Primary viciousness - Bush's fault.

I was wondering why the level of viciousness between the Top 3 Dem candidates' supporters is so high this year, and it suddenly hit me:

There's nobody on the right to focus our anger on, so we're taking it out on each other's candidates.

Last election, Bush was the focus of our rage. This time, he's off watching the sun rise over Jerusalem and being largely irrelevant while we're here on DU with the long knives out for whichever candidate isn't our favorite.

It's probably far too late to beseech everyone to dial back the rage until we find out who we're facing in the General Election. But it might help to understand why everybody wants to take hammers to each others' skulls so early in the primaries.

Thoughts?

- as

I think there are increased crime statistics and a lot of other indicators of a society under stress.

So maybe all of us have frayed nerves and are less gracious than we would be if be didn't have 7 years of Bush in our systems poisoning us.

But think about it. Last time, even during the primaries we were focused on beating Bush. Who got to do it seemed almost secondary.

This year, we're running against - nobody yet. So where Bush was the 'hated opponent' last time, the part of 'hated opponent' this time is being played by hiilary or Obama or Edwards - or whichever combination is not your candidate.

- as

I didn't imagine Iraq going no for 4 more years, I didn't forsee the credit meltdown, I didn't know that I'd still be worried about my job....

I think the poison builds up in your system.

freepers and *bots repeating every white house lie when all reason told them different. Just the other day I was filling up the van ( which I drive 4 days out of 31 ) a big Hummer 3 pulled in to the next pump the asshat filled up his tank, over $100. While paying the cashier, he starts ranting about gas prices then said he most dumbest thing I ever heard. He claimed the gas prices were the results of the minimum wage going up because of the democrats thieving from the poor rich guys. When I stepped in and said no, gas is up because rich assholes are gouging the country of every spare penny, he stormed out of the station, well the asshole shoved past me in the line, pissing me off. Anyhow as asshole was driving away I noticed his bumper sticker "I'm a proud member of the UAW" !!!

*Even calling it "election" may get comments about "stolen...."

be a bush surrogate). The one who does this first will get my vote (which is still up in the air). And I don't mean one sentence in a speech - I mean, campaign major platform.

And I think the campaigns are losing sight of who the enemy really is. I guess it is necessary for the candidates to highlight whatever differences ezist between them (negligiblr though they may be), but they should always, always swing it back to pointing the fingers at bush and his party and their incompetence and why it is so important to put a stop to their reign.

they need to point out, first and foremost, that Republicans fucked everything up beyond repair and don't deserve elected office on any level.

- as

I think all of our candidates were great and I don't have any major objections to the three remaining top contenders. All I am concerned with is making sure a Democratic president is elected this year. As such, my primary vote will simply be a strategic vote based on who I think has the best chance of winning the general election. I think there is a sizable group that share this sentiment, and a lot of the viciousness is directed at perceived fatal flaws in each candidate that we are afraid will sink the Dem nominee in the general election:

Clinton - attacked as continuing a political dynasty, being part of the "establishment". Well, people wouldn't be as critical about "dynasties" if the Bush dynasty didn't turn out to be an utter disaster. Bill Clinton's presidency was a success, but it seems Hillary is being punished for the failures of Bush II (rather than Clinton's failings). The attacks on her being "establishment" basically stem from the fact that the electorate has seen the corruption of Washington insiders like Rumsfeld and Cheney. But again, it seems like Clinton is being punished for things that are the Republican's fault.

Obama - attacked as inexperienced, "all style no substance". Well, again, people would not be as wary about inexperience and candidates who use their charisma (instead of being a policy-wonk) if we didn't have the wonderful precedent of Bush II.

This is exactly the reason why ABB was an ignorant position in the first place. Instead of always being against something it is time to be FOR something. That is the position that the voters will flock to support.

But i think every Dem candidate should make a point of, instead of trying to claw over one another for the nomination, delineate whatever differences they feel there are between themselves and the oher Dem candidates - and then finish up by saying we have to take the keys to government away from Bush's party, because they've shown that they have zero ability to drive.

- as

We spend months providing the other side with ammunition to shoot us with in the fall :grr:

KICK those venal, corrupt, bloodthirsty, dazed and confused motherfucking elephants when they're down!

goddammit!