Skip to main content

View Diary: Over Before It Began: Terry McAuliffe's Folly (46 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Right, he isn't the candidate (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pozzo, SoCalLiberal

    What the hell difference does it make what I say about him now?

    The difference is that we want his money, his organization, and his time behind Creigh Deeds. You're not going to encourage party unity by gloating over the carcass of a defeated campaign. And we need every last bit of energy directed toward beating Bob McDonnell.

    I was a Deeds supporter from the beginning, so I don't have a personal dog in the fight with McAuliffe anymore, but you're not helping us win in November with this kind of crap.

    -1.50, -3.95 | VA 2009: Deeds / Wagner / Shannon

    by Red Sox on Wed Jun 10, 2009 at 12:00:30 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I'd be very surprised if TM gives 5% of what (9+ / 0-)

      he has spent on his own campaign.  We can live and prevail without that.  But, he'll give some pittance anyway, just to save face.

      TM was the mistake we didn't make.  Fortunately.  Lord knows, the GOP have not forgotten one jot of the story.  It's time that we Democrats also looked clearly at the ugly facts about the world.  We can't continue to ignore them to spare the tender feelings of those who've screwed up.

    •  I don't think we want any of those things. (6+ / 0-)

      "we want his money, his organization, and his time"

      Terry is a regressive element of the party which taints the progressive mission.  Large, dirty contributors are so 20th century.  Grass roots donations coupled with the internet are much more powerful and genuine than McAuliffe's "Sea Of Terry" sign ops.

      Every man is guilty of all the good he didn't do. ~Voltaire

      by RepTracker on Wed Jun 10, 2009 at 12:37:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I disagree (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pozzo
        1.  All those "dirty" contributors have a right to contribute to the political process.  
        1.  All of them still do and still play a large role.
        1.  If you think Obama didn't take 'dirty' money, you are sorely mistaken.  
        1.  Grassroots donations are only as good as people can continue to donate the money and feel the compelling need to give money.  Obama, for as compelling as he is now, may not be as popular in 2012 and might not be able to raise the same gobs of money from the internet.  He'll take "dirty" money.  
    •  There is such a thing as being a sore winner (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pozzo, Red Sox

      And I find it obnoxious that people want to come in with this.  I don't see a point.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site