Comments from the Left V

Another from The Gadflyer: Where Do We Go From Here? - different author:

"I hesitate to aim barbs at John Kerry, an honorable, thoughtful man who has served his country well throughout his life. And Democratic primary voters have no one but themselves to blame for nominating him. But he couldn't beat a president who lied to the American people to start an unpopular war; who has the worst jobs record since the Depression; who hasn't done a thing about the most pressing domestic concern (health care); and who wasn't legitimately elected in the first place. Pathetic."

But how do you really feel?

Comments from the Left IV

The Gadflyer: Yes, Virginia, There is a Silver Lining:

"Finally, there is this. At the end of the day Republicans won close Senate races and the presidency principally by appealing to fear, hate, and prejudice. Well-meaning, non-homophobic Republicans may rationalize this by saying that it's a small price to pay for a strong leader who will keep them safe. (Ahem.) But they know better. They know better when they avoid the subject with their gay friends, and they know better when they hear the bile coming from the religious leaders and everyday bigots they depend on for votes but wouldn't be caught dead associating with. Deep down they know a tax cut isn't worth a soul, and security without principles is meaningless. They fought, and won, dirty. And they know it. Democrats may not be entirely clean on the subject - if one is not homophobic it doesn't make much sense to be against gay marriage - but the bottom line is we didn't try and get a president elected by pandering to hate. I'd rather lose every god damn election in my lifetime than win their way. But the beauty is, we can win without doing that. We did in 2000, and we came within a whisker of doing so this year. Remember that when the DLC tells us that we need to sell out gays (after telling us to sell out unions, and blacks, and the poor, and all the other, well, Democrats out there) to win the support of Bible-thumping bigots in Alabama that are never going to vote for us anyway. That's wrong, on every level."

Speaking of reality, "...but the bottom line is we didn't try and get a president elected by pandering to hate." What was "Bush is a Nazi!"; "Bush will bring back the draft!"; "All the Bushies are evil!"; "Bush will steal the elderly's Social Security!"; and, oh - by the way - most of the content of this post from the Gadflyer! It sure looks like hate to me. But I forgot, the left is immune to hypocrisy.

Comments from the Left III

DonkeyRising (weblog):

"Given this sense of cultural alienation, it must be questioned whether candidates like Gore or Kerry can ever really be viable with these voters. Democrats may have to choose candidates in the future who do not so easily evoke this sense of cultural alienation and who can connect in a genuine fashion with these voters. I come to this conclusion reluctantly because I had hoped that an effective campaign could overcome this obstacle by, in effect, using wedge Democratic issues like health care or jobs to build support among this group. But the messenger appears to matter a great deal, just as having a message does (see point number two, above). The Democrats in the future will have to pay attention to both, I think."

Bush's "Attack" on the Environment

When will this end?

Comments from the Left II

Eric Alterman (MSNBC):

"The problem is just this: Slightly more than half of the citizens of this country simply do not care about what those of us in the "reality-based community" say or believe about anything. "

Reality? Really? Can you say "Fahrenheit 911" and still claim you live in reality?

Comments from the Left I

I have a series of these comments. I'm not sure how long they will last, but given the anger during the election, I'd imagine they'll surface for some time. The election results give the Left just one more reason to HATE America!

Joshua Micah Marshall:

"It would almost be comical if it weren't for the seriousness of what it portends. This election cut the nation in two. A single percentage point over 50% is not broad. A victory that carried no states in the Northeast, close to none in the Industrial midwest is not nationwide, and none on the west coast is not nationwide."

A 'single' percentage point is still 100% more over 50%, than Bill Clinton ever received. Can you say 43% (1992)?

WI: Election reform

Yeah, this will fix the problem:

"McCann suggested two reforms: better funding for election officials so that well-trained poll inspectors can be hired and voter lists that are regularly updated."

Spending more money on poll workers will stop fraud - no doubt about it.

Media "How did this happen?"

Last night on a number of analysis panels (MSNBC, CNN, Fox, etc), the question came up with great frequency: "What's going on with the Democratic Party? Why don't they get it?"

This year was pretty clear from a Presidential candidate - they didn't have one that STOOD for anything. The theme of this candidate's campaign was, "Bush is wrong", but little substance on why "I'm right".

The other area of angst among the panels was the 'morals' and 'values' issue that came through in the results. They trumped personal economic needs which the Democrats relied on in '92 - "it's the economy stupid". They also didn't understand the 'tie' into security and the war on terror. These are moral issues as well as security issues. In addition, to my point above, Americans respect someone who believes in something - even if they don't necessarily agree with them.