Seeking to Argue...

Can someone give me a solid argument why Democrats have found it necessary to "tone down" the rhetoric against the policies of the Bush administration and Republican Party at the Convention?

So far, every cable and network media whore show I've seen has drawn on top-level Democrats "censoring" the speeches and asking speakers to drop lines that were overly critical.

Personally, I think this is retarded. Yes, concentrate on the positive- when you're up against these Republicans it's not that hard but at the same time, we need to hit them.

So, why the hell go in this direction? It took a maverick like Howard Dean to give the Democrats balls in the prmaries, do we need another Dean (or even Dean again) to give the Party a pulse now in the next couple of crucial months?

I'm finding it sad and it worries me because the opposition will slit your fucking throat. After seeing this happen to them for years, why do Democrats continually act so passive?

•  Solid argument

  Dean did his job. (And did it very well.) Polls show that a large majority of the electorate already understands that Bush is damaged goods. For example, 79% (!!!) think Bush has lied in some way about Iraq. It's Kerry's job now to sell himself as a viable alternative, not bash Bush. (Thanks, Petey.)

  by Blue the Wild Dog on Mon Jul 26, 2004 at 08:08:18 PM PDT

•  Amazing

  In one of the most amazing transformations I can remember, Al Gore is considered a loose cannon in need of close scrutiny.  Mr Cardboard is now the reckless hothead, devoid of reason and desperately needing a harness.  The convention is all about P's and Q's, but this fact about Gore makes me smile.  He should have grown his beard back as a symbolic gesture of defiance :)

  by Stevo on Mon Jul 26, 2004 at 08:14:42 PM PDT

  •  Let's hope

    we are not saying the same thing about Kerry four years from now...{shudder}

    by Josh Prophet on Mon Jul 26, 2004 at 08:22:37 PM PDT

•  I agree.

  And there's this inertia after Team Kerry's fairly successful, yet quiet, spring to continue to think that this caution is actually some Yoda-like source of strength.  It may not be.  Or it may not quite be.

  I said pre-July that between the VP pick, what Kerry did with it in July, and the convention we would learn about everything we need to know about the JK campaign. In it's best light, we can say that the pick of Edwards was tantamount to endorsing the Edward's positivity approach.  There is a great deal to be said for this.  Letting that positivity flow into a unified convention and build through the Obama night and the Edwards night will be great theater.

  But Team Kerry is not perfect.  They make mistakes...piss off / control the press a bit much here...leave THK without a handler to run interference there....send JK in front of a baseball crowd without totally thinking it through...etc etc.

  Underneath it all is this salient fact:  Edward's positivity was effective in the Democratic primary because it was wise and made sense.  You don't attack you own.  As a "guiding star" for the ethos of this campaign it is still powerful.  But this election is about clarifying a choice....and, further, the job of the United States President in 2004 is about clarifying a choice, with clear enemies and allies.

  We Democrats can't just be the party that promises a brighter future while ignoring the hate.  As THK and JK recently experienced the hate will find us, whether we like it or not. We need to address our opponents.  (Note, I don't say vilify them.)  We need to allow the strong current of anger within our Party to find its earnest and honest outlet, which it will anyways.

  John Kerry talked about speaking truth to power in front of the Urban League...and he didn't look like he really had the fire in him...

  get that fire John.

  by kid oakland on Mon Jul 26, 2004 at 08:19:53 PM PDT

•  You don't

  win the presidency with anger - you do so with vision. This convention is about laying out a vision for the future of America.

  by Josh Prophet on Mon Jul 26, 2004 at 08:20:19 PM PDT

  •  So where's the vision

    Telling every reporter within eye sight ''we're united'' is not vision. John Kerry simply has no vision. Just like George Bush, he will do anything to become president of the United States. And once there he will have no clue as to how to govern.

    I remember feeling so excited this time last year that the Democrats, or at least Howard Dean, had found a Democratic voice and a Democratic vision. And now this. John Fucking Kerry, the candidate, going to the convention too afraid to voice the feelings and hopes of the Democratic rank and file.

    He deserves to lose.

    by dontkickthebaby on Mon Jul 26, 2004 at 09:02:08 PM PDT

    •  asdf

      I am kinda feeling the same way at the moment.

      by Demise on Tue Jul 27, 2004 at 07:44:02 AM PDT

•  Bush has bashed himself

  The base is mobilized (thank you Howard!), and doesn't need further whipping up. The convention is all about wooing the undecided. Which means showing a positive, reasonable, and "electable" team.

  by mcjoan on Mon Jul 26, 2004 at 08:31:40 PM PDT

•  MISTAKE.

  Yes heresy, I know.  Burn the witch.  But a mistake.  One can fight back in unified action as well.  Seems to be me to be some looney idea of managerial CYA pre-emptively taken (HA!).

  I hope it works but damn.  And the Dems are being run over, literally.  
  I'm watching it happen minute by minute.
  

  by Marisacat on Mon Jul 26, 2004 at 08:33:11 PM PDT

  •  /agree

    Yes, it does strike me as quite the mistake.

    Unfortunately, until people who think like us gain more prominence in this Party we'll have to sit around and let the "adults" run things.

    by Demise on Tue Jul 27, 2004 at 07:46:00 AM PDT

•  In 2000 the problem for Gore was Clinton....

  Even though Clinton was wildly popular, even post-impeachment.

  Gore runs away from Clinton's record, and taps Lieberman as his V-P in response.

  In 2004, the problem for the Party is now the Wild-Eyed, Stand-Up-Against-THEM Crowd? (Think Gore and Dean)...

  Is Kerry making the same mistake that Gore did in wanting to be safe, acceptable, and, er, Boring??

  Gosh, I hope not.

  by edwardbanderson on Mon Jul 26, 2004 at 09:07:17 PM PDT