The Democratic Party Just Doesn't Get It

[BrickCop]

After President Bush was re-elected the Democrats were all over the media proclaiming they had to broaden their appeal to more moderate "red state" voters.

That made sense to me.

So who do the Dems choose to head the DNC? Howard Dean, an Ultra- Liberal from the Northeast. :confused: He's just like Kerry only angrier. I wonder if the GOP sent a Thank You card upon hearing the news. :D

I watched in bewildered amusement as Dean, brimming with self- importance immediately announced they have to appeal more to the core values of the Democratic party. Isn't this like preaching to the converted?

Does anyone believe that the Dems will fare better in the next Presidential election with Mad Dog Dean running the show?

[audi0xpl0de]

I think that Kerry lost because he tried to sway the moderates and red states. Those states were already going to vote Bush. He should have focused on gaining more liberal support and sticking to his beliefs. I think Dean has a great influence on people. Look at all the money he raised just using the internet. He has a lot of passion for what he believes in and I think he'll do a good job. He won't be the presidential nominee but he'll help to unite the party and refocus it's efforts.

[BrickCop]

But again audio the Liberals have already drank the Dem Kool Aid. Why shouldn't the Dems try to reach out those who did not vote for them in the previous election? That's just common sense.

Liberals voted overwhelmongly for Kerry, a large percentage of non- Liberals did not. You cannot win the Presidential election by dismissing the importance of the "red state voters".

Like I said the Dems just don't get it.

[Caspertoo]

audioexplode is right, kerry didn't have any issues that were "his". Overall I think dean would have been a better candidate but was a little too umm...intimidating for the dems to pick him as their candidate. Heck edwards would have been better as the frontrunner.

I wonder if the republicans will try to pick someone who will actually appeal to the blue states, maybe a moderate to liberal republican such as mccain or the like.

[BrickCop]

kerry didn't have any issues that were "his". Overall I think dean would have been a better candidate but was a little too umm...intimidating for the dems to pick him as their candidate. Heck edwards would have been better as the frontrunner.


Kerry was on both sides of every issue, that's why none were "his". Dean was a better choice you think? Edwards? He was Kerry Lite.

I believe both would have flopped just as badly as Kerry did. IMO the Dem party is viewed as much too far to the left by a huge majority of "red state" Americans.

[audi0xpl0de]

Kerry kept trying to swing both ways on issues trying to get the red states. The people who supported Bush are really strong with their beliefs. You will not vote for someone who doesn't support your own beliefs. That's why I believe Kerry should have been trying to get more of his base motivated and energized rather than spending pointless time trying to convince people that he's on the fence with issues. Also I think a big reason Bush won and received so much support was that the Republican party made a strong effort to get gay marriage on state ballots. People who ordinarily weren't going to vote for presidents were sure as hell going to vote against gay marriage in their state, and while they were there they voted for Bush.

[Delta784]

The Democrats have failed to learn the lesson of the 2004 election....the United States is tilting towards the right.

Apparently, the Democrat's reaction is to become even more liberal, more shrill, and more whiny. I say.....GREAT! :D

The Dems think that Hillary is their savior? She's going to get her *** kicked in 2008, she's not going to play well on a nationwide stage.

[3/4s]

Joe Lieberman was the only Dem who had a shot at winning because he was the most like Bush. The socialists hated him but his type of politics is what the majority wants, a more centrist type of gov't. Bill Clinton understood that and successfully moved enough to the right. Of course Ross Perot didn't hurt him either. Hillary is starting her move to the right now. Beware! Meanwhile Kerry, Gore et al still don't get it.

Just to add the socialists voted against Bush out of hatred. Many Democrats voted against Kerry because he was a weak phony pushed blindly by the socialists who really wanted Dean. Not all Dems are baby eating monsters, just ask your parents or grandparents what party they belong(ed) to. Many are Dems because in their day it meant something good.

[BrickCop]

The Dems think that Hillary is their savior? She's going to get her *** kicked in 2008, she's not going to play well on a nationwide stage.

I'm still shocked NY elected that carpet bagging fraud. If the Dems do nominate her in '08 they might as well dissolve the party. What has she ever done besides conning the NY voters anyway?

Her Law Firm was crooked with the billing hours, she proposed up crazy Health care idea, fired the White House travel staff, had her fingerprints all over an FBI file that magically turned up in the Oval office, sh made over $100K overnight on a cattle futures stock "hunch"....

What makes Hillary qualified to be President? Because she slept with one?

If thats the case all Hail President Lewinsky in '12. :D

[Welpe]

Many are Dems because in their day it meant something good.

Good point. My parents used to be pretty solid Democrats back in the day. According to my father, because they perceived the Demoractic party as the party of the "common man." That is until their business got screwed over by the Federal government under an all Demoractic administration. It's a long story but after that event, they became staunch Republicans.

[Creeker]

Joe Lieberman was the only Dem who had a shot at winning because he was the most like Bush. The socialists hated him but his type of politics is what the majority wants, a more centrist type of gov't. Bill Clinton understood that and successfully moved enough to the right. Of course Ross Perot didn't hurt him either. Hillary is starting her move to the right now. Beware! Meanwhile Kerry, Gore et al still don't get it.

Just to add the socialists voted against Bush out of hatred. Many Democrats voted against Kerry because he was a weak phony pushed blindly by the socialists who really wanted Dean. Not all Dems are baby eating monsters, just ask your parents or grandparents what party they belong(ed) to. Many are Dems because in their day it meant something good.

100% correct. Lieberman seems to be the only DemoSocialCommiecrat that "gets" it, but even he voted for Kerry.

Re:voting for McCaine, I hope he is not our next best choice. Many reds are too close to being blue for my comfort. I'd like to see a significant 3rd party that could actually be a contender, that isn't some "fringe" candidate, as I believe in my heart that we are still tilted way too left. We have too many state and local govt's that are majority red passing too many tax increases and "user fees", mostly to subsidise Social programs and gimme's.

[Deputy757]

Not all Dems are baby eating monsters, just ask your parents or grandparents what party they belong(ed) to. Many are Dems because in their day it meant something good.
I agree that Joe Lieberman would have been the way to go. Hell, even I would have voted for him. But I hope the Dem's of yesteryear that you are refering to aren't the likes of Roosevelt, Truman, Carter, etc. While they had some good points, their policies overwhelmingly hurt America in many ways.

[1sgkelly]

The Democratic Party Just Doesn't Get It


Be quiet, then they won't change.
;)