Official Election Night Thread

Expect plenty of disagreement. Just keep it civil.
Ess Ay Cee Dee
Posts: 1458
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:35 pm
Contact:

Postby Ess Ay Cee Dee » Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:30 am

You're exactly right, Luke. If Kerry loses (which is apparently going to happen), then Democrats need to do some serious soul-searching over the next four years and figure out where the fuck they went wrong.

This doesn't mean moving further to the right. It means showing the majority of Americans that the left isn't such a scary place after all.

I don't think Kerry should have gotten "nastier" in this campaign. I just think he needed to be much more aggressive. The Republicans are running a well-oiled machine and the Democrats are so damn scattershot, it's ridiculous.

Something is clearly wrong here, and it needs to be fixed. The only positive thing I can think of in my drunkenness and depression is that Dubya is limited to two terms, and there's no way in hell Cheney would ever get the Republican nomination in 2008.

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:33 am

Ess Ay Cee Dee wrote:This doesn't mean moving further to the right. It means showing the majority of Americans that the left isn't such a scary place after all.


Exactly. Instead of running "Bush lite", the Dems need(ed) to come out and say "OUR IDEAS ARE CORRECT, YOU WILL FOLLOW US."

And/or get somebody so fucking charismatic that there's no way they can lose.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:37 am

Wolf is losing it. He just called Candy Crowley "Kerry" twice, and earlier said the Democrats would retain control of the House.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:38 am

CNN finally gave Washington to Kerry.

And with that, I'm going to bed. With any luck, Ohio will still be up in the air when I wake up.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

Ess Ay Cee Dee
Posts: 1458
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:35 pm
Contact:

Postby Ess Ay Cee Dee » Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:42 am

Well, I've had enough. I need to get up and go to work tomorrow. Hopefully, the Justice Fairy will pay a visit during the wee hours and give the election to Kerry, but I doubt it.

It's cold comfort, but at least I live in one of the handful of states that overwhelmingly supported Kerry and work at a newspaper that officially endorsed him. Apparently none of that matters, but I need something to get me through the day.

User avatar
Crummy Old Label Avatar
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:55 pm
Location: Out of my fucking mind

Postby Crummy Old Label Avatar » Wed Nov 03, 2004 3:34 am

The real scary thing is this: if the Democrats can't even win against GEORGE W. FUCKING BUSH - illegal disastrous war, lost jobs, ruined economy, in-your-face favoritism to the rich - who can they fucking win against? Imagine if the Republicans were running a LITERATE candiate who could actually speak.

Seriously, running against Bush should have been a no-brainer, a blowout landslide. How the fuck do you lose to Bush? It really makes the mind reel.

Shit.

I wanted to see Kerry win, in the utmost classic (and literal) "lesser of two evils" scenario, but make no mistake about it: the Democrats rolled over on the stolen 2000 election, rolled over on the Patriot Act, rolled over on Iraq. They've provided zero opposition during the past four years, and I doubt they're going to start now.

Prepare yourself for four or more years of Republican domination, and watch the cowering Democrats in Congress rubber stamp everything from expanded war plans, a military draft (when a draft is announced in 2005, let's see the "liberal media" rerun Bush's "There will be no draft" declaration from the debates; I bet they won't), the appointment of extreme right Supreme Court judges, more favoritism to the rich.

It makes me sick. Despite the fucked up German economy and job market, I really am seriously thinking of returning.
If you love Hi-REZ TAPE HISS, you're REALLY going to love Stereo Central

Ron
Posts: 489
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 4:11 am
Location: Far Away From All You Fellas

Postby Ron » Wed Nov 03, 2004 4:33 am

lukpac wrote:
Ess Ay Cee Dee wrote:This doesn't mean moving further to the right. It means showing the majority of Americans that the left isn't such a scary place after all.


Exactly. Instead of running "Bush lite", the Dems need(ed) to come out and say "OUR IDEAS ARE CORRECT, YOU WILL FOLLOW US."

And/or get somebody so fucking charismatic that there's no way they can lose.


I don't think it's so much that Kerry was "Bush lite" as he and the Democrats did a poor job of educating the electorate as to the failures of the Bush administration. The Republicans, as their appeal is somewhat nonrational, can get away with slogans and sound bites--the Democrats can't. "Wrong war, wrong place, wrong time" is typical of Kerry's/Democrats' inept attempts at one-upping the Republicans. Kerry had dozens of issues with which to *connect* to undecided voters--he obviously failed to do so.

This election featured many, many failures on the part of the Democrats--failing to adequately educate the electorate is only one. Kerry, in failing to adequately explain his "yes" vote to give Bush the authority to attack Iraq, kept the war out of play for a *long* time. This hurt enormously as I think many people wanted this election to prominently feature the war. [And to his discredit, neither Kerry nor prominent Democrats adequately explained that vote. Too bad, as that explanation might have gone a long way in stopping the flip-flop charges in their tracks.] And speaking of flip-flops, Kerry's failure to nail Bush repeatedly since March for his flip-flopping reasons for attacking Iraq is baffling. And not making more of the initial WMD deceptions from Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld is even more so.

Let's face it. Kerry didn't really reach his stride until the last 5-6 weeks of the campaign. Prior to that he was timid and unfocused. This election was his to lose--much as the O.J. Simpson trial was the prosecution's trial to lose. Both should have been slam dunks.
Dr. Ron :mrgreen:TM "Do it 'till you're sick of it. Do it 'till you can't do it no more." Jesse Winchester

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:45 am

I don't think it's that Democrats *can't* use slogans and sound bites, it's just that they haven't effectively.

As far as "Bush lite" goes, I'm not so sure. The DNC seemed terrified of Dean because he was seen as too liberal. Kerry was good at saying "I can do better" but what liberal ideals was he actually running on?
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:55 am

And while I hate to put on the tin foil hat, that the exit polling seems SO far off in places raises at least one of my eyebrows.

At least Kerry pulled it off here, seemingly slightly more than Gore did 4 years ago. Looks like we lost Iowa, however.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

Gee Oh Are Tea
Posts: 440
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 5:54 pm
Location: Fallujah, Ontario

Postby Gee Oh Are Tea » Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:05 am

You've all made some good points. I'll provide my "outsider" perspective from Canada.

For us, it's been interesting viewing as we can't vote, can't be drafted, won't likely be a victim of a terrorist attack (unless we're on vacation, as I was in NYC on Sep 11), aren't effected by the lack of medicare arnd are unlikely to be spat upon when travelling the world. Still, the vast majority of Canadians were cheering for Kerry (or more likely AGAINST Bush) because we don't get the same hard-on that apparently 52% of Americans do in seeing OTHER people die and suffer.

I fully agree with the analysis that the Democrats blew it. Looking at the map, Bush won all the "stupid" states (Bible Belt, farm country) as expected. The Democrats knew they had to win either Ohio or Florida. I agree that they were Bush Lite - i.e. the fear of seeming unpatriotic in overly criticizing what IS an illegal war, "we can be tough as you" stance, etc. I knew all was lost when I watched the VP debate. I didn't know much about John Edwards but I was hopeful. He added absolutely NOTHING in that debate. The Democrats never mentioned that the US has become a political pariah in the world. That everyday Americans are insulted wherever they travel (as has happened here in Canada) because of this Administration's policies.

And I have to give credit to the Bush campaign. No offense to those of you voted for Kerry but Bush realized just how stupid Americans are. How ignorant they are of the rest of the world. How ignorant they are of deficits. He played to all of this. Like I said, I expected him to win in the Redneck Nation (sadly, about 40 of the 50 states). But with the population in South Florida (numbers and demographics) and Ohio being in the Great Lakes (where EVERY state went Democrat), those two states were there for the taking for the Democrats. It must be seen as a great failure that they didn't win.

For Canada, it's not all bad. We now won't be expected to go to Iraq (or any of the other future Occupation sites). Kerry would have asked us to be Peacekeepers. And as much as we hate Bush, we feel he should have to clean up his own shit, and hopefully make it even worse!! And our national chip-on-our-collective shoulders means that we'll actually enjoy watching the US further implode under it's own isolationism, ignorance and stupidity.

So, chin up!!

Cliff

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:20 am

I'll say it again: I didn't write this, really!

Editorial: The lesson of Feingold's win

An editorial
November 3, 2004
Almost exactly three years ago, even his supporters were suggesting that U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., might have finished himself off politically with a solo vote against the Patriot Act.

Almost exactly two years ago, his critics were suggesting that Feingold had finished himself off by joining the small band of senators who voted against the congressional resolution authorizing President Bush to launch the war with Iraq.

Almost exactly a year ago, Republican operatives were gleefully suggesting that one of their three high-profile Senate candidates would finish off Feingold.

But reports of Feingold's political demise were premature.

After mounting a campaign in which he proudly proclaimed his opposition to the Patriot Act, his opposition to Bush's war-making and his determination to keep the banner of Wisconsin progressivism flying even in an increasingly conservative age, Feingold was re-elected by a comfortable margin of 55 percent to 44 percent over Republican businessman Tim Michels.

Feingold faced serious opposition. Michels was a self-financing millionaire who beat better-known GOP contenders in the Republican primary and then received strong support from the Bush White House - which targeted Feingold for defeat - and from former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who went so far as to appear in television commercials supporting Michels.

But Feingold prevailed. He did so not in spite of his record but rather because of it. Wisconsin gave a resounding vote of approval to a candidate who spoke frankly and frequently about the failings of the Patriot Act, the misguided occupation of Iraq and the need to assert progressive values on issues ranging from trade policy to health care.

There is a lesson in Feingold's victory for Democrats at every level of the struggle to reclaim this country from the forces of reaction.

Feingold campaigned enthusiastically for Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, not so much because he agreed with Kerry on every issue but because he disagreed with President Bush on just about every issue.

It is notable that, as Feingold was winning easily, Kerry was struggling to win Wisconsin.

Ultimately, Kerry did take the Badger State. Yet, as election night wore on, it did not appear that he was taking America. Though Kerry backers held out hope that their candidate might eke out a win in Ohio, and with it the presidency, the prospects for such a result grew increasingly slim as Bush's margin of victory became apparent this morning.

Barring a twist of events involving provisional ballots that might resurrect the Kerry candidacy, the next stage for Democrats will be a painful period of self-assessment.

During that period, Democrats would be wise to study the lesson of Russ Feingold's win. It is still possible for a political leader - and perhaps even a political party - to stand on principle, and to win while doing so.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

Ess Ay Cee Dee
Posts: 1458
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:35 pm
Contact:

Postby Ess Ay Cee Dee » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:32 am

Ugh. Wednesday morning comin' down.

I thought there would at least be a clear winner this morning, but apparently CNN is not ready to declare a Bush victory. Those provisional ballots in Ohio are not going to make a difference. It's over.

I've never been more disgusted with my fellow Americans or with the Democratic party. I'm with COLA--if the Democrats can't beat a fucking moron like Bush, there's no hope.

I can't blame Kerry for refusing to concede yet. However, the only good thing that will come from his hesitation is a more polished concession speech later today.

The next four years are going to be VERY ugly.

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:07 am

As much as I'd like to start screaming about vote machine hijinx (I seriously considered changing my quote to the one from the head of Diebold about "delivering Ohio to Bush"), I need more evidence before leaping into that particular conspiracy pool.

No, this was Kerry's election to lose, and he lost it. He was not forceful enough, not clear enough, and not consistent enough. He explained when he should have stated. He speechified when he should have orated. He got caught up in trivia when he should have laid out the facts. He simply was not a good candidate. He screwed up, the Democrats screwed up. Bush was, I think, quite defeatable.

So what did the GOP do right? "MORAL VALUES." Go back to my post waaaaaaay at the beginning of this thread about Bill Schneider's first exit poll observations. I heard on NPR this morning that "moral values" was the #1 issue. More than Iraq, more the economy, more than terrorism. And of those for whom it was #1, 80% voted for Bush.

That is so profoundly fucked up I'm not sure where to begin. It's a fundamental difference in the whole *idea* of what government is supposed to be. I think government should be in the business of running the country. These people think government should be like church, only with an army.

But the important part is -- Bush is not a shining example of moral values. He took glee in executing death row inmates. He pursued a needless war and showed no remorse. He seeks to oppress people. He drunk, drugged and womanized his way through his youth. He's participated in many shady business dealings.

Bush did not win because he had what can objectively be called "moral values." He won because people thought he had what *they* considered to be "moral values." And what are "moral values" in this context? Anti-abortion. Anti-gay. Anti-"other." Pro-death penalty. Pro-Christian. Mixing church and state. Reactionary, fundamentalist, fear-driven, know-nothing bullshit.

Folks, people voted bullshit in this election, and did so proudly and with full awareness of what they were doing. The challenge to the center and left in this country to find a cure for bullshit, and this election proved we don't have one.

Perhaps the most startling revelation to come from this campaign is that the right-wing evangelical Get Out The Vote machine is now equally as powerful as the left-wing union/minority GOTV machine, even in areas like Ohio. All the old Democratic power bases are crumbling -- the media, the unions, the working class. The morals-obsessed Christian bloc is ascendant.

I don't mean to paint a hopeless picture. Bush won by a tiny margin. The country is polarized. There aren't substantially more of them than there are of us. They're just more driven to impose their worldview than we are, because all we want is a sane government and they want to do God's will.

So what's the answer? I don't know. I suspect that it's time for the Dems to stop trying to appease the hard-core Christian right-wing base. They're simply on a different frequency, and making them happy isn't compatible with the Constitution. Simple as that.

It's going to be a long four years, and I hope the DNC uses them productively.

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

Gee Oh Are Tea
Posts: 440
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 5:54 pm
Location: Fallujah, Ontario

Postby Gee Oh Are Tea » Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:09 am

Ess Ay Cee Dee wrote:
I've never been more disgusted with my fellow Americans or with the Democratic party. I'm with COLA--if the Democrats can't beat a fucking moron like Bush, there's no hope.

The next four years are going to be VERY ugly.


On the surface, what you say sounds correct. But the Republicans have been smarter than we think. Look at their message and the states that they won. They talked at the level of all the morons that live in the South, the Heartland and farming country. Bush's lack of articulation is why these people voted for him. He's a bumbling, know-nothing, beat-the-shit out of all non-Christians type of person - like them. He's not some long-faced guy married to a billionaire foreigner. He's a cowboy married to a homemaker with two hard-drinking daughters, who thinks the Olympics were held in GREASE.

At least 52% of Americans are stupid like him. Unfortunately, in the court of world opinion, you'll all be tarred with the same brush.

Cliff

User avatar
dudelsack
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 3:51 pm

Postby dudelsack » Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:10 am

dudelsack wrote:Dems are going to win, and they're going to win bigger than everyone suspects.

You heard it here first. If I'm wrong I'll be too drunk to care. But I feel pretty good about it.


Words taste like burning...
Christ wins 2004 election, promises second coming SOON.