Is anyone else bugged by DUers taking joy from candidates having trouble?

[WilliamPitt]

I'm coming at this as a Kerry guy, so I should say that out front. It is pretty clear that John's campaign has hit the reef in the last 48 hours. His manager is gone, other staffers are grumbling, and overall he has proven himself to be a far, far less effective candidate than I could have believed. Maybe he'll turn it around before New Hampshire, but I am not terribly optimistic.

That having been said, John Kerry would make an excellent President. His IWR vote justifiably hangs around his neck like an albatross, but in his 19 years of service in the Senate, he has built up a progressive voting record that is to be honored.

Howard Dean also endured some recent bumps with the Confederate flag thing. He weathered it well, showing me for one that he is way better on the trail than Kerry. But he got dinged up for a while. I think, by the way, that Dean would make an excellent President.

My point? When Dean had his trouble, and with Kerry now having his, it freaks me out to see some DUers apparently taking joy from these problems. You saw it, I saw it. It has been and is all over General Discussion. Search 'Kerry' or 'Dean' and you'll find plenty.

Folks, one of these candidates, or one of the others, is going to be our nominee. One of them is going to carry the banner. When any of them stumble, it means trouble for us all. I don't care who your candidate is or who my candidate is or who the other guy who made you mad last week has for a candidate. Any one of these guys gets tagged, we all feel the sting.

Basically, I'm saying candidate advocacy is awesome. Shadenfreude when one or the other or the other gets lumped up is weird, over-competitive, and utterly blind to the goal, which should be scourging the criminals from our house.

"Yay! Your guy looks dumb today!" is a suicidal attitude. Here's my poll:

[lysergik]

1. Nothing wrong with a little bantering.

Everyone has their favorite candidate, its like a sports team. You cheer for your team, when another competitive team gets crushed one game you cheer, but when it comes down the playoffs and eventually the "BIG GAME" you pick your sides regardless if you've jeered that person/team in the past.

We all know there are weaker, less desirable (electable) people running right now so people will jockey for their candidate when it comes down to Super Tuesday and when the democratic nominee is announced, hopefully we can put the differences aside and all stand united against ChimpCo and make it blatantly apparant on election day 2004.

[La_Serpiente]

3. Here is my take on it

You say hopefully that we can put differences aside. However, if the primary becomes so poisoned, then our Democratic coalition might be fractured and we won't be strong going into the runup for the General Election.

I think there is constructive criticism and there is unnecessary criticism. I think it is unnecessary to engage in overkill.

[ClintonTyree]

2. There seems to be...........

(at least for the moment) an overwhelming majority that are against the circular firing squad (very well put by the way, Will), yet the board is inundated with negative attacks at faultering candidates. I'd love nothing more than to see positive posts about all of our candidates, but that doesn't seem to be the prevailing sentiment. I try very hard not to be drawn into these baits, but try as I may sometimes I just can't take it anymore and click "reply".
I'd truly like to see less of these attacks, but I've always beena dreamer. Until the primaries are over it will continue. I'm willing to bet afterwards as well. We have to stop this petty squabbbling and concentrate on the real goal; getting whistle-ass out of office
I would hope that whomever our choice as Democratic nominee is, that we all come together and work as hard as possible for his/her campaign. Like I said, I always been a dreamer, but I feel that some will be unable to put their personal feelings aside and will continue to demean our ultimate candidate.
Unfortunate, but true.

[Egnever]

4. That whole thing would be a lot easier to swallow

If kerry hadnt spent the last few weeks twisting like a contortionist in order to paint one of our other candidates as the devil.

I feel no remorse whatsoever seing his campaign fail. He may have stood up for some decent principles in his past but his behavior in this campaign has been downright shameful. I will be glad when his negative campaign of personal slander bites the bullet and we can get back to the big family bush bash we had going for a while.

[robsul82]

8. Exactly.

Nailed it on the head, Egnever.

Later.

RJS

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tyler Durden]

25. YIKES! Anyone hit "ALERT" yet?

I think we have a "disrupter" on our hands (to put it in "PC" fashion."

[Padraig18]

26. Yup!

Sure did.

[Hep]

34. True Right Wing subtlety

As usual!

LOL!

[CWebster]

31. Q, here is a good example of how to get

banned.

[PeaceProgProsp]

5. Honest criticism is good.

I find it offensive when people dishonestly criticize. It's very unhelpful when peoples' own convictions contradict their criticisms, or when peeople have firmly held uninformed opinions about candidates.

However, some truths are very painful, and, just because they're painful doesn't mean they shouldn't be stated (with the emphasis being on "truth").

[blm]

37. Agree. I'm tough on Dean but never called him racist for his gaffe.

I did point out that he was not truthful when he said he was trying to start a discussion about race relations when he was clearly defending his NRA support and race relations were NOT referenced at all in that interview. But I wouldn't jump on the racist bandwagon.

I do, however, have a big problem with the characterizations of Dean that somehow make him into some populist savior when NOTHING in his record shows that to be a certainty. In fact, it points to the opposite. A compromising centrist who treated the left in his state badly.

[Kanary]

6. Dems have a lot of talent

for shooting themselves in the proverbial foot by so much unnecessary fighting.

We don't seem to be trainable.

Kanary

[rucky]

7. Poll after Poll is overwhelmingly ABB

We all sense the urgency of the next election, some folks have convinced themselves that their guy is the only one who can save us.

[FrenchieCat]

9. I just want to win

and get Bush out of our house, Goddoggonit!

[incapsulated]

10. A better question

Are the candidates taking joy in the other candidates troubles?

You bet they are.

Look, this is a campaign, a fight to get to be the Democratic nominee for the President of the United States. It's not going to be pretty. But it never is, not with the Republicans either, when they have open primaries. Just ask John McCain.

And what if you honestly believe Candidate X would be a horrible nominee and a lousy President to boot? Wouldn't you want him to go down? What if you honestly believed that Candidate Y, your candidate, would be the very best choice? Doesn't his success depend on his opponents faliure to a certain extent? In order to win, somebody has to lose.

You said yourself that whatever the Democrats are dishing out to each other are kisses compared to what Rove has in store for the eventual nominee. I would rather they got some practice in now, even if it's against other dems, than be a deer in the headlights come Rove Time.

[VelmaD]

11. It drives me nuts

Part of me knows that it's political survival of the fittest - it seperates the wheat from the chaff. But a bigger part fears that it just tears our eventual nominee down so much that they can't ever recover. I worry that the acrimony during the primary bleeds over into the general election and we never get over the petty slights so that we can all work together effectively.

[Voltaire99]

12. Ha! Not bugged in the least - it's very American!

Believe it or not, William, some things run deeper than party ties.

We are a people with an ingrained distrust of political leaders. Whether expressed in Thomas Nast's cartoons or Mark Twain's essays or by Jon Stewart on The Daily Show, our mild antipathy towards leaders is at its most obvious when we lampoon, take pleasure in suffering, and catcall and whoop.

Schadenfreude does a democratic people good. Mainly it helps to thwart the fondness for kings that is poison to democracy. Self-rule in a republic, you know, doesn't require hero-worship of the egomaniacs who wish to govern. It just requires picking the right egomaniac.

What we have all witnessed since 9/11 - the galling elevation of a toady like Giuliani and an ignoramus like Bush, and all the lies and even violence that worship permits - is the problem to really worry about. That tendency toward reverence truly threatens us. We can't be free on our knees.

Relax - you're being freaked out by something that's gone on for ages and will, with luck, go on for ages more. You should welcome the passion, and excuse the discourtesy. Even the noted asswipe Donald Rumsfeld acknowledges that freedom is a messy thing. The next time your candidate steps in dog poop, try to forgive me for laughing. ;-)

[Zomby Woof]

35. good post

"Self-rule in a republic, you know, doesn't require hero-worship of the egomaniacs who wish to govern."

Get that memo out to the Dean folks. :-)

[ryharrin]

13. I picked option three.

Not because I don't have any opinion, my breath is just kickin today. Eeew.

[mdmc]

53. why do people run from me?

yuk yuk - voted #3 too.
:dem: :dem:
:~)

[ThirdWheelLegend]

14. I voted other...

I like the fact that FACTS come out about candidates. That is GOOD for the political process. When ACTUAL situations and actions by candidates are discussed that is good. Although alot of DUers seems to feel "Even if it's true, it isn't"

Now remarks about appearance and assumptions formed by the media are annoying.

TWL

:)

[DrFunkenstein]

15. Kerry Is Bringing It All Back Home

Kerry's campaign was really hamstrung by inner divisions between the DC and Boston camps. I've always seen the DC people as married to their job, and Boston people as married to Kerry. The DC people were too into poll-driven politics. The Boston people know who Kerry is and know that he should stay true to himself.

I think the media has generally given Dean a free ride into the general elections (where he'll get trounced), so Kerry has to force people to look at the credibility gap between Dean's record and his platform. It isn't pretty to watch, and I know that Kerry would much prefer to have a battle of ideas - but the media is not interested in battles of ideas. They prefer when candidates call each other names. So niceness equals media silence, essentially.

Personally, I would much prefer smaller debates where the differences between the candidates could be shown. I'm confident that if you put Dean and Kerry in the same room - no media filter - Kerry would come out on top. He has been strong in the debates, and his message has gotten sharper.

I'll leave with this account of the Weld-Kerry battle of 1996:

We were pummelling him through August, but his campaign turned on a dime when Bob Shrum was hired as his consultant. It went from flaccid to sharp in a week."

Kerry's aides insist that it was more than Shrum. They say that Kerry was distracted in Washington, that he didn't really focus on the campaign until the Senate recessed. "It wasn't a lack of focus," Kerry says. "It was a strategy. I figured people wouldn't really be paying attention until the fall debates."

The last four debates were fabulous political theatre-two very smart men having at each other. "John's at his best under pressure, when he's being seriously challenged," Paul Nace, an old Navy friend, says.

"He gets really cool, very calm. He really is a warrior-he just loves it. I took one look at him as he was walking into Faneuil Hall for one of the last debates and I thought, Bill Weld has no idea what's about to hit him."

Kerry won the election by eight percentage points. "John has always been underestimated politically," Marttila says. "But that race had the quality and intensity of a Presidential campaign, and he won. I don't see how they can underestimate him anymore, but they probably will."

[flpoljunkie]

52. Independent pollsters Rothenberg and Cook yesterday very concerned Dean

will be nominated "barring a miracle" and that Dean, altho he has energized the base, will be able to be painted by the GOP as "sufficiently liberal to define the whole party" and that Senators running for re-election, especially in the South, will seek to distance themselves from Dean.

This is what every Democrat, who wants to see George Dubya Bush out of the White House, needs to think long and hard about.

To hear for yourself, go to http://www.c-span.org and click on the video "Debate on the 2004 Senate Election". Above comments are from the very beginning of the tape.

They are immediately followed by comments from former Communications Director for the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee, Ginny Wolf of South Carolina, regarding Dean' electability in the South.

[JanMichael]

16. I hate our self destruction, it's so insane really. The people making...

....the prolonged internecine attacks are daff. One of these guys will be our literal Sword against the Bushites, why kill any of them now?????

Wanna know what's fucked up when compared with my support of these guys? I'm a SOCIALIST DAMMIT AND I'M TERRIFIED OF FOUR MORE YEARS OF NEO-COSERVATIVE ATTACKS (IE DESTRUCTION) ON 60 YEARS, NO 100 YEARS, OF PROGRESSIVE ACHIEVEMENTS!!!!!!

Goddamn it all if we, WE, lose in 2004....

[specimenfred1984]

17. Dems are Diverse, That's a big Positive

I think most dems will back Dean, Clark or Kerry when the time comes. I know I will. I got bashed by you and others when I mentioned the unofficial candidate that's outraised 4 of the official ones. Bashing is just a rough way of discussing things.

I know, and I know other dems know that, the goal in 2004 is ousting this regime of conspiratorial neocon imperialists and replacing them with someone who will actually do something about war, healthcare, the economy, equal rights, social security, deficits, jobs and who will also just plain tell the truth. That'll be Dean, Clark or Kerry.

The frustration with the current twilight zone is so friken high that the whole arena of political discussion has turned into a predatory environment wherein going for the jugular is the 1st move. It's the result of 100+ years of govt and corporate propagandizing that's turned us all into greedy, reactionary, argument-culture, winner takes all, non-compromising competitors.

Still, when a real threat comes along like neocon fascism, I believe we will all rally together to defeat it.

[sujan]

18. I am enjoying

[drfemoe]

19. I dunno

I'd rather everyone just rally up behind my guy ... then we could all get along ;) ..

Your question has two sides .. are you talking about the candidate's slamming each other or what goes on here at DU? I think it's obvious that if candidate A doesn't throw a tirade about candidate B at every opportunity .. or in some cases candidates A,B,C,D,E doin a dance on candidate F .. their supporters wouldn't be relaying the same messages and 'attacks'.

In Dean's case, the hounds have done nothing but make him stronger.

It bothers me a little when people forcast that he would lose the general. But I think they are just missing a broader view. Dean is just one part of a much larger movement of people who want to restore constitutional rights and economic opportunity to the citizenry. We will either rule ourselves or be ruled by lords and masters who profit at our misfortune.

I'm open for an investigative, informative, exchange of ideas. If someone wants to post their candidate's attack or focus on 'my' candidate, don't expect me to accept it as gospel. Certainly don't expect me to believe any prognosticators who claim he is a 'loser'.

I don't go hunting down threads to disrupt. Some folks around here like to play rough house. I just play on the (mostly) tame threads. As long as they don't bring down the house, and the mods can take the action, let them play. (Or they can go run a couple laps around the block to release energy?)

[Lexingtonian]

21. not really

To be honest, I don't see any real evidence that Kerry's campaign 'hit a reef' or whatever. Sure, it's dirty laundry being washed in public and gawking/squawking by the silly, but I don't see it mattering. What matters is that Kerry seems to be waiting for something to happen rather than making things happen. Though maybe something sufficiently big is quietly in the making, quien sabe.

The overall problem is that no single candidate is looking like s/he has a comprehensive grasp of much, let alone all, of the available electorate. All the agitprop, bitching, and whining here seems so beside the point.

[jonoboy]

22. SOLIDARITY !!!

[Padraig18]

23. "As ye sow, so shall ye reap"

Sen. Kerry has spent the entire last 2 months playing "How shall I bash Gov. Dean today?", rather than focusing on promoting himself and his ideas; the results of his campaign's tactics are abundantly clear: his campaign is floundering and his poll numbers are dropping like a stone.

I take no joy in seeing it happen to a distinguished public servant like Sen. Kerry (who would make a fine President), but he has brought it on himself.

I find it a rather bizarre concept to think that supporters of Candidate X would and should not defend their candidate from attacks by supporters of Candidate Y, especially when those attacks are based on either Candidate X's statements used out-of-context, or 'talking points' from the RNC.

Bottom line: I stop when they stop; until then, I'll fight fire with fire--- it'll be good practice for next November.

[Tyler Durden]

24. SCHADENFREUDE is for your enemies.

"We are not enemies. We MUST be Friends." Abraham Lincoln, a Republican actually worth a damn.

[HFishbine]

27. Yeah

I'm bugged.

But I do have a legitimate question that nobody seems to be able to answer about Kerry. Why all the focus on Dean? It makes no sense as a strategy to gain Kerry votes, which are what he needs right now.

- Attacking Dean is not going to move voters from Dean to Kerry. If anything, and this is a remote possibility, it may move a few Dean supporters to Clark. Still picks up no votes for Kerry.

- If Kerry's thinking is that he needs to harvest votes from those who are ahead of him in the polls, why ignore Clark, Gephardt and Lieberman supporters?

- With more than one in five voters still undecided, wouldn't it make sense for Kerry to go after the undecideds rather than those who prefer another candidate?

The point is, Kerry's strategy makes no sense mathematically. It's as if he's trying to settle a grudge rather than persue a sensible course for gaining more votes. Maybe I'm missing something, but nobody seems to be able to tell me how the attack Dean strategy is going to advance Kerry.

[Le Taz Hot]

28. I've been singing this tune for months now

and here's the problem. The chronic bashers are prolific so the flame threads/posts are more numerous than the authors. The VAST MAJORITY of us rarely engage in this useless nonsense making it appear that there are more juveniles than there really are. Skinner and many DUers have pleaded for self-policing but apparently this is an impossibility for those suffering from severe arrested development. Since these mental midgets can't seem to check themselves before they hit the "Send" button it's up to EVERYONE ELSE to do it for them. I know it's unpopular and I've suggested it many times but you have two solutions:

1) Don't engage them. I'm not talking about a legitimate concern about a candidate, I'm talking about the "*insert candidate's name* eats fetuses" threads. Just don't play. I swear to the goddesses it's like watching Pavlov's dog around here sometimes the way people fall for the flamebait. These people are looking for attention -- don't give it to them.

2) Put them on ignore. I hate to say it but I counted 50+ people on my ignore list INCLUDING Dean supporters. There are two criteria for me: Repeatedly posting inanities against a candidate(s) and those bashing the San Joaquin Valley (a personal pisser). They have nothing to add to the dialog, no new ideas, no interesting points, and nothing substantial to say. They're a waste of protoplasm.

Look, we've got a GREAT variety of candidates this year, we should be grateful for that. In the end, we're going to need each other and it's going to be REALLY difficult to come together if we've spent the previous year-and-a-half throwing mortars at one another. The enemy is Bush and the right-wing gestapo -- not our Democratic presidential candidates.

/End Rant

[Trajan]

29. HELL YES ! ! ! .....

I find such negative posturing juvenile and destructive ....

This ISNT a football game: this is real life .... We need to keep the heat on the party in power, NOT shoot into our own camp ....

Some real ambulance chasers here sometimes ....


......

I still love DU though ....

[CWebster]

30. Lol...

but, if Kerry wasn't on the rocks would you be defending against attacks on the others?

Kerry has no one to blame but himself and he was responsible for much of the dirty, unrelenting pattern of attacking in an attempt to cause others "to stumble". Excuse me if I am not exactly sympathetic.

[Zomby Woof]

32. even my boogers are spicy!

No wait, I now have Ralph Wiggum on the brain! Thanks Will. :-)

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

33. After the primary, we'll all friends again

don't worry about it.

[Military Brat]

36. Save the time, energy, and ammunition for the big fight

I don't visit RW sites, but do any of them take glee in bush's fiascos and incompetence and hubris and idiocy? I doubt it.

The Dem candidates' mistakes are so minor, they bear a bit of scrutiny but not the endless microscopic picking apart of every word and phrase and what-ifs and plausible meanings and et cetera.

I do care who wins the nomination, and I do have a couple favorites and one distinct "please God no, not him," but in the meantime, unless someone does something really egregious (like rape, theft, child abuse, embezzlement), I will focus my energy on the political war against bush, not little skirmishes within our ranks.

That being said, for those who do want to engage in accusatory ping-pong, your posts are often thoughtful, sometimes amusing. If only the RW would read and quote those instead of the flame-throwing barbs.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

38. Will Pitt: "I am not terribly optimistic"

...and this is supposed to help the Kerry Kids?
Sounds like no bashing is needed with this kind of attitude.

[WilliamPitt]

41. Honesty is not bashing

[NewYorkerfromMass]

48. When you're down

you are not necessarily out- and defeatism never helped anyone get back up.

[MoonAndSun]

39. These flame wars are so nasty that I have made the decision

to "ignore" the posters who I feel are the worse offenders. It has made my time here at DU more bearable. I will "un-ignore" after the primaries are over.

[maxanne]

40. I'm bugged

and I find it very destructive. There are ways to critique without the insults and flames we see here.

There are reasons why Republicans win over and over. They have superior party organization. In my state, what one has to do to become a delegate to the national convention is so convoluted and difficult that it ensures that Joe/Josie average won't even attempt it. They are organized, efficient, and have blind, knee jerk party loyalty.

Even when they hate each other behind the scenes, when they're in public they are brothers. They do not criticize each other or engage in infighting, at least not in public.

As long as we continue to bash and prod at each other - they see it as a weakness, and chip away at us. If only we were capable of just standing together as a united front - they'd have far less to work with.

[Cocoa]

42. I'm concerned about gloating

I want everyone to feel good about the eventual nominee, but certain behavior may make that impossible.

[ninkasi]

43. My main objective

is getting Bush out. In my opinion, we should be attacking him, and his policies. Whichever of our candidates gets the nomination, I don't want quotes by anyone who opposed him in the primaries to be used by the right-wing to attack the one trying to unseat Bush.

Attack Bush, not each other.

[Skittles]

44. YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IT IS F***ING DISGRACEFUL. You won't see ME doing it because I KNOW WHO THE F***ING ENEMY IS.

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

45. I'm extremely bugged by it

I take no pleasure whatsoever in any of the Dems having problems, and I find it mildly sickening when people engage in this silly bullshit. Listen to the candidates, explore their records, and then cast your vote. If your nominee is any good, he or she doesn't need to advance at anyone's expense.

[Jacobin]

46. Get real. How else are you gonna thin the herd?

You want all nine running against AWOL?

[IndianaGreen]

47. It is better when someone else's candidate is the one that eats crow

The field has to narrow sooner or later. I plead guilty to perverse pleasure!

[IronLionZion]

49. nah it's basic human nature

that's politics! Just let it go.

[Terwilliger]

50. This poll is pointless

as well as the question

The pro-candidate folks may be hard on one another but that won't mean shit when the Repukes get their machine going.

Besides, I was told that it's a very necessary process to discuss issues about candidates and their viability as nominees. Some of these people are making huge blunders, and their abilities are very much in question.

Of course, there's the vitriol these discussions tend to inspire, but that appears to be the given in the partisan realm.

[MrPrax]

51. I am EXTREMELY bugged

Not by good old fashion partisanship, but by so-called democrats that THINK there is something wrong with the candidates proving themselves.

Whoever lives through this 'mud storm' will be much better able to battle the GOpukes and RoveCo.

The other thing that really bugs me is the defeatist attitude and some idea that Bush even has a chance in 2004.