It's a democracy... if the majority is so deeply fucked up that the prospect of an intelligent president who may not be 30+ years in office experienced... but is so obviously quick a learner that he was able to outmaneuver a 30+ year experienced politician with a 500-fold advantage in name recognition and win the primary... if that kind of obvious brilliance scares the Republic more than the old man who has changed positions so many times that trying to keep up with it feels like an exercise in mental yoga, just because the electorate feels more comfortable with a man who's so white that looking at him and his wife makes me think of snow-blindness...

Well, what the hell?... power to the people.

[bridgit]

32. Those elements should have been taken into consideration well in advance...

They should have been anticipated. But rather, those excuse utterly & completely notwithstanding and adding a whole other level of mis-management; Kerry stood dead in the water for nearly three weeks while his staff tried to get their heads around this 'swift boating' phenom; which is in reality no older than the intrigues against John Adams or Caesar if you prefer, in addition...

Kerry is well known as another, who speaks with his silver, august tongue all the way round the block, the point, the horn, and the rodeo all four. Republicans do not merely show up to the game, they show up to WIN!

Then...the sky falls down. It's time to get busier than excuses will ever allow

[GreenPartyVoter]

33. Without a doubt. And of course they did Gore in as well

[Phx_Dem]

64. That is exactly right.

The swiftboating hurt him and, technically, cost him the election because it made it so close, but the Diebold crap that happened (behind closed doors) in Ohio and voter supression in Florida did him in.

It's like saying Bush beat Gore in 2000. He didn't. The Supreme Court did (with the help of Republican voter suppression and election tampering in Florida).

[LVjinx]

81. Well, just imagine if he'd shown some spine and contested the results, then.

[Marie2]

94. There seems to be a consensus

From the right and the left that the electronic machines are unreliable and too subject to tampering.

I think it should be fairly easy to have the nation return to paper ballots - at least punch cards that can be understood "by hand" and by the naked eye in cases of suspected fraud.

Perhaps paper ballots or punched cards can be machine tabulated on election night, but then manually re-checked over the next weeks to certify.

I read recently that Ohio just decided that the machines couldn't "sleep over" at election official's houses. I can't believe they ever let them do that in the first place.

[WeDidIt]

2. My broken clock is right twice each day n/t

[blogslut]

3. This VP stuff is making the kitties go wild

It's entertaining.

[ProSense]

4. In 2004,

Kerry lost Ohio by 118,000 votes. There were nearly 400,000 black votes suppressed (as determined by every report from Conyers' to Carter-Baker). As a result, Bush got 11 percent of the black vote in Ohio, 3 percent higher than the national average in that election.

That doesn't include the machine errors and other election tampering. All Kerry needed was 60,000 votes to shift from Bush to win.

If you're going to use 2004 as an indication of what could happen in 2008, then you're assuming the Republicans will employ the same tactics. Otherwise, there is no comparison.

[Doctor_J]

42. You don't think they will suppress votes again this year?

How is life in Fantasy Land? :crazy:

[ProSense]

59. Did I say that?

All the variables, do you really believe they're going to steal (actually steal, not attempt) another election?

Should we just give up: Democrats are destined to lose from now on?

[Doctor_J]

69. Destined to lose until we fundamentally alter the playing field

And the first steps toward that are

1. Stop saying "we have better candidates, therefore we'll win"
2. Stop "playing chess" when the Repukes are playing dodgeball.

[blm]

5. Kerry won. Those saying McAuliffe's DNC didn't secure Ohio and other states'

election process for Dem voters are the ones who got it right - Rove and his RNC and GOP officials who gained control of every level of the election process where the votes are allowed, cast and counted were able to steal another election.

[TwilightGardener]

6. I'll always take overreaction to sitting still--always.

[Median Democrat]

8. So, What Are You Going To Do About It?

Is it just a coincidence? Is there a magical strategy that will cause Fox to cover the Democrats fairly and the corporations?

[DainBramaged]

9. You forgot to add polls don't matter yet.

Unfortunately, polls DO matter, and McSame is having a devastating effect on Obama without standing for anything. There are too many people in this country who do not WANT change, and who want the status quo to remain, along with just being ignorant about politics, and voting for Obama is voting for change like we've never seen in our history, voting for Gramps is safe.


Too many people like safe. We have to be very afraid.

[RaleighNCDUer]

14. The reality, of course, is that voting for McCain is a vote for change

like we've never seen before.

It would be Bush on steroids - a permanent security state.

The end of US democracy.

THAT's a change I could do without.

[Lorien]

10. Yep, same fools pulling the strings at the DLC/ DNC

and none of us will ever really know who any of them are.

A close friend of mine works with a guy who has been one of Terry McCauliff's (sp?) best friends since college. My friend's coworker is also a loyal Dem and during 2000 he was on the phone with Terry screaming "What the hell, man! Slam them on this "he says he invented the internet" crap! Have Gore talk about the environment, and not just this hand wavy " I will fight for you" nonsense! This campaign is fucking pathetic"! and Terry would respond "I know, I know, but they won't let us". Who the hell are they?? He would never answer, but THEY are still in charge, fucking things up by abandoning the base, standing for nothing and running toward the Right. Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? Maybe "they" don't WANT a different results! :shrug:

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

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

[QueenOfCalifornia]

15. Shhhhh

You need to be very quiet about this shit in here or you will be labeled as a troll or a PUMA.

McCain keeps rising in the polls - at least the polls which are being promoted to the general public - and polls do make a difference. People are so stupid that they want to vote for the "winner."

I am disgusted.

BTW, I recommended your op.

----

Gilligan

[SuperTrouper]

16. Chicken Littles are correct sometimes and we are out again seeing Obama's fall in fortunes

[calimary]

57. 'Fraid I'm with ya on that.

I hope TO GOD that I'm wrong. But he's not going for the jugular, which is what many Americans like to see. Some of these voters just plain ol' LIKE a fighter. Regardless what he or she is fighting for. Probably why Hillary was able to stay in it for so long. She was/is a fighter and she earned respect. I even heard one female republi-CON operative saying that people gravitate toward the GOP "because WE fight." Maybe it's just a throwback to all the little ninnies on the playground who were first to gather around a dust-up and yell "FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!"

There's also the attitude (which I find VERY understandable, and I share it) of - if he wants it so badly, why doesn't he fight for it??? Hmm... didn't fight that hard? Must not have wanted it that much. SAME THING when Kerry got swiftboated. The reaction out in voter land was "well, he's not fighting it. Is he fighting back? No? Why isn't he fighting back against this? Hmm... guess it must be true then..."

Look, I hate it, too. I don't want to have to fight and sling mud and dig up dirt and go sleazy. I'd rather not lower myself, either. But in this day and age, WE HAVE TO! We don't have a choice. We HAVE to fight with EVERYTHING we've got, and yes, go dirty, hit as far below the belt as we can reach, do shitty things, say shitty things, and go nearly thermo-nuclear. That's what it takes to win anymore. That's the ONLY thing that gets you into the winner's circle. We've HAD the issues in now THREE consecutive presidential election cycles. We've HAD the issues. America is and was with us on ALL the issues. But America didn't vote that way sufficiently. ENOUGH voters were scared stupid or believed the dreck and the lies that the election got close enough to steal. And sure enough, it got stolen.

And I suspect that's all these mcsame people want. To get close enough to steal it. Because their friendly secretaries of state in strategic states with their friends at Diebold can take it from there. And if it's close enough so that it "could" go either way, then nobody will get suspicious and start asking any questions when they flip it. That goes QUADRUPLE for the media.

[Clark2008]

67. Fight? Obama, fight?

Hell, from where I'm sitting, he took one of his best FP advisors and "cut him loose," just like McCain asked, no demanded, him to do.

Some fight.

[olkaz]

17. Obama has Axelrod.

They're already defeated the most well-funded, well-connected, well-known campaign in years.

I think things are different this time.

[Bake]

18. Then why on earth is his campaign so lackluster?

Especially when it was flawless in the primaries? Did Axelrod go on vacation too?

Bake

[WeDidIt]

20. Even Markos Moulitsas said the same thing

last summer when Obama wasn't "taking it to Hillary".

Those screaming for the gloves to come off were wrong then, just like they're wrong now.

Obama knows what he's doing.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

26. Because you touch yourself at night.

Lackluster?

Oy.

[Bake]

34. I call it lackluster when you blow a substantial lead

and are now constantly on the defensive. What do you call it (without resorting to junior high school insults).

Bake

[ellacott]

21. Most of the "Chicken Little" just complain on message boards

There was complicity with the media that aided in Kerry's defeat.

Most people who complain don't do anything to help. Write some letters, make some calls. It's not entirely up to Obama.

[Major Hogwash]

22. Everything has changed since Hurricane Katrina, the 3rd anniversary of which is a few weeks away.

Even the news people saw how bad FEMA under Bush worked.
Aaron Brown was fired from CNN for reporting what was going on in New Orleans.

Bush's National Disgrace was on every cable channel all day long!!!!

Even Republicans were appalled.

Most of the "chicken littles of 2004", as you call them, were wrong for the reasons they had for complaining.
Complaining nonstop for months on end is not conducive for discussion.
And I commend Skinner for taking the necessary steps he was forced to take in order to deal with many of those "chicken littles of 2004".

I don't miss any of the grenade throwers from this year's primary, either.
Flamers should be dismissed if after they have had time to make their point, they are only here to disrupt the entire board.

[dbonds]

23. Kerry did win, he could have won by more though.

2004 was stolen. But I agree with the premise that he could have done better.

[unblock]

24. obama's no kerry.

he may not be perfect, but he's a much stronger candidate than kerry AND the political/economic backdrop is MUCH better for now for democrats than it was 4 years ago.

[musicblind]

27. The people who do not learn from history

are always surprised.

[yardwork]

28. Kerry's team made a lot of mistakes but Obama's team is not making mistakes.

My greatest frustration with Kerry in 2004 was that his website never mentioned the attacks made by the media and never refuted them. I'd go to this website to find his military record, his voting record, etc., and they were never there. I had to search around for the information - all of which made Kerry look good! - from third sources.

Obama's team, in contrast, published the refutation to Corsi's swiftboating a day after the book came out. Anytime I see a lie about Obama circulating, I can go to his website and find the truth right there at my fingertips.

I agree that we should continue to help watchdog the campaign. However, there are concern trolls here on DU who love to drag crap over from their right-wing masters and slap it up on our boards. Fie on them.

[nolabels]

51. Yea, but playing it nice won't cut it in the end either

In addition to refuting and smacking the liars around with some good ole truth, Obama should be hammering away, 24/7 on the wheelbarrows full horseshit the republicans have saddled the electorate with. Non-stop on how the pond-scum has mucked so much up.

[yardwork]

55. I expect that Obama will pull out the negative ads after the conventions.

That's when things generally get dirty. Until the conventions are over, the usual approach is sweetness and light. Of course mccaint has jumped the gun (he's offsides) but that's probably because his ads now will look nice compared to the crap he's probably going to spew in September and October.

I predict a very very ugly couple of months right before the election. mccaint will pull out all the stops - racist, lying, swiftboating ads against Obama - and I fully expect Obama to link mccaint with bushco.

[Liberal Dose]

29. I was a Chicken Little in 2004

screaming at Donna Brazille (among others) who didn't even have the first clue how to explain Kerry's statement, "I voted for it before I voted against it" and made no mention of Kerry's statement from the Floor when he voted "yes" on the IRW. These things were easily explained by all of us here at DU, but those representing Kerry couldn't come up with anything but the deer-in-the-headlights look. It pissed me off, and in the end it just sucked all the hope out of me.

[Liberal Dose]

30. Aside from the fact that Ohio was stolen. nt

[beachmom]

47. You remind me of how bad Democratic surrogates were. And so called liberal pundits.

They were less than useless for Kerry.

[Liberal Dose]

52. Where do we apply for that job! nt

[Barack_America]

31. So hopefully they learned their lesson and are out volunteering for Obama this time. nt

[brentspeak]

62. I did volunteer for Kerry last time

A lot of volunteers had the same "bang your head against the wall" feeling that I did. It's up to the campaign's upper-management (and Obama) to listen to the rank-and-file.

[mkultra]

35. even a broken clock is right twice a day

[Lilith Velkor]

36. Yyyup. n/t

[JackORoses]

37. this isn't 2004 and Obama is definitely not Kerry

but cock-a-doodle-doo all you want Chicken Little, what else do you have to do?

[SuperTrouper]

41. As far as we know

:eyes:

[JackORoses]

45. he's not muslim either, as far as you know, huh?

[blondeatlast]

38. Kerry was up against an incumbent. Obama isn't. nt

[Awsi Dooger]

48. Not only an incumbent

An incumbent with his party in power for only one term, the most favorable scenario imaginable. 2004 was always smack uphill but DU failed to acknowledge it.

In 2008 an open race is normally a slight edge to the out party. But the factors of lousy economy, unpopular war and Bush at 30% or lower approval rating for 3 years gives us more of a natural bump.

Nominating a black or woman was going to cut into our edge. That's simply reality. And no doubt we were fooled by the ease of 2006. This cycle was never going to be similar to the massive situational edge of a second term midterm. I warned about that more than a year ago. But I'm not worried. It should be a narrow victory. Big picture is more vital than day to day hysteria over recency. This thread fails to point out that the big picture in 2004 favored Bush.

[LittleClarkie]

39. That I could deal with. It was the jokes about the long face that got me.

How hard could a person be working for Kerry if they're making fun of him.

This time around, critique all you want, constructively. That's all I personally ask. Constructive criticism. That's all DU asks as well. If you've not been deleted, you're doing okay, never mind what other folks are saying to you.

[beachmom]

46. Actually, that was the problem in '04. When I have stumbled upon

threads from back then, it was either pot shots at Kerry like the one you cite OR people staying positive and enthusiastic for Kerry. I saw little constructive criticism, as in intelligent posts explaining what he needed to do. Instead it toggled between primary sour grapes and very positive support, with nothing in between. In fact, I think a lot of people thought the Swifts were backlashing on BUSH when it was happening and then after Kerry lost in November, the SAME PEOPLE said Kerry ran a piss poor campaign, should have fought back, etc. In other words, big time revisionism occurred post Nov. 2004.

[StuffyJones]

40. It will be a sad day if Obama loses nt

[americanstranger]

43. Wait a second.

The line of thinking I'm seeing here is that because Kerry was up in the polls in August and went on to lose in November, that Obama will suffer the same fate - and the apparent Trigger For All This Anxiety is the Zogby poll that has McCain up by 5.

But wouldn't the Trigger For All This Anxiety - that McCain is currently up by 5 in a Zogby poll - be an indicator that McCain is destined to lose in November?

I mean, considering that the model many of the Anxious Democrats (TM) are buying into relies on the thesis that every election - regardless of mood of the voters, economic issues, candidates' strengths and weaknesses - plays out exactly the same, every single time (/snark), isn't it McCain who is doomed here and not Obama?

Can you clear this up for me, please? I'm not sufficiently doom-struck today, and I'm feeling slightly out of place here. Maybe if I go change into black clothes, put on some Emo and pull the shades it'll get me into the appropriate mood.

- as

[amborin]

92. no

it's not just the zogby poll

a bunch of prominent progressives have recently expressed alarm at Obama's campaign

[AllentownJake]

44. So all the armchair strategist out there

What exactly do you accomplish with all your concerns? Just curious? Even if you are "right"

What is your action plan other than engaging in flame wars on the internet?

[mistertrickster]

49. I agree. Obama has a long slog ahead of him, and the Pukes are going

to attack him with everything they've got and a lot of what they don't got (truth doesn't matter).

Obama needs to start swinging with intent to kill.

[Egnever]

50. it was the chicken littles that gave us Kerry in the first place

Dean was the man when we stepped away from him for the safe candidate we lost. Dont fall into the trap of becoming the safe candidate using the same old formula again. One would think you learned not to do that last time around. Obama is doing just fine, he was on vacation last week, theres months to go and he is still ahead.

[apnu]

53. Word.

Its long been time that Dems need to quit playing the safe game and take some changes. Kerry had the appeal of cardboard... sorry folks but he does. He played it safe, which was the wrong move. The voting body of this country has said for a long time they want easy to understand, fiery and battling politicians. The GOP has been giving them that for years and its the only reason, IMO, they are still a viable political party.

We gotta take that page and run with it. Dean got that, did that and it was great. But the primary voters didn't, they went for Kerry (not me, I went with Dean) Obama gets it, but he's got some assholes around him that hold him back. They should let go and have Obama be Obama and put the boxing gloves on. Swing hard at McCain and let nothing be sacred, because you know that the Repukes will toss everything at Big O.

He comes out swinging and the polls will swing our way. All we have to do is back him up.

[demo dutch]

54. Eh, that why I log onto DU rarely now adays!

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

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

[Splinter Cell]

58. LOL

What bullshit. I'm so sick and tired of people sitting at their computer acting like they know how to run a presidential campaign. First of all, Kerry won. Period. He got fucked over just like Gore. I live in Butler County, OH, and it's as GOP as it gets. Kerry won the election. Most folks around here are lifelong Rethuglicans, and many voted for Kerry. He was our best choice, and nobody else would have done as well, with the exception of General Clark. Not Dean, or Kucinich, or Edwards, or anyone.

So instead of bitching about things, start working that much harder to make this happen. This sky is falling crap helps nobody, and I'm tired of the way our party bitches and moans all the time. I'm also tired of the fair-weather sailing. Let's win, not whine.

[GoesTo11]

60. My gut is better about this time

Just had a feeling Gore and Kerry would find ways to lose (remember Gore back then was less authentic than Gore today).

Have the same feeling that Obama will just find a way to win (and McCain will find a way to lose). I've known people who are fundamentally nice, but are also competitive as hell. Good athletes. Clutch players. Obama's one of these. The last couple weren't. Bill C. - competitive as hell. GWB - competitive as hell. McCain? Competitive isn't quite the right word for him - there are some people who just won't give the possibility of losing any credence. McCain has made his peace with losing. The hug shows what his killer instinct is. Let's be patient.

[Straight Shooter]

61. Don't forget election day. Thread after thread, I saw the word "Landslide!"

I can't begin to tell you how much it gave me the heebie-jeebies.

Okay, maybe I'm superstitious, but when I see "Obama will win in a landslide" on DU threads this time around, it feels like someone is walking on my grave. Deja vu indeed.

[DemBones DemBones]

63. My favorite was "Kerry is playing chess."

If he was, he sacrificed his queen very early, and tipped his king before he had to.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

68. Boy does that take me back.

Remember "Democratic Strategist" telling everyone the little people don't have a clue about this bog-boy stuff?

[brentspeak]

75. Dem_Strategist

Here's one of his (her's?) first paternalistic posts. He promises to "reveal my (Dem_Stragist's) identity immediately following the election." I think we'll all still waiting -- four years after the fact.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=612933&mesg_id=612933

[QC]

72. Ah yes. And those of us who were not carrying on like Little Suzy Sunshine

were merely playing checkers and needed to shut up, sit down, and learn from the superior intellects.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

[Naturyl]

65. Yeah, you're right.... BUT

The majority of DUer's (myself included) still have a very valid point that excessive defeatism must not be encouraged. Some constructive criticism is okay in my book. But when there are a flood of "concern trolls," it really can erode morale and de-motivate people.

Obama is better candidate than John Kerry was in a number of important ways. The political climate is also better for us this time around. We have a very reasonable chance at winning this and we need to stay focused on doing just that. In all honesty, I can't deny that it could go either way, but I remain fairly optimistic about our prospects.

[DailyGrind51]

66. Kerry's failure to respond to the "Swiftboat attacks" diminished his chances.

[QC]

70. Don't forget: "They don't poll people with cell phones, so they're missing the youth vote!"

How many times did we hear that one last time?

[last_texas_dem]

76. What's funny (well, not "ha ha" funny) is how many times I'm *still* seeing that one

this time around. No candidate should ever bet on the youth vote. I don't think Obama is betting on it, but many DUers seem to be putting their faith in it coming through for him to a great degree. If it does end up coming through for him in a big way that will be awesome and icing on the cake if he wins, but I believe there are too many examples from fairly recent history that demonstrate that it is not something worth counting on.

[QC]

90. Very true.

It will be great if they turn out, but they might also be too busy putting enormous grommets in their earlobes to make it to the polls ;-)

[wolverinez]

80. ahhhhhh that one was a classic!

nm

[QC]

93. Now there's a whole thread for it!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6682577

[Sparkly]

71. It's like recognizing reality = lack of "positive thinking" = dangerous

I'm concerned that the campaign is making mistakes, and on a few key matters, doesn't "get it," retail-wise. I'm worried the job of winning is going to be very difficult if they name an unhelpful VP, and I'm sure that's what they're about to do.

And I was one of the ones who felt pretty secure about John Kerry!!

I see no danger in discussing the challenges and hoping they'll be minimized.

[QC]

73. Yes. Saying the wrong things might anger the gods. n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

74. A - Fucking - Men

I am always amazed that I have to fight MY OWN PARTY and MY OWN FELLOW TRAVELERS more than thoe with whom I have deep disagreements.

God help he who questions the anointed one du jour.

[last_texas_dem]

77. K and R

Your post sums up my feeling on this subject exactly.

And to all of the "speak no evil of the Obama campaign" folks on here who say, "But what are the critics doing besides whining on a message board?" I say, "Well, what are those keeping their heads in the sand about potential problems and ignoring even constructive criticism of the campaign doing besides rah-rah-ing on a message board?" I've seen no evidence that those trying to realistically assess the situation are less likely to be helping out the campaign or are any less likely to desire an Obama victory.

[galloglas]

79. Kerry's most famous words

though not spoken aloud to us, are taken from Marlon Brando.

"I coulda been a contender!"

[flvegan]

82. No. Kerry won. The election was stolen. The Dems did NOTHING about that.

End of story.

[amborin]

84. Exactly....deja vu all over again

i worked hard for a Kerry win, all the while very dismayed at the lackluster way his campaign was being run

now it's a repeat of 2004....a super lackluster campaign and a sure Dem victory being squandered

of course, then as now, the response of any du-er to any criticism of the campaign is either vicious attack, or magical thinking optimism

[inthebrain]

85. Obama is just starting to hit back and sling mud

Kerry waited until about three weeks before the election to do that.

This ain't 2004 all over again.

It's August and Obama is taking out the knives.

[BlooInBloo]

86. Therefore they're ALWAYS right. Because everything that happens is JUST LIKE Kerry 04.

[McCamy Taylor]

87. The polls said Kerry would win---however I knew election fraud would steal it.

I recall Will Pitt posting that the polls clearly said Kerry would win and I agreed with him. However I posted a caveat which was that there was election fraud in Ohio and Florida that could change the outcome.

On election day, when I heard that Blackwell tried to keep exit pollsters far away from the polls so that their exit polls would be inaccurate, I knew that the fix was in, and I blogged as much. That was before any results were in and before the first suspicious exit poll/total results came in.

If you keep your eyes and ears open you can figure out any election. I also figured out 2000 in advance, namely that Gore would have won easily except for the Nader spoiler effect.

It is much too early to predict this election, so calm down. Things can change wildly. In the past, they usually change for the worst for the Democrat. However, with the way that McCain is abusing the press and the way that the economy is tanking, the press may turn against McCain, in which case, things could start looking better for Obama as election day nears. So, do not despair. Only the oil industry and the insurance industry really truly support McCain. All the rest can easily be won over by Obama. Even telecommunications.

[senseandsensibility]

88. I see you were a DUer then

I was too. I was accused of being a concern troll, etc. I was condescendingly told that Kerry was "playing chess" and I was too stupid to understand his "strategy." Although I love Kerry to this day and did everything I could to ensure a Kerry victory (including volunteering countless hours and contributing the maximum allowable), I know that the Dems had no strategy. I and other DUers were slammed for saying the simple truth. When you don't learn from history (even a mere four years ago), you are doomed to repeat the same mistakes...

[chknltl]

89. THIS chknltl wasn't here then... I DID predict a Kerry win though

I could not have factored in the diebold stuff and I had never heard of voter caging. WHY? Because I was NOT online back then!

Today I am online, a member of DU. I know what voter caging is and that it is going on AGAIN. I know that diebold is going to steal a phenomenal percent of the vote AGAIN. I know that the MSM is keeping us informed with the kind of propaganda that has many believing this to be a close race-that mCain is actually something other than an angry old fart who is too senile to run a PTA meeting.MANY MANY more folks are online these days, the front-line fight for this Presidency is very much being waged over the internet! Furthermore the turnout among the new-first time voters is supposed to be phenomenal with most of that vote going against the republicans. The bush war is now seen as the fiasco it truly is, the middle class has bee damaged even harder and in larger numbers than it was in '04.

Lastly I am counting on that fictional character that the MSM paints as a Maverick getting revealed for what he is. It's all an act, Ronald Regan without the acting experience-I believe he will fumble or more likely be made to fumble when the time is appropriate. I believe that Senator Obama knows that mCcain is NOT what the cons want us to believe he is. That recent cone of silence fiasco illuminates mCcain's weakness here-his handlers may not be able to cover for him next time. I believe that the Obama campaign intends to shine a bright light in those shadows and before too long the world will see the angry senile puppet that is mCcain.

The REAL numbers of the American electorate who are voting for Dems or against repugs is likely astonishingly high. I am predicting that regardless of everything the cons are pulling this time, this race will not be close enough for them to steal! We will gain the White House as well as more House and Senate seats. If not, then God Help us because We The People have utterly and thoroughly lost democracy in this country. Some here think that this is already the case. Call me stubborn but I have not given up on the citizens of this country. I think it will be the cons who get surprised this time. The whole world is counting on it.

........................................................................................................................................

[amborin]

91. yep

i posted here under a different name back then, and any time any concernful posts occurred, i and other similar posters were essentially told to go stifle ourselves

i don't think 2004 was stolen; yes, irregularities occurred in Cuyahoga county (can't remember the exact spelling now), but Kerry should have won in a landslide---more than enough to override any possibly stolen votes

now, it's not that Obama is exactly replicating Kerry's failed campaign; it's rather that, since getting the nomination, Obama appears to have adopted a passive, reactive campaign; and, his message isn't clear, honed, forceful enough; he's got to get the independents on his side; and, he's got to get the working class white vote energized. I just don't seem him succeeding with either. Go ahead, flame me all you want.

[Political Heretic]

96. Well, considering he probably won in 2004....

not sure any of what you are saying is the reason he is not in the white house.

[RedShoes]

97. Did they thank you for your "concern"?

Because if Obama loses this thing, and I HIGHLY doubt he will without them stealing it (again) I will wish a pox on the head of every backward "em-effer" that thought it'd be a good idea to take a shit on half his base.