Poll: Is Dean just another Ralph Nader that will divide the swing vote?

Is Dean just another Ralph Nader whom the Republicans will sponsor like Nader to divide the swing vote?

http://antiwarmonger.com

Because I love irony. Many people's tax cuts are already going to Dean. How about some more republican money contributing to their downfall?

will it matter? He said he wouldn't run as an independent, so from where would he siphon votes? Repugs can give him all the money they want...and vote for him, too.

prominent repubs want, they say it openly.

Perhaps it is at work here.

I don't know if I agree with this argument...but it reminds me of what happened in Florida last year...I can't really remember what happened in Florida with Jeb/Janet/Bill, though. Did Jeb want to run against Reno, so he hyped Bill? Or did he want to run against Bill so he hyped Reno?

...unlike Nader, Dean has said without reservation that he will support the nominee, as will the vast majority of his supporters. Let the Rove operatives shoot themselves in the foot. I know several republicans that started supporting Dean for Rove, but upon closer examination, thought that since they agreed with Dean on so much, maybe they were liberals after all...then they realized Rove is just a liar and an opportunist, and now they are sincere Dean supporters and can't stand Bush. It takes time, but it's happening all over...

I don't think anyone has reliable information on what his supporters will do. Many of his supporters, according to Dean supporters here, have never been involved in politics before. They're so inspired by Dean (and no one else) that if he loses they'll stay involved with a candidate they feel is inferior to Dean? Really?

Some of his supporters won't vote for a pro-war candidate, and some of his supporters are Greens. Some of his supporters are Republicans, and won't vote for a liberal like Kerry. That's what Dean supporters tell us. 'Dean's support comes from everywhere'. So do you see how it is hard for me to assume that that support would all go to a Democrat if Dean is not the nominee?

I, as a supporter of another candidate, would feel more secure if that indeed were the case.

I and almost every single other DU poster who is a Dean supporter have said we would vote for whomever gets the nomination.

Why do you assume everyone who wants Dean will just not vote if he doesn't get it? You always have to be so hateful towards us when you have absolutely no proof that en masse we will all just "stay home on Election Day."

In my post, in the first line, I SAID I don't think anyone knows what Dean supporters will do. And, I agreed that the majority of supporters *AT DU* supporters have said they'll vote for another candidate (it was my subject line!). Dean has supporters that don't come to DU, doesn't he?

I didn't even say that ALL Dean supporters will stay home. I just said it was hard FOR ME to believe they would ALL support the Democrat.

Show me, where was I hateful?

Ask a question around here, express a concern, get called hateful.

Great.

"So do you see how it is hard for me to assume that that support would all go to a Democrat if Dean is not the nominee?"

Do you really think there are that many Greens for Dean that they will all just defect to "Candidate X" for the Green Party? Don't you think maybe they were hammered enough last time, that they will surely do anything to keep Bush from being re-elected?

The Independents (like myself) and Dems who have dropped out of the process in the last few elections are interested again. Why would we simply make a 180 turn and vote Bush, or not vote if Dean isn't there? That is a belittling sentiment in which you assume we are children who will throw a tantrum if Kerry or whomever gets the nomination.

That negative assumption is always brought up about Dean supporters. Never about the Kucinich or Kerry supporters who vehemently hate Dean. So really, who will THOSE PEOPLE vote for if Dean gets it?

You're putting meaning in there that wasn't. I was not at all implying that Dean supporters are tantrum throwing children. If I wanted to say that, I would have.

The reason that no one makes this assumption about Kerry or Kucinich--they are not attacking (for lack of a better word) and expressing discontent with their own party. I don't think it's a leap to say that Dean is appealing to those who are upset with the Dem party as well as Bush. If you don't feel Dean is doing that, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Will the Kucinich and Kerry supporters vote for Dean if he gets the nomination? I don't see how they can since so many of their posts here and Kucinich's public statements say how dreadful Dean is. They HATE HIM. So, to assume that they will vote Dean because they don't express discontent with the party is not a clear answer to me.

Yes, there are sentiments by Dean supporters that the rest of them acted like Bush lite when they voted for the war...but why would we shoot ourselves in the foot by just not voting if one of them gets the nomination? That is just a veiled insult.

They are committed to voting for whichever Democrat is nominated and have an interest in the Democratic party.

Again.

What Dean supporters HERE HAVE SAID is that Dean's support comes from everywhere. Why would disenchanted Republicans have a vested interest in the party? Why would Greens have an interest in supporting the Dem party?

If your answer to this concern is that those people have an interest in removing Bush which is greater than party loyalty, I don't know why you couldn't have just said that instead of accusing me of something I wasn't even doing.

You just won't answer the question. How you can reconcile the "vested interest in the party" the noble Kucinich and Kerry supporters have and their hatred for Dean is beyond me.

...will you support Dean if he is the nominee, or will you stay home, or maybe vote for Bush? Maybe contribute to Bush's campaign? Does this sound precariously close to slander? Does this sound like I'm accusing you of supporting Bush because you are as set against a candidate as many are set for a candidate? I sure hope it does, because that's how your comments come off, and it's pretty damned offensive. And you have the nerve to talk smack about the attitude of Dean supporters?

No, it sounds like you're asking me a question.

I don't know who you're mistaking me for, but if I wanted to call Dean supporters crazy misguided cultists worshipping their king, or whatever, I would have. Have I ever called Dean supporters that?

I don't know why you are putting subtext into my post that wasn't there. Should people not ask questions or express concern lest they have subtext and assumptions put into their post?

I was asking if you understood why I personally find it hard to believe that Dean supporters are all going to vote for the Democrat.

That's all.

That's crazy talk. No, they may not all vote for the Democrat if Dean doesn't get it, but you could make that statement about anyone. And as we have asked you about 5 times...Will the Kucinich and Kerry supporters vote for Dean if he gets it?

We don't really know do we?

Uh...NO.

I merely said what Dean supporters here have said.

I really don't get this.

How could I have telegraphed that I was asking an honest question in my original post?

Geez.

where do you get off demanding that another DUer answer your question?

i get this picture of you, standing, hands on hips, screaming 'answer the question.

and then people wonder why Dean supporters have a bad reputation here/

sheeeesh.....there was nothing attack mode oriented the post. just a simple expression of uncertainty.

give it a rest....

...is sailing past you...

Answer the question, will you support Dean if he is the Democratic nominee? Dean himself has sworn the loyalty oath to support the Democratic nominee, why can't the antideans?

...we've actually ANSWERED your question, and your "If I'd wanted to call Dean supporters misguided cultists worshipping their king, I would have?" is about as smarmy as Rumsfelds method of "answering questions".

Will you support Dean if he is the nominee? Just answer the question.

Hey, an exercize, let's use tjdee methods and substitute candidate names...

"If I'd wanted to call <candidate> supporters passionless cynics bound and determined to justify their thinking that <candidate> was entitled to the nomination, I would have just done so."

"If I'd wanted to say that all the naysayers that find their way to post antiDeaen diatribes in every thread mentioning his name were divisive, hypersensitive, whiny, namby-pamby Rove/DLC operatives, I would have just said so."

I don't know why you're treating me like I'm some other posters. I don't think I've ever called Dean supporters names or anything like that.

Fine.
I'm done with this thread, I'm apparently not making myself clear and obviously whatever I say isn't going to convince you that I was asking an honest question.

I support Dean, but the truth be said, there are a lot of good Democratic candidates out there... I think that is how most people feel anyway. I'd even vote for Lieberman if he gets the nomination, I don't care who the independent is. No offense to the third party people, but we can't waste our time voting for a candidate that isn't viable.

try and read tjdee's post again without the chip on your shoulder.

Those who voted for Dean like myself also voted that they would "enthustiatically" vote for several other candidates (most notably Kerry) if they got the nomination. I will support the candidate who wins, except Lieberman.

didn't materialize out of thin air. i have personally seen more than one Dean supporter use the phrase, so the question of how many Dean supporters will support 'other than Dean" is valid.

It was talking about second choices among democratic candidates, and most of the Dean supporters indicated that they would support Kerry if he was chosen, whereas most of the Kerry supporters indicated they wouldn't support Dean.

I wish you had a link for that poll, as it confirms what I believe. Yet the Dean-haters will tell you it is just the opposite.

i HAVE SEEN Dean supporters roughed up here but this post doesn't do anything like that.

lighten up please?

have we really lost anything? By your own admission, they wouldn't have voted anyways. The way you set it up, the best outcome is for Dean to be nominated, because he is pulling in support unique to his campaign.

...(support the nominee), and they got involved in politics because they are horrified by Bush, and we've ALREADY influenced the campaign and will do so in the future as well regardless the nominee, why would you find it hard to believe? Just another opportunity for a broadbrush bash? Whatever...

I really don't get it.

I SAID that I don't think anyone knows what Dean supporters will do, and I stated the reasons why--by citing things I've read here from Dean supporters!

I SAID I'd be more comfortable if they all stay with Dems.

NOWHERE did I call Dean supporters any names, NOWHERE did I call them stupid jerks as one Dean supporters have called non-Dean supporters, NOWHERE did I call them cultists like some other people have,

I EXPRESSED CONCERN! JEEBUS!

I apologize for not having the crystal ball you all do, geez!

...yes, you sound "oh so reasonable", but the meaning is still clear enough. If Dean is the nominee, will you support him? Or will you vote for Bush? Why don't you just answer the question? I mean, we don't know WHAT the Kerry and Kucinich supporters, and the DLC, will do if Dean is the nominee...

I sound oh so reasonable because YOU'RE the one injecting subtext that isn't there.

How are people supposed to "prove" that they're being sincere and not bashing? How could I have telegraphed that to you in my original post?

...you should know this, after all, we view Bush thru the context of history, do we not? Why shouldn't we also react to you in the context of your post history. You still haven't answered the question, but that's ok, you've accused Dean of using symantics and legalistic lingo to avoid answering questions, it wouldn't at all be unexpected for you to emulate that manner of discourse. Injecting a subcontext, no, but the more you post, the more that subcontext is reinforced, so please, keep trying...

Actually, like I said, I'm done with this thread.

Obviously you'll believe what you want.

I admit, I don't have a crystal ball, but it's like someone said in a post above... what have we got to loose? These people wouldn't have voted Dem anyway. Now I too would really like to know how some of Kerry and Kucinich voters, some, whom are spewing serious venom, has Ripley said "THEY HATE HIM", how are they going to back the Dem candidate should it be Dean?

While many here may not have "been involved in politics before" - if by that you mean voting? or campaigning? whatever - most of the people I come across have a record of voting and fully intend to do so again. It's a media/DLC generated myth that Dean's supporters are all college aged.

I have met and hear from a large number of Dean supporters. If Dean doesn't get the nomination, it's anyone but Bush for the vast majority of them. People want Bush out of office THAT MUCH. Believe it or not, Dean supporters are just ordinary people.

I'd be interested in hearing the point of view from a disenchanted republican.

from one (Republican).

This also might interest you:

BRAND New Democrats for Dean
http://brandnewdemocrats.blogspot.com

Independents for Dean
http://deanindependents.org/

Republicans for Dean
http://republicansfordean.blogspot.com/

African Americans for Dean (new)
http://www.africanamericansfordean.com/AA/

Official Website
http://www.deanforamerica.com

Official Blog
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/

Eloriel

Note: I am not a dem. also no dean supporter, tho, not a detractor either.


Nader affected the swing vote?

Is the 'left' now the swing vote?

From what I have read of Dean, he is a centrist, and the hype is

painting him as 'left'.

Swing voting just started in the 2000 election. The Republicans filed lawsuits to shut it down but failed. Here is a good article that describes it.

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39860,00.html

So what's a Nader-loving, Bush-bashing voter to do? How can one support Nader, who needs 5 percent of the popular vote to qualify for federal matching funds during the next election, while ensuring a Gore White House?

Swap it.

That's the advice of people who have put up a host of websites encouraging Nader voters and Gore voters to "trade" votes with each other -- allowing Gore to win swing states like Wisconsin, Oregon and Pennsylvania, while letting Nader win votes in Bush-secure states such as Texas.

These sites, which are all less than a week old, go by names like VoteSwap2000, Votexchange2000, and, most memorably, NaderTrader.org.

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39860,00.html

Dean is running for the Democratic nomination. If he wins he will be the Demcoratic candidate, so how can he divide the Dem vote? Because he's supposedly so "liberal" that moderates will vote for Bush? That seems unlikely, because Dean isn't that liberal but Bush really is that conservative. If he doesn't win the nomination, he has said many times that he will not run as an indepednet canddiate but will back the nominee all the way.

Nader split the vote on the left by running for a third party :shrug:

if dean is the nominee he will be the nominee, not running against the nominee.

is/would be "sponsored" (re: paid for) by the republicans.

That is an inflamatory charge against any democratic candidate.

Flamebait at its most transparent.

...mods, this thread should be locked according to the temp GD rules...

Now, I think Dean has the best chance to draw a moderate crowd, but Kucinich is still the only real answer.

And if he turns out to be the choice of the nation's Democrats, he will run on the Democratic ticket.

So my question really is, what the idiotic moronic hell are you nattering about?

That's a great response, can I steal it?

"What the idiotic moronic hell are you nattering about?"

Gosh, I could use it in about 50% of the threads lately.

The Republicans supported him because they could count on him to do their dirty work for them.

1. The swing votes aren't going to Dean. At least, not the progressive votes. He might get some of the moderate swing voters. He is not progressive.

2. He is a democrat. While I'm not supporting his campaign, I've heard nothing to suggest that he is interested in running as a 3rd party candidate if he doesn't win the nomination. And, just my gut feeling, I don't think he would. If he gets the nomination, he gets my vote even though I don't much care for him. If he doesn't, I hope that he will endorse the candidate who does. Of course, I expect that from all of the 9.

who aren't neanderthals?

oh NOOOOO...cant make the Democratic party actually pay for the soup!

Is it too much trouble to look into Dean's record? He was governor of Vermont for over a decade. It REALLY isn't hard to do.

Dean, as a moderate, will bring in the swing voters, who are mostly moderates.

And Dean will energize and motivate the Democratic base to get out and vote.

The media and the DLC and Rove keep calling us "angry" - OK, I doubt most of us were all that angry before they started in with their baloney - but yes, we're angry, and do they want to make something of it? Now we're going to do everything in our power to get Bush out of office. Come on, label us some more.

If the republicans are dumb enough to finance the campaign of the guy most likely to beat their candidate, more power to 'em.

The "swing" vote is up for grabs. If you think think running a pro-war candidate who backs the boy emperor is going to win them, or the election,...have at it. I doubt it.

I can just see the debates now:

Q: Senator how do feel about the war in Iraq?
A: It's a mess that seems to be turning into a quagmire.
Q: Then why did you vote for it?
A: I..uh...well,...uh..I was...uh.. misled.

Sure, that'll impress the hell out of the swing voters.

so no

In an effort to improve the quality of discussion in this forum, we have instituted some TEMPORARY guidelines to start threads in the General Discussion forum. This discussion topic is in violation of those temporary guidelines.

Your post must contain 5 sentences.

Please take a moment to familiarize yourself with these TEMPORARY posting guidelines. They are available at the top of the General Discussion forum, here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=129980&mesg_id=129980

Please be aware that this is just a three-day experiment. On Saturday night at midnight, the temporary guidelines will no longer be in effect.

If you would like further information, we have also provided a detailed explanation for these temporary guidelines, which is available here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=149059&mesg_id=149059

If you re-write your message to comply with our temporary guidelines, you are welcome to re-post.

Thank you for your understanding.



NYer99
DU Moderator