Can we win in 08?

With the pukes calling us anti-American, unpatriotic, and soft on defense at any of the myriad of right wing media outlets and the sheeple out there seeming to not only buy every word of it but completely turn a blind eye on domestic issues, how can we break out of all the labeling and take back OUR house?

(sorry for the runon question)

election years are much different than nonelection years.

:evilgrin:

I think the next candidate will be a govenor not a Senator. We've already made that mistake. The question is who will they pick.

would be stupid. Kerry nearly won against a sitting President in a time of war in spite of most of the non-print media being extremely biased against him. This happened ONLY because of that first debate on foreign policy where he demonstrated amazing competence on all issues - even with no electronic help like his opponent had.

The most likely Republican nominees have foreign policy or military experience - that same type of debate would kill even a governor who learns quickly. Imagine McCain vs Warner or Vilsack - or even Allen (who appears one of the dumbest on the SFRC) vs the governors. It is a big disadvantage.

Hillary, as Bill's wife and as a Senator likely has a good background. Clark has a good backgound. Kerry showed himself to be informed on issues throughout the world and has articulated a view of how we can deal with non-state terrorism without sacrificing everything important to us. He wrote a book on this issue in 1996 - when no one else even thought of the issue much less spoke of it.

the debate. I think for too long we have let the republicans shape the debate while we respond to it. We've been playing defense for way too long. Hopefully with Dean at the helm of the DNC, we will change this. The track record for Senators winning the presidency isn't too good. Close is nice, but it's still losing and four more years of republicans. I feel that Dean would have been a much better president had he been given a chance to debate him, I think the country would have seen that and Bush would be back at Crawford.

The war is everything. We MUST be perfectly clear that it is immoral, illegal and we have to get the fuck out NOW. If we play the game on their turf, we'll get killed.

go-along-to-get-along hasn't helped our cause any, just wasted time while the repubs have defined all of the battles on the legislative front and wiped Dems from public visibility.

More than anything else, it'll depend on who's running. Plus, we've got a ways to go till 2008 - there's a lot that's going to happen between now and then.

We must concentrate our efforts on making every gain in 06 first.
Then set our sights on the 08 election with even more fervor

Not if there is any denial of what the job entails, or any tendency to "ignore" or marginalize issues surrounding election fraud, vote counts, or MSM manipulation.

Heading into an election with confidence, publicly addressing and resolving the election concerns, and standing up for truth, confronting the nastiness of the opposition? Nominating a candidate who will do so, and running a campaign that does so? Yes. We can win.

We have to run on what we believe in. We have to state our positions and don't back down. I'm sick and tired of hearing speaches and watching ads saying vote for me I'm just like the Repug. They never run on their voting record of Progressive ideals. If there is no difference between us and them why change? At least Howard Dean says what he believes in, although he sometimes does run away from his words the next day.

Everybody went ape sh** about Hackett in Ohio but his ads were about him standing next to *. Never once did his ad say he was a Dem. Was he ashamed? And look who lost. I know it was close but the winner goes to the WH not the one that came close.

One last rave, and if our candidate says I voted for the war before I was against it I'm staying home.