"Conventional wisdom" is the bunk.

[TygrBright]

"Conventional wisdom" says that if we don't settle on a candidate soon! Now!! RIGHT NOW!!! it will be a Terrible Thing because the GOPpies will be able to do all their campaigning and fundraising and suchlike unhindered while the Democrats are still fighting it out in the primaries.

I'm not so sure.

For one thing, knowing the capacity of the RW smear machine, I think giving them multiple targets for as long as possible might not be a bad thing.

For another thing, I haven't seen this much energy, excitement, and engagement in the Democratic Party since 1960. No, not even in 1968 or 1972. People really seem to feel that it's a process worth getting INVOLVED in, for a change. They're caring. I don't want to see that energy go away just yet. I think we need a little more time to get the habit kicking in, as it were. Get people seeing that their involvement, not just their sentiments, makes the difference. I think once it's "settled" we'll lose some of that, maybe a lot of that.

Don't get me wrong-- even if it did wear off, only in the worst of the 3:00 AM blue mullygrub moments do I worry about the GOPpies having a snowball's chance in hell of actually winning the general election, no matter who we run. Stealing, now-- that's another matter. But I think the more Dems are paying attention, being involved, being in touch, the harder it will be for the GOP to pull that one off.

I am far more encouraged by the incredible numbers at the Democratic Primary voting stations than I am by any other factor in this race, and I think the longer the race is competitive, the more those numbers will stay high. And I hope that "go and vote" habit will carry over to the general election, and the longer the excitement continues, the better the chance of that.

There's only one thing about ol' Conventional Wisdom that I think might be a real danger: The more the candidates concentrate on shredding each other, the weaker the ultimate general campaign will be, and the more risk of alienating our own electorate.

But I have a solution:

From now on, every Democrat should encourage every other Democrat to make their decision about who to support for the nomination on one basis, and one basis ONLY:

How good is the candidate at kicking the GOPpie candidate in the metaphorical kishkas?

We KNOW no one can shred a Democrat like another Democrat. Ho-hum, they're all good at that, each in their own weary, nausea-inducing way. Democrats are fabulous at running against other Democrats, there's no one we'd rather savage than one of our own. Kinblood always tastes better, eh?

BUT, once the convention's over, that ability will mean less than spit in the ocean. What will COUNT is how well our candidate runs against McCain or (if he's finally collapsed under the weight of years and infirmities) whoever's pinch-hitting for him.

So from now until the Convention, if every Democrat demands of each candidate "Show me just how well you can run against McCain, not against another Democrat!" We'll really have some basis for making a good choice.

And screw Conventional Wisdom. (But wear a condom, I hear the old fart's loaded with social diseases.)

helpfully,
Bright

[TygrBright]

1. Wow. Just wow.

I had no IDEA how fast a post dives off the first page of this forum!

amazedly,
Bright

[kentuck]

2. I think I may agree with this ...

"I think giving them multiple targets for as long as possible might not be a bad thing."

So long as we don't kill each other off.

Good to see you again, TygrBright!

[Hardrada]

3. Very true.

[Blue_In_AK]

4. I agree with you.

Multiple moving targets for poor old John McCain to try to take aim at, plus it keeps the media focused on the Democrats. Our convention can be exciting and suspenceful while the Republicans' will be bo-ring. It's all good.