Newsweek's Eleanor Clift asks: Is Dean Damaged Goods?

[Jack_Dawson]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3763267/

"Hardcore Deaniacs won't abandon their leader; they're cheering him on. But most voters don't know much about Dean, and the attacks by rival Democrats have jolted the party's supporters into a bad case of buyer's remorse even before the first vote is cast. Depending on your vantage point, this is either an opportunity to take a hard look at the man who could be the nominee, or it's an invitation to a self-destructive campaign among Democrats that will send a weak and wounded nominee into the lion's den with Bush."

My personal view: Dean is enjoying much-deserved success that comes with kicking off your campaign early, speaking your mind and raising tons of cash.

But if he becomes the nominee, the free ride he has been more or less enjoying from the media will come to an abrupt end. I believe with every ounce of my being that Clark will fare much better in the Bush/Rove meatgrinder. My $.02.

[dajabr]

1. You couldn't find any other Right - Wingers to back up your theory?

Is this the "post Right-Wing opinion that slams Dean" thread?

[Zomby Woof]

35. Clift isn't a right-winger nt

[dave29]

2. free ride

bwahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahaha

[Padraig18]

3. Rule violation

"Nicknames for Democratic candiates, their supporters, or their opponents are no longer permitted anywhere on Democratic Underground.

If you wish to discuss any Democratic candidate, you are required to use that person's real name. You cannot use a nickname or a different name or add asterisks or anything else.

If you make a comment about any candidate's supporters, you are required to refer to them simply as "(Candidate Name) supporters" -- "Clark supporters," "Dean supporters," "Kerry supporters," "Kucinich supporters," etc.

If you make a comment about any candidate's opponents, you are requied to refer to them simply as "(Candidate Name) opponents" -- "Clark opponents," "Dean opponents," "Kerry opponents," "Kucinich opponents," etc.

Any messages posted after 10:00AM Saturday which violate this rule will be deleted and a warning will be added to your record.

Skinner"

[markus]

7. Um, that's a quote from the author

Do we now have to expurdiate BadThink references and put in something appropriate in brackets?

That's getting a bit silly.

[Padraig18]

10. It violates the spirit of the rule

Skinner has posted often about this subject.

[bicentennial_baby]

12. Link?

Can you point me to where Skinner says we must edit out articles in order to comply with the rules?

[Padraig18]

Read the rule itself

It's unambiguous on the subject.

[Zomby Woof]

33. Skinner posted the other day...

That it is okay, because Clift doesn't post on DU. Quotes are fair game. It was this same article being referred to in that thread.

[Padraig18]

37. In that case, I'm off to Google

Help me with a list of really vile nicknames gauranteed to piss people off here, so that I can cut and paste articles containg those names...

[bicentennial_baby]

8. It's in the article

Are we expected to edit articles written by someone outside of DU if they use a nickname?

[Padraig18]

13. Yes

This seems perfectly unambiguous, to me:

"Nicknames for Democratic candiates, their supporters, or their opponents are no longer permitted anywhere on Democratic Underground.

If you wish to discuss any Democratic candidate, you are required to use that person's real name. You cannot use a nickname or a different name or add asterisks or anything else.

If you make a comment about any candidate's supporters, you are required to refer to them simply as "(Candidate Name) supporters" -- "Clark supporters," "Dean supporters," "Kerry supporters," "Kucinich supporters," etc.

If you make a comment about any candidate's opponents, you are requied to refer to them simply as "(Candidate Name) opponents" -- "Clark opponents," "Dean opponents," "Kerry opponents," "Kucinich opponents," etc.

Any messages posted after 10:00AM Saturday which violate this rule will be deleted and a warning will be added to your record.

Skinner"

I see nothing in the rule that says "unless it's in a published article"; do you? :eyes:

[bicentennial_baby]

17. Why are you rolling your eyes at me?

I'm serious...I just want to know if this has been clarified by Skinner, and if so, where. I'm not asking for your interpretation of the rules.

[Padraig18]

20. In ATA, numerous times.

I will paraphrase, but Skinner has said repeatedly that finding a cute way to get around the rules while still appearing to adhere to the techincal requirements of them is *still* a violation.

[Shrek]

34. There were plenty of paragraphs that could have been snipped

And that didn't include the offending nickname. So why choose the one that does?

I agree that this violates the rules as they are currently written.

[bitchkitty]

9. It really shouldn't apply here -

and I am a Dean supporter. The poster didn't use the forbidden phrase, it's in the article. I personally don't mind being referred to as such.

[Bad Thoughts]

24. Concur

If you want to edit Ms. Clift, go to MSNBC.

[Jack_Dawson]

16. Ridiculous

That's a Slippery Slope

[Padraig18]

18. Read the rule itself.

Nothing slippery about it.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[Padraig18]

23. It's a rule violation.

Have a nice day.

[bicentennial_baby]

38. Actually, you are incorrect

This article was posted before, so it IS a dupe, but the use of the term in this case is not a violation of the rules, as per Skinner. Apparently you asked this the first time it was posted, and Skinner answered you then:


"Skinner ADMIN
Response to Reply #1

5. Since this is a quote we will permit it.


Ms. Clift is not a member of DU."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=10638#10655

[Padraig18]

40. Great! I'm off to Google.

I just have to think of the vile nicknames to call other candidates supporters, so I'll be able to coppy and paste them here. :eyes:

[bicentennial_baby]

41. Why bother?

I thought you were the one who's above this type of crap. Afaik, you have always been gracious and friendly for the most part...why start acting like this now?

[Padraig18]

42. I wasn't serious.

I'm trying to make a point. A name is a name is a name, regardless of the 'source' or 'legitimacy'... :shrug:

[maddezmom]

4. this is a dupe

it was posted the other day...

[bitchkitty]

5. Oh, please.

That is pure bullshit, Ms. Clift.

"the attacks by rival Democrats have jolted the party's supporters into a bad case of buyer's remorse even before the first vote is cast..."

She pulled that one out of her ass.

[markus]

15. Read the article

It's not unsympathetic. It's a realistic assessment of what the other Democratic Candidates are doing to someone with a significant chance of being the nominee.

The other candidates need to take a long, hard look in the mirror and decide if their position is Bush before Dean to save their own incumbent skins or outmoded, appeasment-oriented Congressional world view.

That is the dirty little secret Ms. Clift is talking about, one which has been well debated here.

[bitchkitty]

19. It's a realistic assessment?

From MSNBC? Oh, how silly of me.

[Monte Carlo]

36. Eleanor Clift is not like others.

She is certainly a more liberal journalist, and not given to the type of whoring you usually see on MSNBC. I don't think you should discount her thoughts on the matter so easily.

[Jack_Dawson]

39. I agree - Clift is a Liberal writer if there ever was one

[demnan]

6. This part is true

"Dean is well on his way to becoming damaged goods. His rivals are doing the Republicans' dirty work by conflating Dean's lack of national-security experience with his record of popping off to create the kind of character issue that could prove deadly next year."


So does this speak poorly of Dean or of those who are "doing the Republicans' dirty work"?

What is Ms. Clift really saying here?

[dajabr]

11. I know Rush is suggesting B*sh use the "Ossama" ad against Dean...

In the General Election (if Dean is the one).

Great. Thanks.

[plm135]

22. unfortunately

I am beginning to think we dont have anyone this go around who can beat Bush.

Dean is the only one firing up Democrats (and folks if you cant fire up Democrats, then you arent going to beat Bush).

The others:

Kerry: worse public persona than Gore had
Lieberman: ugh
Kucinich: What state would he win period?
Clark: No experience, too new to the process
Edwards: too young apparently, not taken seriously by anyone
the rest: fringe defined

Even Dean is saddled with as many negatives as positives.

I would submit that at this point, we may have to start realizing that we dont have anyone this go around with the ability to beat Bush's combination of political skill and outrageously good timing when it comes to political fortune.

Doesn't mean we give up, but may mean that we stop throwing around all this negativity and assertions that this guy cant win because, or this is the only guy that can win because...

because, bottom line, ALL of these candidates have weak points and issues both in and out of their control that are going to make beating Bush awfully difficult.

[hackwriter]

25. And does anyone think another Democrat will be treated any better?

Do any of you guys listen to conservative talk radio?

If not, you should.

I usually listen for about 10-15 minutes a day, because it's all that I can stand.

And every Democrat with the exception of Joe Lieberman is getting SLAMMED.

Dean is a Communist.
Wes Clark is insane.
Kerry looks French and was against the Vietnam war and he's p*ssy-whipped by his wife.
Gephardt is an old-line advocate of failed liberal policies.

...that's what they're saying. Mostly the vitriol is directed against Dean and Clark. Rush Limbaugh claims that Wes Clark never served in Vietnam and every other general hates him. And people believe this.

With all due respect to Wesley Clark's intellect and military service, if you think that any of this will insulate him against smears and outright lies by the Rove machine, you'd better guess again.

Why aren't they slamming Joe Lieberman? Because he's a warmongering theocrat -- just like they like 'em.

[Jack_Dawson]

26. No

They are awful to everyone except Mr. Lieberman - you are right. But I think they fear Clark the most - or so it would seem by the level of vitriol directed against him right out of the gate.

[stickdog]

14. The first paragraph of the article says it all.

Howard Dean is right, but so were the French when they opposed the war in Iraq. That's the problem. Saying that Americans are no safer now that Saddam Hussein has been captured is a correct statement on the merits, but given current American attitudes, there is some company you don't want to keep.

If Americans are really too ignorant and idiotic to determine the truth about Iraq, then nobody is gonna stop the Boy King.

IMHO, Americans aren't that stupid. It's just that they've only heard one side of the issue. And if we don't nominate Dean, that trend will almost certainly continue.

[MrBenchley]

27. Where was this free ride Dean's got?

Not in the media I've seen....Faux has been attaccking him for months, and fat Tim jeered at him on Meet The Press backc this summer.

Meanwhile he's "damaged goods" compared to whom, exactly? An AWOL drunk who lies every time he opens his yap? Vice President Halliburton?

[Jack_Dawson]

32. Everywhere, but here are a couple links...

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/000980.html

If you talk to staffers for many of Dean's rivals, you'll hear a lot of talk about the lack of scrutiny Dean receives. It may be partly sour grapes and partly jealousy, but I think the complaints have merit. Dean, for the most part, has received a free ride. To be sure, there have been a few tough interviews -- the Meet the Press debacle in June, for example -- and the media has created a few mini-flaps over occasional controversies -- the infamous Confederate flag comment comes to mind. On the whole, however, there hasn't been a great deal of in-depth analysis of Dean's governing record, policy proposals, or frequent rhetorical inconsistencies.

Indeed, as ABC News' The Note mentioned in October,

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/TheNote/TheNote_Oct29.html

Dean has worked his way into the frontrunner role "without getting anything like the normal level of scrutiny a leading candidate normally gets on issues as diverse as affirmative action, the death penalty, the assault weapons ban, tax cuts, the Social Security retirement age, veterans' benefits, the legitimacy of using old 'votes and quotes' to attack an opponent, ethanol, matching funds, the war in Iraq, American troops in Iraq, NAFTA, Yucca Mountain, baseball, and others."

[deminflorida]

28. It's the Dick Cheney tactics he's using to keep those records...

sealed that disturbs me, lots of specutlation that maybe it's ENRON ties he hiding in there, it could be speculation or it could be true. Once a judge decides to review and release them it maybe in the general election. Bush and Co. won't be able to make to much of it then however, because ENRON is off limits as a talking point for the GOP.

Fact is it will be just that, speculation until he releases them.

[Padraig18]

29. One small difference.

Unlike Dick Cheney, Gov. Dean is not contesting the lawsuit seeking to open the records, which are the property of the people of Vermont.

[dajabr]

30. Second small difference - no special Enron favors by Dean.

Gephardt 'Enron' Attack Misses the Mark
He claims Dean aided Enron at the expense of Vermont’s needy. But Enron got nothing special, and the state GAINED revenue.



Summary



Dick Gephardt has been attacking Howard Dean for giving “huge tax breaks” to Enron while cutting aid to Vermont ’s poor. But Gephardt has failed to show that Enron got any special treatment. The inducements that Dean approved for setting up so-called “captive” insurance companies were available to any corporation, not just Enron. And far from hurting the state’s poor, revenue increased. In fact, taxes and fees from from Vermont's “captive” insurance companies more than doubled.

More: http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=119

[dajabr]

31. Hiding Enron ties in plain sight?

http://thinkvermont.com/captive/stats.cfm

http://thinkvermont.com/captive/index.cfm

[Moderator]

43. Consolidating threads..................

Please continue the discussion here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=10638#10655


DU Moderator