I'm a bit reluctant to post any questioning of Kerry right now.

[MyUncle]

I don't want to mess things up or get flamed. Should I buck up and post or shut up (until after the election).

Thanks Lounge for answering the more difficult questions in life.

(edited to change subject from "afraid" to "reluctant".

[clydefrand]

1. What's to question?

[MyUncle]

3. Are you trying to get me to open up?

I'm not biting until I hear more about what to do. Kind of feeling wimpy today.

[fob]

19. Feeling wimpy today? Perhaps you're looking for

PinkTutuDemsUnderground.com? We don't take kindly to that type of Dem round here. If you have a legitimate question, ask it and be prepared to defend your words. As long as it's not gratuitous, thinly-veiled RW talking points, you'll gather some hearty debate.

You may want to check snopes with your "question" just in case it's already been debunked. Also refrain from citing, DRUDGE, Newsmax, Freepers, Fox, Limpballs, etc., especially to BACK UP your point.

You seem to have some reticence with Kerry, join the debate and have all your fears allayed. The penultimate step is to burn the pink tutu, the final step is to vote John Kerry Nov. 2nd.

Also;

Learn how to use these keywords correctly;
Lose, Loose, Their, There, They're, Your, You're, Its, It's, Tack, Tact, In other words, Another words, Here, Hear, Know, No, To, Too, Two and others.

Enjoy!

[2Design]

2. only positives from now until after election - pm someone

[JimmyJazz]

5. I completely agree

let the repubs do the bashing at this point. We are going to be positive from here on out. If you have concerns you can pm me. I'm in the middle of a pm exchange with someone right now who has your same concerns and I think it's been helpful for both of us.

[sundog]

4. All the questioning just drags everyone's spirits down...

imho

[Melodybe]

6. Right on, go register some voters

or canvass 4 Kerry.

I personally think Kerry is kicking major ass, too bad you don't agree.

[ThomCat]

7. I'm going to buck the consensus

I think that circling the wagons here is a bad thing.

We all have to put on a united front "out there" when we're facing the freepers and the undecided. But here, among ourselves, we should be able to talk seriously about our party and our candidate.

If we use all this peer pressure to shut down conflicting options and discussion then we're doing what the republicans do. If we insist on uncritical support of our reps then we're closing our eyes and acting on faith.

I'm too much of a cynic to have faith like that.

But as I told someone in a private message, I agree that we all need to support Kerry at least enough to get him elected. We can question him, but not stridently enough to drive people to Nader or Bush.

Once Kerry gets into office we need to turn up the heat and pull him left. We all know damned well that there will be a whole lot of political and corporate pressure pulling him right.

[Misunderestimator]

10. Unfortunately, since DU is an open forum, "out there" is "in here"

I say shut up, and keep the negative crap inside... the only really negative stuff lately has come from disruptors, from what I've seen... so anyone wanting to post anything that might tear down our candidate (most of which has been absolute bullshit, by the way), I will immediately label as anti-DU.

[ThomCat]

14. You're entitled to that opinion.

But it's like my option of abortion. You don't like it, don't have one. So if you don't want people using critical thinking until the election, feel free to shut down your own critical thinking until november. But that doesn't give anyone the right to shut down other people.

Insisting that people become sheep simply because the cause is righteous is a tactic that never does anyone any good, no matter how righteous the cause might actually be.

I say to everyone, Think! Discuss! Refuse to be dumbed down into an obedient little drone! Support our side, but do it from knowledge and conviction, not from peer pressure and obedience.

[Misunderestimator]

16. I say that we need to build up our candidate and concentrate on winning

this election. Any normal election year... I might agree with you. Not this one. The choice is obvious. I'm not saying don't discuss or be dumbed down... I'm saying don't attack our candidate. What good does that do? We can attack all we like after he's elected.

How you tied this to pro-choice is absolutely beyond me.

Oh... and welcome to DU.

[ThomCat]

22. There is a HUGE difference

Between discussing and attacking. But in the drive to get Kerry elected there is a tendency to see discussions as attacks.

Discussions can be critical. There will be disagreements. Support might not be 100%. But that doesn't mean that people should be accused of attacking Kerry.

Election year or not, we need to know what our candidate is going to do, what he is going to support, and how he will do it.

Whether or not we want him to get elected isn't up for debate. We are agreed that we want him to win. But if we wait until after he wins to ask, "what next," then it's too late to influence what happens next.

[Misunderestimator]

25. Since you're new here, maybe you haven't noticed all of the incredibly

negative posts that have come from other newcomers. There are things that can be improved about Kerry and his campaign, as can be about ANY campaign. With the election so close, however, my point is that we need to be building him up and not tearing him down. There are many undecideds who probably visit this site, and there are a lot of new members who would like nothing more than to try to influence them towards voting against Kerry.

There are plenty of threads here if you care to search for them or simply look for them daily that go into great detail about "what he is going to support, and how he will do it."

[ThomCat]

26. Actually, I'm not new.

I've been here for years under a different User ID. I'm just breaking in a new one.

I have noticed some very negative stuff. There are definitely trolls around. But let's not use the extremes to shut down the legitimate discussions.

Yes, there are threads about what Kerry says he will support. But as with every politician, or every agency, or every company, what someone says is only part of the story. Discussion brings out the rest.

[Misunderestimator]

28. Then we are in violent agreement.

Don't post purely negative rhetoric and you won't be accused of anything. What was your user name before, or are you hiding something?

[ThomCat]

30. Paranoid much?

It was TKulesa. I had a poll to determine what my new ID would be. There were a bunch of posts about the change. Nothing was hidden.

Don't be an attack dog and I won't accuse you of anything either.

[Misunderestimator]

33. Yes, actually, paranoid often recently... since there have been so many

newcoming trolls who have posted very negative disruptive stuff about Kerry. Don't tell me you haven't noticed?

[ThomCat]

35. Actually, yes, I have

I agree with you that trolls are a problem.

But I'm violently opposed to the idea of giving in to them. We shouldn't become more reactionary because they're here. We should do our best to weed them out and otherwise do our best to ignore them.

It's tough sometimes. They try to mask themselves and intelligent critical debaters. Those of us on the cynical side get used as camoflage. But I still can't support the idea of shutting down disent. Tolerating the occasional troll is a small price to pay for the awesome debates and discussions we have here.

[Misunderestimator]

36. Stop saying that I am shutting down dissent. I find that offensive...

and completely against my character. And it is not an occassional troll lately.

[ThomCat]

39. "I say shut up, and keep the negative crap inside..."

This was the original quote that I interpreted as shutting down disent. How broad is your definition of "negative crap?"

It's a moot point. We agree that trolls need to be hunted down and banned. We won't come to an agreement on how much disent is okay from people who aren't trolls.

It'll get hashed out thread by thread.

[Misunderestimator]

40. OP: "Should I buck up and post or shut up"

I was answering one of the options. Sorry that it got misinterpreted that I'm a closed-minded sheep. My assumption that the poster even asked the question was that it was a negative enough thing to have to ask.

[Night Gal]

43. again, it seems there is confusion ....

about the difference between negative/disruptive stuff and the reality of what we NEED to do in order to WIN this thing.

Not singling you out here, but there seems to be a lot of folks here who put their fingers in their ears and repeat "la-la-la-la-la" if they read something they don't want to know.

Pretending that the campaign isn't in trouble right NOW is a sure way to get complacent and lose.

Shit. You could have James Carville come in here and mention some things that need to be changed and folks would be flaming him calling him names and questioning his sincerity.

[Misunderestimator]

46. Purely negative stuff doesn't help. Constructive stuff does.

The original poster has not yet mentioned what he was reluctant to post. I think it is better to keep negativity out of this for now if it is not doing anything constructive.

On edit... I just love how my words get twisted.

[Night Gal]

42. I totally disagree

with your statement of:

There are many undecideds who probably visit this site, and there are a lot of new members who would like nothing more than to try to influence them towards voting against Kerry.

I seriously doubt there are any undecided voters here, and if there were, the sheer nastiness would turn them off.

There is a LOT of difference between negativity and reality.

I'm in complete agreement with the original poster.
If we cannot recognize (through revelation and discussion) the problems, shortcomings and defects of this current race, we are doomed to another 4 years with Bush.

I too have suffered some arrows from the folks with blinders on.

This time there really IS an elephant in the middle of the damn living room and we can't afford to walk around it, pretending not to see it.

[Misunderestimator]

45. I'd say you have blinders on if you think that undecided voters don't

visit this site. And welcome to DU.

Tell me what you think the elephant is. Kerry's flip-flopping? Kerry's looks? What?

[Night Gal]

50. IMNSHO

First, thanks for the welcome. I'll put it with the other ONE I received.

As far as the campaign strategy, I do have some concerns... (in no particular order)

Failure to adequately fund the various organizations responsible to get the black voters out. While I may not love the dude, J Jackson is not being paid the props he deserves for what he can deliver.

The recent decision to pull ad money from states that have proved to be important to a WIN. We all know how the popular vote went 4 years ago and we still lost.

Continuing to take Nader to court. Talk about the pot calling the kettle...... opens up the DNC to real tangible claims of voter disenfranchisement.

Failure to provide hard hitting "talking heads" to the media who are actually able to answer the questions they are asked. I've watched gawd knows how many "debate style" mini interviews where the question is ignored and the talking points are just repeated. By actually answering the questions (we do have excellent answers to them BTW) instead of acting like a parrot, many of the undecided folks can be swayed.

Kerry's whole "reporting for duty" thing. Political advisors are paid big money to forsee what that type of focus was going to bring on. Continuing to go down that path after the first grumblings from the swift boat liars was foolish.

Not adequately getting the TEAM of Kerry/Edwards in the limelight instead of just Kerry.

Not getting the rest of the primary candidates ACTIVE support for Kerry promptly after the cards were on the table. Not going to single anyone out, but there is a bit too much self promotion still going on rather than uniting behind Kerry.

Not keeping a lid on the protesters at the RNC. Now I know this is a Constitutional right, etc.... but the demonstrations were counterproductive when viewed in the average voters living room.
Impressions are important, sometimes more important than doing what you feel is right, if the end goal is to be achieved.

Not having the right folks on board with this campaign from the beginning. Too late to do anything about that now except to file it away for future reference.

That's the ones that come to mind right now.

[Misunderestimator]

51. All very negative. And all opinions.

And many RW talking points engineered to make it look as if Kerry is running a weak campaign. Thanks, but I think he is running a highly effective one. And I hope you intend to vote for him.

[Night Gal]

54. yes

I vote where I've already made my investment, and that will be with Kerry.

[Misunderestimator]

48. Oh and btw... I've just read a bunch of your posts over the past couple

of days... and I'd say that you're on the verge of being a negative mouthpiece yourself. And you can go ahead and flame all you like... I don't have time for anything but working to get rid of Bush.

[Night Gal]

52. if you have the time to spare reading my old posts...

then why not read this and get the answers to your own question about what's wrong with the campaign:

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=132&subid=193&contentid=2906

(An excellent article that is a bit long, but is very enlightening when you look at 2004)

In short, we selected the most publicly liberal candidate that we could offer up and we're paying for it.

Like it or not, this no longer flies in America.

Clinton won by being perceived as a "New Democrat".
Arnold won in CA by being branded as a New Republican

See a pattern here?

If we don't learn from our mistakes, we are destined to repeat them

[Misunderestimator]

53. LMAO

[JohnKleeb]

20. The problem with the negative crap is

Many of us myself included are on the frontline battaling for Kerry, we hear him badmouthed by republicans in our schools, places of employment, etc from them, and we stand up for him and his values over the ones of Bush, and it's bound to piss some of us off that members of our own party are giving Kerry shit, I am not saying shut up but I really don't think it helps us, and frankly I want to know more about the great things Kerry has done, I read about what he did in the early 90's during the Rodney King riots in LA.

[ThomCat]

24. Hearing the good stuff is important.

A lot of the good stuff he's done only comes out in serious conversations. It comes out when we talk about the context of things he's done. It comes out when hash out what we think he'll do and why.

Cheerleading rarely ever pulls up serious information. I've learned more good stuff about Kerry during the serious discussions and debates than I ever have in the rah rah sessions.

[JohnKleeb]

32. Cheerleading to me is different than learning

Actually when we found out the other day that Kerry had learned to be a pilot at 16 and can do tricks, someone had a link where Kerry's reaction to the Rodney King fiasco was, it was something that reminded me of RFK.

[Redneck Socialist]

8. It is unfortunate that things have reached the point...

...where people are afraid to post what they think.

on edit: Missing letter

[Ducks In A Row]

11. that happened long before kerry was nominated or even running

the hope is he will help turn that around.

until he gets elected, it only helps the enemy to question him.

after the election of course all bets are off.

[Redneck Socialist]

15. I don't think it does

The "enemy" do fine all on their own. We should be able to discuss what we like and what we dislike about our candidate without getting dog piled.

[Night Gal]

44. Thanks for being a voice of reason Redneck

Seems like there's no acceptance unless you have that 1K post level achieved.

I lurked on and off here for months and while I know that there are some true hearted liberals and Democrats within the core group, there are also those who wish to remain blind.

I am happy and confident with myself and my beliefs. It's too bad that the party that represents true freedom is not reflected in thee way that some of us are treated for views/ideas/opinions that do not necessarily stay within the lines.

[Redneck Socialist]

47. Lord knows I try

Not everybody new is a freeper troll. Unfortunately we don't need much help from the trolls. We're pretty good at eating our own here at DU.

Welcome to DU, here's hopping you stick around.

[Misunderestimator]

49. Why does this post of yours sound so very familiar...

"too bad that the party that represents true freedom is not reflected in thee way that some of us are treated for views/ideas/opinions that do not necessarily stay within the lines"

Bwaaaaahaaaahaaaa.... You think we're stupid? unbelievable

[MyUncle]

12. I'm not afraid,

but I am reluctant to be negative right now. There is a greater good at stake here that I am starting to feel that trumps us getting our demons out.

[Redneck Socialist]

18. Discussing questions or concerns about a candidate...

... not going negative. There should be no better place to "get you demons out" than among a supposedly friendly crowd.

[ThomCat]

31. Well said.

[Ducks In A Row]

9. go to freepererland, they'll be happy to question kerry

but don't expect any truth or honesty from them.

[ThomCat]

21. That's not very nice

That sounds a whole lot like, "Disent is treason," or "You're either with us or against us." Legitimate, reasonable questions about Kerry's policies, his likely administration, and other real issues doesn't make someone a freeper.

We're better than the freepers because we have facts and information on our side. But that won't last long is people are piled on and attacked every time they ask a question or start a discussion.

DU is for discussions. This site wasn't created solely for cheerleading.

I, for one, refuse to be reduced to cheerleading.

[Misunderestimator]

27. It's unfortunate that you didn't join DU some time ago, during the...

primaries. You would have seen a magnificent amount of debate. Since you know why this site was created, you should know that its current purpose is to get rid of Bush. Ask all the questions you like, no one is trying to stop you from that. But post purely negative rhetoric, and you will be thought (at least by me) to be working for the enemy.

[ThomCat]

29. I've been here for years under a different name.

I was here during the primaries.

Nobody on this thread, that I'm aware of, posts purely negative stuff. You are implying (almost directly stating) that questions and discussions that aren't purely supportive are purely negative. As I said above, that sounds a whole lot like, "any disent is treason."

Be careful not to polarize your perceptions to the point where you are seeing enemies were there aren't any.

There are a lot of us supporting Kerry who insist he has to win, but we also think he was a 2nd or 3rd choice. He's good, but only within limits. He needs our support, but not our uncritical support. We need to support him, but we need to question him enough to be able to prod him to the left.

[Misunderestimator]

34. You are apparently not reading my posts...

I never once said that posting questions and discussions that aren't purely support are purely negative. So, stop putting words in my posts. I haven't accused anyone on this thread of posting purely negative stuff. However, we have had a recent infiltration of very negative posters, so I'm offering my opinion that purely negative posts about Kerry are not really welcome, since that WAS the OP. To make the analogy that what I wrote was the same as "dissent is treason" is ridiculous and inflammatory.

[ThomCat]

37. Sorry.

That depends on the interpretation of what is purely negative. There are some who seem to think that anything that isn't purely positive must be purely negative.

If you are more discerning than that then I'm sorry. I don't mean to tar you with that brush.

[Misunderestimator]

38. Thanks. I am a bit more discerning than that.

[Trajan]

13. Maybe it's better to exercize your right to free speech ....

and take the lumps as they come ....

It HAS to be better than playing the 'victim' without cause ....

NO one is restraining your speech: so stop hiding behind your facade of 'fear' ...

Afraid to hear you might be wrong ??? ...

[MyUncle]

17. Edited post to say reluctant.

Thanks for pointing out that "afraid" is way too woossy.

[blondeatlast]

23. Im a GD2004 devotee; I'm relatively certain you know how

things are over there.

If it's constructive and you can take the inevitable heat, go ahead. If it's flameworthy, use the sense the Lord gave you.

If you have to ask in the Lounge, though, I think you already know the consequences.

[MyUncle]

41. I did come to the Lounge, because it is a insanely sane place

to have a discussion.