Are Lieberman and the DLC right (so to speak)? Are we wrong?

Are Americans more right-wing than we give them credit for? They clearly aren't as unwilling to vote for fascists as we hoped they were.

Just bitter food for thought.

NT

Why are they willing to let the Bushists run free in DC and the Arnoldites in Sacramento?

This wasn't an ideology based vote. They were voting for a center right republican, against a kind of center right dem.

Heck, some CA may even think Arnold is realy a robot.


Aronld - "I am not realy a terminator. That is just a movey charicter. I am an actor. Get real."

That Americans are so nonideological that they'll vote for the candidate who claims to have no ideology even when the evidence is clear they're ideological to the core? Of course they did respond to Gore's populism, but they didn't line up for two hours to show it.

@ that!

So far we only have right wing, and sort of part time right wing, canadates from which to chose. But what about all of thoes who do not vote? Don't they facter in there some where? What if they people who arn't voting, are in fact not lazy, but waiting for a librial/progresive canadate worth voting for?

Zero supply, generates zero demand.

So long as the Dems refuse to go left, they will see no need to go left.

I believe given balanced coverage, Americans would elect more Democrats than Republicans. Some of the long-held biases that preclude people from our party are media-influenced.

but how does that translate into the people not being on our side? I don't get it. (Not tonight anyway.)

Unions, social services and public schools are all under attack. Years ago, they were what defined our party, and allowed it to bury the Republicans soldily for a good many years.

Now, corporate influence is strong in the media. Not a death blow in itself, but combine it with the fact that many Democratic stances are less than friendly to corporate profits and you have a problem. You will notice that the villification of the above items is most vigorously carried out by the media. Take the coverage of the "Leave No Child Behind", or the Right to Work states, or welfare reform. Something is seriously amiss when it comes to coverage of these issues. They are no less essential, but someone is trying very hard to convince us that they need to go.

Of course you're right. The propaganda against working people is relentless. One thing about California that hasn't been in evidence since the 1980s that returned with a vengeance today is that it's in the vanguard of the radical center. The sheep there get moved to bleat angrily against "powers that be" en masse every now and again, and they don't care if they shoot themselves in the hooves to shake the system up. But it can look an awful lot like just plain dumb bleating from a distance, like they aren't aware of the shepherd's hook pushing them toward the slaughterhouse.

We can't compete with Republicans in corporate friendliness, and so we'll always play catch-up for packaging and image. Clinton's image scuffle was food for thought in that sense--the Republicans got tainted for looking like hyper-partisans at a witchtrial, despite plentiful pundit support. So now the trick is look like the outsider, the populist--look like who the public wants, but do exactly what you always have done. Usually the media will not provide context to disprove a big ideological lie. The Bush campaign tried to fill out the "underdog" clothes when it suited them in the debates, and the sensible populist constume for stances, to give examples.

Lieberman and Schwartzenegger have shown me that the republicans really are right and the democrats are just wrong losers.

I was a fool to care about anyone but myself. I'm going to be a winner from now on.

It's not whether their philosophy is right, it's whether their reading of our fellow Americans is right. Of course their philosophy is wrong!

want to march along with the Nazis then let 'em. Principles aren't for sale to the highest bidder.

Wouldn't it be great to be celebrating Arianna's ascension rather than mourning over Arnold's? Why isn't she in there?

What is that? Is it two bad candidates? Thats how you lose. God help us if howard dean wins the nomination.

but logically I really wouldn't mind if Clark won the nomination.

It won't be even REMOTELY close.

I miss the days when Democratic voters surprised the shit out of every one. They just seem so over.

The result is of course howard dean.

Not of much substance or use either.

Very Unclever. But then you knew that.

Dean will make a Great President!

...and absent an alternative they will vote for what they know.