If you have "no place to go," come here!

It is not THAT it happened, but HOW it happened..

Joebasic's picture

Thats it for time has come. Today, I proudly went and changed my voter registration from Democrat to Independant. I can't tell you yet how I will vote in the Fall, but I honestly cannot see myself voting for Obama.
For me, its not that he won..if indeed he does win, but for me, it is the how of it.
Hillary Clinton tried to run as good a campaign as she could. She had the right, the media, the lefty blogs all against her. I can't even watch keith Olberman any more..his outright contempt for Hillary Clinton is disturbing, to say the least.
I have seen the most vile and atrocious attacks against Hillary coming, not from the right, but from the so-called progressive left. Many female progressives have become little more than Ann Coulter wannabes, in their attacks against Hillary.
Lefty blogs eagerly embrace any and all right wing smear..a trip over to democrat Underground at any given time will provide thread after thread attacking Hillary that make Freerepublic look like a friendly camp.
In my short time there, I saw progressive Dems use Monica Lewinsky, Vince Foster, Travel Gate, Ken Starr, Juanita Broderick..all used with glee on a DEMOCRATIC site..against Hillary Clinton. The attacks against Chelsea..were enough to make Rush Limbaugh blush. Hillary has not many defenders over there at DU..they are quickly shouted down, then quickly banned for speaking against the Holy One.
If Hillary goes down, it will not be based on policy differences..but rather, on the distressing marriage of the progressives and the right wing.
As I said is not that Hillary is defeated, if indeed she is, but it is the how of they did it.
I won't even list the slams that Hillary took based on her gender.
The question about which cause is more important to advance..race or gender..has been answered loudly and clearly. In this first historic year, when we had a woman, and an African-American running for the highest office in the land, the woman was trampled over easily so that the first black man could be elected President.
Before anyone labels me racist, spare the diatribe, my assumption is based on two facts:
1. With the Obama campaign running around intimidating Super delagates with the "you-don't-want-to-be-seen-as-preventing-the-first-black-president-do-you" line ala Jessie Jackson Jr..race has indeed become an issue. (How come no one seems anxious about standing in the way of the first woman president)?
2. The glee..the absolute glee that some female Obama supporters eagerly trampled over Hillary to advance Obama. They make Maureen Dowd and Ann Coulter appear warm and fuzzy.
The "likeable enough, periodically blue" world that they have helped create is something they are going to have to live in for a long time after the saint is annoited and ascends to the presidency. I sit..a former democrat that will not vote in November if Obama is the nominee.
There are many like me.
I hope progressives are not too shocked when they wake up and see those Republicans and right wing attack dogs have turned against them.
Its the how of it...
It was nasty..
and it turned a lot of people away from the process.
The "screw you..we don't need you"! attitude from some Obama supporters will come back to haunt them.
Recovered DU Member

No votes yet


Stellaaa's picture
Submitted by Stellaaa on

Absolutely dumbfouded. If I hear one more Obama female supporter tell me that she is a feminist and then proceed to trash Hillary I will become violent. I was doing calling for Hillary, and it was funny how many of her supporters told me they would not be registering as Dems anymore. I hope the "elder fathers" who passed on the torch in the name of unity knew what they were doing. Taking us for granted.

I know it's anger, but tempted to tell those young feminists, here take McCain, you go fight to save your rights and then come and tell me you are a feminist. Taking for granted the past fights is really a sad state of affairs.

Sorry, but if my party becomes the "faith based" party for a new age cult like politics just to win, I will not join.

Submitted by scoff on

Hillary is Satan

or at least that's what one Obama supporter on DKos said (and others agreed) a few weeks ago.

The flame wars are now a conflagration.

That's what sent me looking for another site where I can read news/discuss issues without all the hype of Obamamania. (For those who might be unaware of the fact, mania is, first and foremost, a mental disorder. Yeah, I'd say so.)

Just to be perfectly clear, Hillary wasn't my first choice. I liked Edwards' takes on policy and agreed with him that poverty (more specifically, the inequality of opportunity and access that comes of a severely skewed distribution of wealth) is one of the most pressing (and potentially explosive) issues facing this country.

Since the 'O'holes have overrun DKos, though, I don't feel like I belong there any more, and that was one of the greatest attractions of the site to me. So here I am.

OxyCon's picture
Submitted by OxyCon on

I honestly don't know what I will be doing about the presidential election. Whether or not I vote for McCain, or even work for his campaign, or actively work against the narcissist fraud Obama. But one thing I do know for sure. There is no way in hell I'm going to vote for Obama.
To me, just about everything I didn't like about Bush, which sent alarm bells off in my head about him, I see in Obama.
After this country has been run down into the ground for the past 7 years, the only chance we had to right the ship was to get Hillary Clinton in office.
Obama is just going to make everything so much worse.
I really, really fear for our country should he become President.

Submitted by lambert on

Seriously, there is a difference.

I mean, Democrats might fantasize about animal abuse, but Republicans are actually into it. Did you know that McCain's finance director helped kill and barbecue a dog while drunk in college? The link has many other examples; and for Democrats, no matter the many faults of the party, there's no equivalent list. Please consider the cultural and ethical aspects before saying there's "no difference." And I this as a blogger who's working as hard as possible to shove the Overton Window left...

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

TonyRz's picture
Submitted by TonyRz on

I think you'll regret sitting out 11/08 if you base it at all on the behavior of the cult. There are plenty of good reasons to not vote for the Anointed One come 11/08, and as several have posted here about themselves, that's my current plan, unfortunately.

And it took me several long agonizing weeks of a "conversation with myself", as Mrs. Schtreetswillflowwithbloodifgaysgemarried, first lady of California, recommended I do.

My objection is that nothing is getting changed or transformed for the future of "our" Democratic Party by the way BO is campaigning. It's a Rovean politicking I just can't reward with my vote. It greatly benefits the Anointed One, sure, but if polls are to be believed, it is, among other things, showing splits and fissures along class/income/race/orientation lines in the party which have not previously been so close to the surface. He'll be in the WH, and our collective Democratic fortunes for the next 50 years are doomed no matter what he does or doesn't do. Slash and burn.

BO keeps telling us to vote with our hopes and not our fears, but a reflexive party-line vote for his campaign in 11/08 is just that. My hope is for real, transformative change: a strengthened liberal/progressive party; a real effort to change the level of the public dialogue, not wallow in it for personal advantage; a real recognition that the great middle is in fact further to the LEFT, not the RIGHT!

(And yeah, I'm gay, so my ox is getting gored there by BO, but OTOH, I have enough self-esteem to decide that that stuff is a big deal to me. I'd tuck it under for a real liberal like my first choice - Edwards - but not this guy.)

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

Here's my plan - vote for Obama in November 2008 if he's the nominee. It's a hope for the best kind of thing.

But I think we should also plan for the worst - that he might not win in November or he'll do what we all expect and throw liberals under the bus. This is where the Shock Doctrine comes in (thanks, Naomi Klein!).

If Obama loses in November, there is going to be a massive shockwave sent through the Democratic party. We should be prepared to use that - to change this horrendous system we have for choosing a nominee. Do not let them blame this on Obama, he merely used the system the party created. If he turns out to be unprepared for a national campaign, it's the party's fault for setting up a nominatiing system, heavy on caucuses, that let him be so and still get the nomination.

So, we need to be prepared to fight for primaries, not caucuses. Closed primaries, not open ones. Allocation of delegates by popular vote in a state, not the ridiculous district method. Instead of focusing on all the reasons Obama's campaign has sucked, we should focus on how to reform the mechanism that prevents someone from waging an insurgent battle against Democrats in its own nominating contests. And we should have that plan lying around, as Naomi Klein would say, so that if the party goes into shock, it's there. Now, how we do that, I haven't yet figure out. But this political activism is kind of new to me.

If Obama wins in November and turns out to have meant what he said about policy, then there will be anger among liberals, including many of the folks who currently support him. This will be an opportunity to remind them - repeatedly - of their own contribution to the problem and try to get them to join us in a fight to reform the nominating process.

If neither happens, Obama wins and is a fantastic liberal president, then I'll be the one in shock and this entire plan isn't needed.

Let me finish by saying that I think it would be a mistake to simply opt out of the system, that's how the bastards win. And nobody would tell you that more than Hillary Clinton. Look at what the GOP machine has done to her over the past 20 years, look at what so-called progressives have done to her over the past year, and I bet if she loses the nomination, she doesn't resign her Senate seat.

Progress always has been and always will be a fight. So if Obama doesn't thrill you (god knows he doesn't me), hold your nose and vote for him. But then work, donate time and money to someone running for your state legislature or Congress. If the misogyny is getting you down, hold fundraisers and work for a female candidate. Elect people who will poke and prod and make Obama's life hell if he tries to govern from the center. That's your best payback.

wasabi's picture
Submitted by wasabi on

Really good post.

As a yellow dog, I could never sit an election out. This doesn't mean that I am happy with where the party is right now and won't work to right the injustices I perceived in the election processes.

I will never look at he "progressive" blogs the same ever again. I am truly horrified by what has taken place in the blogosphere over the past few months. They will not get my money or my time in the future.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

to the progressive cause, to the nation and to the whole of humanity.

Hold your nose, stick two fingers up it, take medication, whatever. Voting R, or not voting at all, is an abomination. Win or lose, show up at the polls and vote Dem or become a willing agent of destruction of what little worthwhile we still have remaining.

Hope that's clear enough.

Joebasic's picture
Submitted by Joebasic on

If you go running around telling people to "Get lost..we don't need you"..well, you deserve whatever you get. In my mind, if the progressive wing of this party wants to embrace right wing tactics in order to get their way, then they deserve the right wing policies that come along with them. Besides, you are implying that Obama will be able to actually effect this great "change".
And you are also assuming that we are not playing right into the Republican hands by nominating Obama..or do you really think Hannity, Rush, Joe Scarborough are going to continue to shill for him after he gets the nomination?
Obama is wrong on this point..he will not get ALL Hillalrys votes..there are many like me that this campaign has turned off and turned away.
Recovered DU member

cenobite's picture
Submitted by cenobite on

Before you decide to not vote for the Dem candidate:

"Secretary of State Joseph I. Lieberman"

That's worse than anything any of the D candidates will do.

dr sardonicus's picture
Submitted by dr sardonicus on

Seems to me that Joe Lieberman is one of the big winners of the 2008 campaign so far. He gets a Cabinet post no matter who is elected President.

...for the rest of us

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

Come November, everything you wrote will be moot and whether the Dem is Obama or Clinton the choices will still be the same: (1) campaign and vote for any Dem or (2) vote for McCain or (3) sit it out.

The matter being addressed is what does a good citizen do then? What will best serve the progressive cause? What is best for the nation and the world?

A Republican President will try to continue the disastrous foreign and domestic policies of the VRWC. A Republican President will be a great help in recapturing both the House and Senate for his party. Worst of all, a Republican President will have the power to change the majority on the Supreme Court to 6-3, maybe 7-2 in favor of the Scalia wing, the nutjobs that stole the 2000 election and who will not only overturn Roe but who will provide legal false cover for any authoritarian power grab the Executive tries.

Obama may be just as bad as McCain on everything else, his voting record says otherwise and we will just have to see, but I do not believe he will cave on the Supreme Court. If that is the only difference, it is the most critical one.

Again, and talking only about the choice in November, anything less than an active, positive campaign and vote for the Democratic nominee is IMNSHO a traitorous act, and advocating for either the Republican or for sitting it out deserves the strongest possible condemnation.

Can’t imagine who would have said you’re not wanted, of course you are, and if it did get said well, ignore it and get over it; once the nomination is settled it will be time to man up and do what needs doing. If we stick together we have a chance to keep things from getting much worse. If you won’t stick with us, well, then you deserve everything that you do get and I for one will not be shy.

Clear now?

Joebasic's picture
Submitted by Joebasic on

Let me say, that this whole thing has turned me off enough so that, for the first time in my life, I am not a registered Dem. You can call it treasonous, or traitorous, or whatever you prefer, but I do not believe in rewarding bad behaviour.
Mr Obama and his "My voters will not vote for Hillary" attitude deserves the same in kind. I am not the one who has divided this party. I do not forget being insulted and seeing our previous heroe's villified as devils. Bill Clinton, being tossed under the bus by the Obama crowd, is no better than the right wing painting max Cleland as an Al Queda sympathizer.
These folks should have thought about this before THEY took the party over this cliff.
I believe that "manning up" as you put it, involves standing up for your convictions, I am standing firmly on mine. I am not shy either, not in the least, in saying that the behaviour exhibited by the Obama camp is deplorable..and should not be rewarded. Winning at any cost is not winning in my book. I do not believe in my party..right or wrong.
I stand by my contention that they broke it..they laid down with the right wing..THEY can bear the consequences and the monster hybrid of the progressive/right wing monster that THEY have created. I can respect your opinion..but I sir, am no traitor, and I don't have a treasonous bone in my body.
I have served proudly, and continue to serve, this country proudly.
I will gladly vote for my Dem members of congress, and state Legislatures..but Obama..guess what, don't be so sure you'll get all "Hillarys voters" are not entitled to "Hillarys voters" sure won't get them all.
Upon much reflection..
I do however, recognize your points regarding the SCOTUS and other issues..I am loathe do do anything to empower the Republicans..we will see how far Mr Obama is willing to go to mend these fences. I am open to the possibility, the very real probabability, that I may indeed have to vote against the Republicans, and that may indeed mean holding my nose and voting for Obama. Make NO mistake though..this will not be a vote for Obama, but rather, a vote against the Republicans.
Surely, you can see how distressing this situation is for many in the party.
Recovered DU member

Motherlode's picture
Submitted by Motherlode on

I feel your pain. I won't change my registration from Democrat, and I won't vote for McCain or any other Republican. I've sent more money to Hillary than to any other candidate EVER (including Edwards, whom I supported until he dropped out of the race). And that's all been in the past few weeks.

What I also won't do is campaign for Obama. And I'm obviously not alone. I will vote for the man, but I won't reward the despicable tactics employed against the first credible female candidate for president -- tactics not based on her positions or issues but reminiscent of the VRWC and employed by the so-called "progressives" in our own party, as well as by her erstwhile opponent, Obama.

Just as Republicans fear that disappointment with candidate McCain will keep conservative Republican voters at home and activists inactive, the DNC, DLC, the MSM and the Obamaites had better realize that the tenor of the campaign, and the gender-baiting and -hating that has been witnessed, will keep a good many Clinton supporters on the sidelines as well. Don't call on me, MoveOn, to organize and host any house parties THIS election cycle.

kelley b's picture
Submitted by kelley b on

Voting R, or not voting at all, is an abomination. Win or lose, show up at the polls and vote Dem or become a willing agent of destruction of what little worthwhile we still have remaining.

Arthur Silber recently said this:

Any individual who rises to the national political level is, of necessity and by definition, committed to the authoritarian-corporatist state. The current system will not allow anyone to be elected from either of the two major parties who is determined to dismantle even one part of that system.

Well, no argument.

But Silber (and many out here in the wilds of cyberspace) say that since no one is clean, no one deserves their vote.

I say there's a big difference between Al Gore and George W. Bu$h, and if more people had seen it that way and voted for Big Al, there are a million or more people who might be alive today, and several hundred million whose lives would be better.

Even if Big Al is an Authority and has effectively run a Corporation or two.

As soon as the Clintons and Obama, and their minions, are through with their pissing contest, I'd like to get back to legally dismantling the Empire and returning it to a Republic.


No Hell below us
Above us, only sky

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

If it weren't for the Supreme Court (and other courts) I might consider throwing a giant hissyfit this November, especially since Congress will be controlled by Democrats, but too much more damage will be done to the courts and not just the Supreme Court. We cannot afford to lose any more influence over this third branch of government. It's already stacked against us, we can not afford another four years of GOP appointments.

So, vote for Obama. Then put your energy, your money into something you believe in whether it's a candidate or cause. And if MoveOn or one of those other organizations ask you for money, tell them no and tell them why you're telling them no. Then do the same to the DNC, funnel money directly to your candidates, tell the DNC why you're doing this instead of giving money to the party.

Personally, I'm thinking of writing a letter to Dr. Dean once the nomination is settled expressing my disapproval for the entire clusterfuck that has been the democratic nominating process, including his atrocious handling of Michigan and Florida, and telling him that I did not appreciate my party standing quietly by why one of its leading members was swarmed by a sexist media (this isn't about choosing a nominee, it's about not being silent in front of sexism and misogyny), and that in the future the DNC does not need to ask for any donations from me until they've done something that indicates they intend to work for a truly representative party.

Now, I don't do enough for the party that I think my own letter will matter, but I bet if they got a couple of thousand of these, they'd care.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

But there will be, and far worse that any previous election because the VRWC has already grasped so much. Any effort that is less than full-on opposition to the VRWC is unacceptable, inhumane and reprehensible, and there is no way around it. Standing idly by in the face of great wrongdoing is no different than actively participating. However wrong Obama may be, he is nothing near the evil that is the VRWC.

You are responsible for your opinion, and your actions. Advocating that anyone do less than everything possible to thwart the VRWC, including failure to vote for a Dem (or against an R, take your pick, all the same effect) is enabling the VRWC and will earn my condemnation in the strongest possible terms.

You've read the arguments. You chose to put your position out in public. If you don't want to be condemned as an enabler of the VRWC, change your position. Otherwise, brace yourself for the consequence.

And in consideration of your edit with further reflection, thank you for doing so. This will apparently be one of those times where the battle against the bigger enemy will require an unappetizing alliance. I’m not happy either, and I appreciate that unhappiness is widespread. I believe the aphorism is about cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face, all I’m saying.

Joebasic's picture
Submitted by Joebasic on

Unless I was prepared for dissent. Unlike other forums, where debate consists of shouting at each other and not listening, it is refreshing to see a place where debate..and the ability to disagree, are not considered negatives.
I have always maintained that when there are people I disagree with, I do not have enemies, but rather people I just disagree with. That disagreeable trait is one from the Obama camp that I deplore the most. This debate has helped me to clarify..and to see unfortunate consequences for making rash decisions based on my anger. Though I disagree with some of your points, I can agree with your conclusions, hence the update. This is what healthy debate is all about. Now..having said that..
What then, do you propose to do about the swiftboating of our our own?
Should there not be some condemnation of them?
Recovered DU member

Sarah's picture
Submitted by Sarah on

standing up against the wrong, because while it's a lot more fun to stand up for the right, you're still doing the right thing by standing up against the wrong.

People probably won't cheer you for it.
People may not understand what you mean by it.

But standing up against the flat-out wrong that would be a 3rd term for Cheney/Bush (McCain/Huckabee/Other GOP) is doing the right thing.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

and there's nothing wrong with that. By all means criticize unacceptable behavior, who ever said not? Be careful of the consequence, my only caution. Sometimes it is necessary to have it out in public, nothing else for it; other times it is better to voice concerns in private.

There is much that concerns me about Obama. However, the rough-and-tumble so far has not, in my estimation, been out of bounds. Not entirely savory but this is politics, not high tea. You charge swiftboating; by whom and in what way? Take another look at that charge, and make certain it applies; I've seen some pretty good pokes from both sides, but nothing I'd call "swiftboating." Got an example that you think fits?

Deep breaths, bud. Long fight ahead.

Joebasic's picture
Submitted by Joebasic on

More of expecting my party to be better than the right wing fanantics that, rather than using them as sources and weapons against our own,we used to condem. Blind obediance, my friend, is what we criticize the republicans for, remember? When you find it difficult to figure out if a smear came from Democrat underground, Kos, or freerepublic..I think we have a problem. Well, maybe you don't, but I do..
I never mentioned swiftboating, but since you have, what would you call using Vince Foster, travelgate, Monica Lewinsky, attacking Chelsea Clinton, or any Democrat speaking against the Holy One, to name a few. My previous posts have ample examples, if you have been reading. Tell me, if Mr Obama, the unity candidate, once in office, sacrifices some of your principles in order to unite Democrats and republicans, do you not think it is good to publicly speak up? Or do you prefer silently going along with the party. I think not.
Asd I said..I can see the greater good in voting for the Democrat..but I think Mr Obama and his crew, might want to dial it back a bit if they expect Hillary supporters to go along on his ride should he win the nomination.
If we get to the point where HOW we win does not matter..we lose..IMHO.
Recovered DU member

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

Maybe it's the buddhist in me, but perhaps what's needed here is some middle ground. I understand the need to act. I feel the same way, mine won't be with my vote, but in getting more active to elect more women and more men who reject sexism as a campaign tactic. I'm going to work to make the democratic party more my party and it's clear I can't rely on those white boys who claim to be crashing the gates. But I get that still doesn't get you over your Obama problem.

So change your registration to Independent. Change your plans for November to 'undecided.' Opt out for now. If folks call for your support, tell them why you can't commit to Obama. You've got eight months, maybe Obama will mend his ways and win you over. Or maybe John McCain will piss you off. But for now, just be an undecided independent.

And if Obama doesn't win you over by November, then if you're in a swing state or a close state, hold your nose and vote for him. If his sexist dogwhistles anger you, then do it for the women who need Roe v. Wade. It won't be the first time we've had to rely on some sexist male's good graces. If his smearing of Clinton using right-wing memes bothers you, then hold your nose and vote for him for her sake, so they can't blame his loss on HER (and you know the OFB will try if he loses, it can't possibly be any flaw in Obama or their "grassroots" campaign). Or simply think of it as a vote against the greater of two evils if you must.

And if you're in a safe Dem state, vote for a third party or write in someone or abstain in protest. While I don't think you should contribute to a McCain win, I also don't think you need to help run up Obama's totals or soften his loss if you honestly can't stand the man.

Joebasic's picture
Submitted by Joebasic on

and as I have said..I do indeed see the peril involved in a president McCain and would hate to be a part of it. But some sort of message has to be sent some way..and if speaking out on a blog is one of the only ways to do be it. As it is..this is one of a small handful of spaces on the net where you can even think of speaking ill of the Obama and not being booted off. That alone speaks volumes.
Recovered DU member

Sima's picture
Submitted by Sima on

Joebasic is right, that's a problem right there.

I fully agree with the Supreme court argument but... but... if I get a more favorable Supreme court by throwing feminism, poverty issues, the economy, Social Security, health care, etc, under the bus, what's the point? And more favorable to what? Probably not women and the poor, those needing health care, Social Security...

Can't you see? I'm tired of being the dog that gets the bone, an afterthought as a reward for voting against my best interests as a whole. Yea, yummy bone. But no thanks, I think I'll go hunting with my own pack, thank you. That pack will include Democrats, Patty Murray, Jay Inslee, for example, but just because a person is labeled a Democrat, doesn't mean they are part of MY pack. Not any more.

TonyRz's picture
Submitted by TonyRz on

JB - consider this - you, too might have an Obamaphany between now and 11/08, and decide you must must must vote against the GOP, no matter what that means. Even if it's out of fear, and even if you have to plug up every orifice to enter the voting booth.

Should that happen - it's many months away, after all - and you pull the Anointed One's lever as a registered Independent, you are actually rewarding the extremely bad behavior of his campaign even moreso than if you pull it as a registered Democrat. You would be buttressing the claims being mouthed by the cult day in and day out about the centrists and Independents Obama is bringing in. Not only that, you will be helping to bolster the credibility of the utterly poisonous chattering classes on teh tee vee. "Obama Republicans" and "Obama Independents" is a big part of their completely made-up narrative, too, and is being shoved down our throats daily about the powers of the Anointed One.

OTOH, if you are registered D, and vote for him, you're just a reliable sheep for another election cycle. Not the worst thing in the world, exactly. You've done it before. You're likely to do it again.

Finally, if you really DO end up having the will power to still decline to vote in 11/08, and you're registered I, then all that says to the party and the punditry is that in 2012, even more of these ugly, divisive, tactics (er, politics as usual, Barack) are called for.

So it seems to me that a party-affiliation switch between now and 11/08 sends exactly the opposite message than the one you (and I) obviously believe needs to be sent right now.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

It probably does send the wrong message. I hadn't thought of it that way. In my defense, the entire independent to democrat power ratio that has developed as a result of this movement is incredibly fucked up, especially since we're still in the primary season.

Submitted by lambert on

[Great comments. Thanks, all!]

Interesting use of the passive voice.

I'd rephrase "the entire independent to democrat power ratio that has developed" to "the entire independent and Republican power ratio that the Obama campaign leveraged in open primary states." But that's just me. Yes, David Axelrod is a genius.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

You are bbsolutely correct, lambert, this didn't just happen. Although it wasn't all the Obama campaign's doing, they had plenty of enablers on the so-called left. I've never seen a group of people so anxious to give away their power to independents and Republicans as some of the "progressive" bloggers. All that work to crash the gates only to hand the keys to the kingdom over to the first smooth talking man who comes their way? Maybe it's because so many of the gate crashers are boys, if they were women, they'd know never to trust a smooth talking man - they say all the right things to get you into bed, but they won't care whether you come because it's all about them.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

absolutely not bbsolutely since I'm pretty sure the latter is not a word.

dr sardonicus's picture
Submitted by dr sardonicus on

I also think part of why more voters are eschewing party affiliations is due to the same reason that many of the religious are rejecting denominational labels, and simply wanting to be referred to as "Christians". More and more,people don't want to be labelled; it's a form of rebellion against the increasing loss of privacy.
...for the rest of us

kelley b's picture
Submitted by kelley b on

if you’re in a safe Dem state, vote for a third party or write in someone or abstain in protest

You have a fundamental misunderstanding. There is no such thing as a safe Dem state. They have stolen 2 presidential elections, becoming more entrenched in the electoral machinery each time.

If there is not an overwhelming electoral turnout for who ever the candidate is, the 'Thugs will steal it again.

There is no safety. Anywhere.

No Hell below us
Above us, only sky

janittdott's picture
Submitted by janittdott on


Look, a LOT of us are in this terrible delima.
I got TEAR GASSED for McGovern!
How can I be THINKING of leaving MY Party!

But I too am SO offended by Barack Obama's tactics
and I am SO sick of being called a...racist...if I try to say so,

It's just a LIE by Obamacrats that they will support Hillary
They fully intend to bury Hillary so it's a stripped olive branch....
And their posts at Hillary favoring sites are like broadcasts of
Tokiyo Rose.

*watch the watch, watch the watch*
*you are getting very sleepy*
*Give up, Hillary, you CAN'T win*

First, bless you joebasic. You are doing what you CAN do.
Using your model of a protest

for that to work...every switch would require a letter to John Dean
and to you superdelegates and delegates.

And the MOVEMENT would have to be blogged and hopefully
picked up in the press (as in press releases)

It would take a LOT of people doing that to have an effect

And it isn't ALWAYS about doing.
Sometimes it's about...threatening to do...
But he's bringing IN so many Obamaknats...
They are a swarm.

If it's now any vote is still a matter how ill informed...
And I'm afraid we are sort of...there.

So just leaving is turning it over to...them.

But THIS is The Thing.
The Complaint being leveled at Hillary NOW is that her campaign
is not agile enough to handle the sudden ocean swell of barack
and they are saying that it's HER fault.

We KNOW it's the sexist rightist MEDIA'S fault
and it's not Barack's brilliance, either.
It's are driving his campaign...for him.

So we have to do better for...Hillary.

And the OTHER thing is...they are feeling good.
Obama's GIG is as President Feelgood.

So WE need to make Hillary...funner
Cause FUN trumps HOPE everytime

I'm not a...blogger. I do...chatrooms, myself.
I got started in this crisis too late too get up to speed quickly...
I'm sort of staggering around in here and we only have


But ONE DAY is enough...on line...say at YouTube.

And I USED to be a PR person so I'm...thinking...
Let's seee...

The, thing is, to succeed, any PR campaign has to

1) be noticed
2) be multiplied...repitition is the sincerest form of flattery.
3) become...hip...and embraced by others

We KNOW Hillary is the BEST candidate.
She's just not the...hippest..candidate.

But WE can change that.

And, instead of being SO our political thinking...
we need to get...creative.

What ELSE can we do...
(using the new media tools available.)

I have...Chris Crocker...on my space page.
You know him as the "Leave Britany Alone!" boy.

What you may NOT know is that Chris has had
MILLIONS of hits at his YouTube rant for Brittany

It was the #1 Youtube video last year
According to Time magazine.

He's gettin g his own...TV show.

(I wonder if, being a...lady...he's a Hillary Supporter?)

Even if he isn't...the IDEA is...great...for OUR purposes.

It would be HYSTERICAL if Hillary fans
Started doing hundreds of
LEAVE HILLARY ALONE videos on YouTube.

In fact...THIS site...could launch...a contest.
For the BEST leave Hillary Alone at YouTube.

we could give out...a prize...something...silly...and fun.

Say the word Shrillones,
and I will post your press release here in...a hour.
See...that would be...hysterical
And VERY...hip.

the Clintons have WONDERFUL senses of humor.
And the people HERE are just...hillarious.

It could...happen.


"You need a mother VERY badly!"

-wendy to captain hook