GOTV: Am I just really bad at it?

I have canvassed for three elections now (CA 2002, NA 2004, CA 2005), and each time I spend 8 hours a day for several days going door to door, I feel like I changed few minds and made little difference.  The houses where I tend feel the best are those in which the resident is very pro-democrat already -- it's just a relief to talk to someone who understands the issues after a day of otherwise.  The worst is when the resident remains unconvinced that politics affects anything in their life.

And I always leave the day thinking, did I find 4 new votes today, or maybe I found 5.

I've been recognized as a good teacher (I am a grad student at UC Berkeley and teach math to undergrads), so I should know how to communicate and connect to people reasonably well.  But somehow either I am, or just feel, really bad at canvassing.  

Phone banking is no better.  A million answering machines and 10 real conversations later, I'm thinking, did I find 2 votes today?  Well, maybe I raised this guy's probability of voting for Kerry from 37% to 43%.

So first, I'm asking for suggestions about talking to people.

I also feel like most organized GOTV (e.g. through unions, etc.) is more interested in knowing what each voter is planning on doing on election day than on changing minds.  Is this worth as much as they seem to think it is?

I remember going into a grocery store with my companions in Nevada 2004 and talking to a random woman watching TV.  She had no idea what was going on politically, and we engaged her in conversation.  It seemed like she might actually take some of the information home with her, and even disseminate some of it.  That felt like a success.

So second, I'm asking if maybe there are better ways of changing minds than through door-to-door canvassing.  Canvassing involves interrupting someone in their home.  Whatever they were doing, they are going to feel like it's an intrusion, especially if they're in a swing state and hit regularly.

Today in Thailand, thousands of protesters went to the shopping malls to bring their feelings about the Prime Minister to the shoppers.  Is this better?  Is it just a different type of interruption and intrusion, which leads to people trying to get rid of you; or does it create a stir that gets people at least talking about the issues; or does it create a stir that gets people annoyed at the very cause we're trying to promote?

Maybe our success with the woman in the grocery store was more based on its spontaneity or her particular receptivity than from its occurring outside of the home.

This is probably the kind of stuff taught in DFA school, but I haven't been (too busy with my dissertation), so help me out.

If you have any suggestions, or if you have the same problem as I do, recommend this diary, because I think there are a lot of people who feel the same way I do.  And it's quite discouraging.

•  Throw in some calculus jokes.,,,

  to break the ice.

  by irate on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 07:51:17 AM PDT

  •  Calculus jokes

    Ok, I got some.  Tell me what you think about these doozies!

    1. Bush is so bad for the country that it's like dividing by 0!  Error, error!

    2. Bush is crashing like a vertical asymptote.  

    3. What's the integral of Bush's brain?  A constant!  Because the derivative of any constant is 0.  And Bush's brain is a big fat 0!

    4. In the graph of our national debt, what is the slope for time t=2001 through 2006?  High!  Really freaking high!

    Yes!  This can work.  

    by dspivak on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:44:18 AM PDT

  •  jokes

    Q: What's the integral of (1/cabin)d(cabin)?
    A: A natural log cabin!

    grooooooan. I do love calculus jokes though. And physics jokes, those are usually even worse.

    I think in general though, the joke idea sounds good. Maybe pick something Leno or Letterman said about Bush, keep it pretty "safe" that way (ie not South Park or Daily Show)

    by reid fan on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:45:02 AM PDT

    •  Physics jokes? Worse? Noooo

      What's the difference between an extroverted physicist and an introverted one?

      He stares at your shoes instead of his own.

      Ba-dum-chh.

      by jgwd on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 11:46:48 AM PDT

•  Similar experiences

  I have done GOTV for six candidates now since 2003.  I have learned that the main thrust of GOTV is identifying your supporters and making sure they get out and vote.  A "No" is almost as good as a "Yes" because that means you do not have to go back there any more.  A "Move" is OK, too because of the same reason as the "No" - you don't have to waste time at that house any more.  I have very rarely encountered anyone who wants to talk politics and frankly, if someone came to my door and tried to convince me to vote for Candidate Y, I would say "Thank you, but not interested."  

  GOTV is boring stuff, but you have to do it in order to find your "Yes" voters.  The hardest part for me is 90% of the doors I knock on, the people are not home.  In that case, you are just providing the candidate with a free lit drop.  A valuable service, but not that glamorous.

  by carlton858 on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 07:58:47 AM PDT

  •  I don't get it

    Yeah, this is the feeling I get from the union people too: know who your voters are.

    But the logic doesn't make sense to me.  We go to houses so as to find out whether we should keep going to that house or not.  "A 'No' is almost as good as a "Yes" because that means you do not have to go back there any more."

    The claim is that you can't convince anyone to vote a particular way, but somehow that you can convince someone to actually get to the polls?  I don't get the feeling like I'm good at convincing people to get out to the polls either.  

    Me: "It's really important that you vote."  
    Them: "yeah."

    by dspivak on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:31:29 AM PDT

    •  Or they tell you Yes

      and then vote otherwise.

      by curmudgiana on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:42:46 AM PDT

    •  But you can convince people

      I think people can be convinced by canvassing and phone banks. Lots of people appreciate the personal attention, especially at the door, I've found.

      But what I think COSTS votes is the high pressure GOTV on election day. I think that needs to be re-evaluated, because in my experience a MUCH larger percentage of people are pissed off by election day calls than are reminded and encouraged to vote.

      Canvassing is also useful in smaller geographical elections as a sort of polling process. You collect yes's to see how well you're doing. The maybe's are also valuable. And the absentee ballots to bank your votes in advance. In city council races where only 2000 votes wins it, you can actually talk to enough people to get that number of yes votes ID'ed in advance. That is VERY useful campaigning.

      by Hollywood Liberal on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:44:05 AM PDT

      •  How many voters

        actually follow through on their threat and stay at home? My guess is hardly any. Recently, during a GOTV campaign I heard a few people make that threat and I took them seriously. Halfway through the day, numbers were looking so iffy we had no clue how it would turn out. In the end, we won by 18%.

        by JK Minnesota on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:00:35 AM PDT

        •  I think

          that someone should look at the actual numbers on this. Has anyone gone back and looked at actual voter lists to see who actually turned out? Also, you don't know who they voted for, so they may have voted but for the other guy. (more likely in primaries and non-partisan elections.)

          by Hollywood Liberal on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:08:13 AM PDT

          •  I know of a study

            wherein some Dem-leaning precincts were blanketed and hit hard, and other very similar precincts were not targetted at all. The targetted precincts had both a much higher turnout and a much higher Dem vote. I wish I knew where to find that study.

            by JK Minnesota on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:13:45 AM PDT

            •  yeah

              I'd like to see that. I've been asking around to find out if there is such a thing, but haven't heard of any.

              There are ways to do this right and ways to do it wrong. A sense of humor helps. Neighbor-to-neighbor is better than stranger-to-stranger. The "Hi Joe, it's Edna! I see you haven't voted yet. When are you going?" strategy. But of course that's hard to accomplish. One campaign manager I worked with suggested that GOTV on election day could be done non-partisan so the "harrassment" factor doesn't get attached to a name.

              by Hollywood Liberal on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:18:29 AM PDT

            •  District 62 in Minneapolis

              leans very strong Dem - several groups worked the area during 04. Over saturated was the word on the street - but the district played a major part in Kerry taking MN. It's a dense urban area, mostly lower and middle income, mixed ethnically. Making certain that everyone who could vote did vote was critical. No excuse was excepted. I worked as an election judge, and there was a republican looking over my shoulder all day to double check the credentials of every voter (we have same-day registration). The GOTV efforts brought a lot of new voters to the polls - I know because I registered over 300. Those folks made sure everyone knew where to vote (only had to redirect one voter to another precinct) and what to have with them to register. Someone like you convinced them it was important to vote that day.

              by parryander on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:43:24 AM PDT

    •  See comment below, as well as...

      A better script is "It's really important that you vote today for Jimmy Carter because our men and women in Iraq deserve to come home safely to their families."

      I find a lot of our folks (read: "consultants" or "managers") don't grasp how to make a good case for their candidate - nor a good case for getting out to vote.

      by JK Minnesota on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:05:31 AM PDT

  •  Concentrate on your neighborhood

    Contact your precinct chair/captain and volunteer to be a block captain. Of if you don't have a precinct captain, take up the job yourself. Then you can work  on putting together your own team of block captains.  Then on election day you'll know exactly who to contact and how many votes you'll be able to deliver.  

    We are all most effective in canvassing our own neighbors. Get to know them and listen to them and what their issues are.

    Local politics is an especially good way to get people in your neighborhood involved. And from there you can move on to larger state and national elections and issues.  

    And it shouldn't be about politics all the time, or just big elections. Organize events around holidays. For flag day get a few neighbors together with flags and provide a volunteer group who will install a flag pole for anyone who wants to buy a flag and display it.

    Year round precinct organizing. It's more effective than anything else.

    by Thom K in CA on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:02:42 AM PDT

•  I know what you mean

  and I'm curious to see what kind of suggestions you get. It seems like the people whose minds are changed aren't usually changed as the result of talking to one person one time, but maybe your (or my) effort is part of a bigger picture. I guess we have to believe that or we stop trying.

  by casperr on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:04:59 AM PDT

•  When I canvassed in Canada in the 1980s

  for the NDP, I always had a dark suspicion that I'd do the party more good canvassing for the Tories. My dad on the other hand, who took me with him  door-to-door during a couple of election campaigns in the 1970s, when I was a child, was actually good at the process.

  by gracchus on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:18:39 AM PDT

•  Republican Do It Better

  Please don't troll rate me yet. This comment is more about persuasion rather than just GOTV.

  The Republican's have information about what interests a person before they start their spiel.

  If someone is in the National Guard, they know it, and they get another Guardsman to talk to them. If someone's trigger issue is x they know it and have talking points on x ready and available to change their minds every time they talk to them whether door-to-door or on the phone. They also are better at using people from the neighborhood to talk to people when going door-to-door.

  Volunteered for the Kerry campaign. On the first phone inquiries, people were asked what was a main issue to that person. This was recorded on the phone sheet and entered into the computer. After that initial entry, the information was lost forever. Completely disappeared. No information was sent to an undecided voter on that issue, you did not have that information in future calls or door-to-door encounters.

  To get people to vote for your candidate, you need to know what is important to that person and address their concerns. Individualized solicitation would improve results.

  by MO Blue on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:26:01 AM PDT

  •  only recently, though

    they didn't used to be. Dems used to be the ground game team. Then Karl Rove learned from "the enemy..." and improved upon it.

    by Hollywood Liberal on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:44:59 AM PDT

    •  Then Why Did We Stop Doing What Worked

      and improve on it. Why gather then lose issue information? If you know what interests the person you are talking to, it is easier to talk to them and increases your chance of convincing them to vote for your candidate. Much easier for the volunteer and better chance of success.

      by MO Blue on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:09:52 AM PDT

      •  no

        that's the part that they added that they're better at. They took it to another level. From what I've heard, Howie is working on impacting this very thing.

        by Hollywood Liberal on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:13:55 AM PDT

        •  Improvement Can't Come Too Soon IMO

          The Kerry campaign process here in St. Louis was very, very bad. In fact, it was so bad, that it pissed off many potential voters. And if you brought any problems (voters are angry because they are receiving calls every few hours etc.) to the campaign coordinators, their response was tough - the voters will just have to deal with it.

          by MO Blue on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 10:07:09 AM PDT

  •  Repubs do email better too

    At the risk of getting even farther away from the original subject (GOTV) of this diary, I would like to add that I think the Repubs use email more effectively year-round than we do.  I work for a computer network consulting company that works for small businesses here in Austin, which means I get to see a lot of MS Outlook Inboxes.  My right-wing customers tend to have a lot more emails titled "Write Senator Hutchinson to support Judge Alito's nomination" and the like than do my fellow left-wingers.  I have to think that even if most of the people getting those emails never write their senator, the Repubs are a LOT more successful in turning their "fellow-travelers" into voters on Election Day.

    by Brother Love on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 10:24:25 AM PDT

•  I totally understand how you feel.

  It seems like such a tremendous amount of output for very little return.  It feels like there has to be something more effective.

  One time I tried to launch a discussion about what works on you, knowing that we aren't the typical consumers of candidate information.  But I thought it would provide some ideas.  Didn't go anywhere.  Alas.

  I still make calls.  I still ring doorbells.  But it seems really ineffective.

  by mem from somerville on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:52:26 AM PDT

•  GOTV is the final step in a long process

  The reason why you feel like you're not changing minds is that GOTV isn't intended to persuade. It's only about Getting Out The Votes that the campaign has already identified - or getting out all the voters in areas / precincts that historically have performed very well for similar candidates, i.e. a precinct that votes 65-70% Democratic will get "blanketed" (every door knocked and everyone called) for a Democratic candidate in a general election.

  The best GOTV operations contact every identified voter 4-6 times in the final 3 or 4 days - in different ways of course: an email, one or two pieces of literature, a phone call, for example. Some more reluctant voters - or new registrants - can use a few extra contacts. In some ways, if you hear "Enough already!" you've done your job. They. Are. Gonna. Vote.

  Persuasion, on the other hand, is a whole different ball game. It's an art. The best advice I have is to always ask questions - people love to be heard. If they want to know specifics about the candidate, they might ask, once engaged in a conversation. Few of us seem to get that.

  For instance: "I'm Sandy, I'm here on behalf of Jimmy Carter. Did you know that President Carter is running for President again because he thinks the current administration has squandered the good name of the United States, and failed us in Iraq and at home?"

  Chatter chatter....

  "Do you agree with your neighbors who think we need to change the direction of our country - that we need a president who actually understands people like you an me?"

  et cetera...

  Just my $.02 as a candidate who believes entirely in the effectiveness of face-to-face, door-to-door canvassing.

  by JK Minnesota on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:53:55 AM PDT

•  I always wonder about this myself

  I've done a fair amount of campaigning around the Washington, DC area (the ultimate overpoliticized environment, so maybe it's not the best example). I've done a lot of phonebanking with NGOs. Phonebanking really only seems to work when you're talking to likely supporters/members to begin with. I think phonebanking is best when your goal is GOTV or "GOTA" (get out the activist). When you're talking to the politically (semi-)active and pumping them up to do something, it really feels good. But it is getting tougher. A lot more people are setting up their phones to refuse calls not only from telemarketers but also "solicitors" -- in other words, anyone they don't know who wants anything, money or not. For now, I think it's still worth it, but I wonder about the longer term.

  I'm not sure how to answer your poll. I think door-to-door canvassing is certainly necessary before election day (and GOTV is CRITICAL come election day), but canvassing shouldn't be done any more than absolutely necessary, I think -- I worry about burning people out in our information overload society. Talking with random people might be my favorite choice. Just talking person to person, when you can both be pretty confident you're just speaking for yourselves, is liberating. But I think it's important to know what you want to say, to say something positive at some point and not say too much (knowing people forget most of what they hear).

  Talking (and/or arguing) with friends, I think I'm learning the value of not saying anything sometimes. When my political friends and I get together to talk about everything and anything political, it quickly get very complicated and frustrating (and it's soon forgotten anyway).  

  Talking about everything all the time is pointless in the information overload age. What's really the most important thing? In a campaign you have a focused message (hopefully a good one). But in our private lives I think it also pays to be somewhat focused.

  by dzhessi on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:25:38 AM PDT

•  Door-to-door

  I've rung thousands of doorbells and felt that it was a tremendously productive experience in my own successful campaigns for a non-partisan local office, as well as for other candidates and issues.

  Precincts that I've walked effectively early in the campaign cycle show much higher positive votes than precincts that weren't walked.

  Things that make walking more effective include proper timing, teamwork, effective lists, practice, and neighbor-to-neighbor efforts. Candidates themselves, working with their families and closest friends, working in team efforts, are far and away the best people to ring doorbells.

  When done well, it's an education for both candidate and voter. I see many campaigns that would be much better served if the candidates would use more shoe leather rather than trying to stage media events.

  by Aeolus on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:29:17 AM PDT

  •  And humor

    As another poster points out, a self-effacing sense of humor that allows people to respond is one of the best tools. Another incredibly powerful tool is a written follow-up response to any substantive issue or question.

    Sidewalk Strategies by Larry Tramutola is a great primer by someone with lots of experience.

    by Aeolus on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:36:41 AM PDT

•  This door-to-door stuff

  Oh gosh -- I teach the rudiments of political participation to community groups, so I almost have too many things to say on this topic. In no particular order, here are a few:

  1. Field operations which is what door-to-door canvassing and human phone banks do can only swing about 2-4% of the vote. Now if it is close, that means you can win the thing. If not, you'll feel redundant.

  2. If the campaign is competent, you shouldn't be knocking on the doors of people who always vote. You should be working on occasional voters whose demographics/party affiliation suggest they vote your way. This is the population among whom you can make a difference.

  3. The folks you meet on the doors are just like us -- and not like us. They are like us here at dKos in that they get discouraged about whether anything they can do can make a difference. Your job is to convince them voting does some good. For a fun story about how young canvassers did that last fall, click the link. They are not like us in that they barely know the election is happening -- even Presidential elections. They don't live in a politics oriented world. Your job is drag them over into one, very briefly and against considerable inertia.

  Hope that helps.

  by janinsanfran on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 10:01:04 AM PDT

  •  I've heard the 2-4% figure before

    and color me skeptical. If you're talking about field alone, I'd agree. But I think neighbors talking to neighbors, effectively, can make a much bigger difference than just 2-4%.

    And if we're including candidates knocking on doors and making phone calls, then we're definitely talking about 10-20%. In rural Rochester MN (Mayo clinic docs, nurses, etc - not exactly strong Dem territory) a young Andy Welti is now Rep. Andy Welti because he knocked on every single door in his district - defeating a 5-term incumbent powerful committee chair who didn't have any clear black marks against him [no Abramoff-like taint, as far as I know.]

    And I knocked on 12,177 doors myself in my race in 2004 and nearly won despite my opponent's overwhelming sympathy vote brought on by a near-death freak accident 6 weeks before the election. I think sincere, well-trained volunteers can make a HUGE difference in reinforcing the candidate's own words and presence, if timed well.

    by JK Minnesota on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 04:36:52 PM PDT

    •  JK-MN

      Yes indeed -- candidates who do the door knocking themselves can get a much more out of it than 2-4%. I've seen an unknown pull off a victory in a smallish district by doing the work this way.

      It only works however if 1) the candidate actually sells the people s/he meets (not a given) and 2) if the candidate can accurately identify whether the support recieved is real or merely polite. On the the latter point, I worked for a guy in 2004 who doorknocked for 6 months. But when we went back to people he had identified as positive, in order to make sure they turned out, many were not voting for him.

      You sound like the kind of candidate who can win by door knocking -- you are a rare bird for simply being willing to work that hard and we all need more of you!

      by janinsanfran on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 07:38:34 PM PDT

•  I know what you mean

  I've gone door to door for Kerry (in AZ) and Busby (in CA-50).  The experiences were quite different, to be honest...

  In both instances, we were only knocking on Dem doors so hopefully the answer was already a yes.  Probably because it was such a contentious election, in AZ I found that people were MUCH more interested in talking to me, taking Kerry literature, and signing up for absentee ballots.  In CA-50, very few people were home (and, when someone was home, the person on my list was often not home), but that could be because it was a gorgeous southern california day and i was in an area walking distance to the beach.  The ones who were home were only not terribly interested.  

  by anthonyLA on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 11:12:22 AM PDT

  •  I apologise for abusing you last night

    I was really offended.

    Just so you know, you don't have to worry about me re: banning.  

    by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 06:59:48 PM PDT

    •  So

      The great Armando admits his mistake and his threatning was wa out line.

      by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:31:27 PM PDT

      •  You are a lying troll

        This communication has nothing to do  with you and your being a troll.

        by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:33:45 PM PDT

        •  And still

          no evidence.

          Just more accusations.

          by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:39:52 PM PDT

          •  Fuckhead

            You know the evidence.

            See your troll rated comments moron.

            Your stupidity on putz does not teach you a lesson.

            But it is no matter, the community will ban you in a few days.

            by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:47:29 PM PDT

            •  Why

              First,

              I can't see the comments because you and virtually you alone did the vast share of rating.  

              Speaks volumes.

              Second, I never called or hinted that you were anti-semetic.  That was YOUR LIE.  You made that word up out of whole cloth and YOU KNOW IT.

              Third,  I said when I asked specifically that your statement was not proof of anti-semitism, that it was merely insensitive.  

              Fourth, you called me an idiot for suggesting that people who send money to Lamont will necessarily have less money to send to other people.  I conceded that for some this not true but for others like myself it is true.  You called me again and again a liar because of this statement.

              Fifth, you claimed that I was a forger because I obviously do not support Lamont.  You were exposed as a moron on this - asking for an email with a "confirmation number" before realizing that Lamont's confirmation e-mails contain no number.  

              Sixth, you called me a liar for refusing to e-mail you documentation.  Yet, you have not provided your e-mail address.

              Seventh, you downrated dozens of posts - those not related to our conversation at all - just because you are an enraged bully.

              Armando you obviously lost control.  As I regain trusted user status and can examine the whole thread I intend to complete composing my diary which catalogs your abusive, over the top, absurd rhetoric.

              I will be around, don't worry.  

              by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:52:29 PM PDT

              •  Lying idiot troll

                The COMMUNITY hid your comments, not me.

                You have filled the hidden comments page.

                You are in auto ban territory. If you don't get your average rating up in the next few days, you will be banned automatically.

                Will you be back? Sure, this is a return trip for you I am sure. But with a new name, and that will be banned also I am sure.

                by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:55:14 PM PDT

                •  Armando

                  That's just not true.

                  Look at the comments that remain, many are positive, with one or two or sometimes three comments negative.

                  I'll take care of my average, don't worry.

                  And no, this is my "first trip".

                  So whats your e-mail address.

                  At least I can clear my name.

                  by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:56:52 PM PDT

                  •  Look it up in MY PRofile

                    Or try the Contact page.

                    Look, apparently you need to take a trip to the FAQ page.

                    IF you are not a troll, you did a great imitation.

                    Your behavior was atrocious and judged so by the community.

                    I beleive you are a  troll. The community believes you are a troll.

                    You have two ways of avoiding banning right now.

                    Convince the community or me you are not -- QUICKLY.

                    I can ask kos to override your autoban.

                    by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:00:27 PM PDT

                    •  Sorry

                      Look, I am not interested in groveling to you.  If I am auto banned, fine.

                      But you have to recognize your outrageous behaviour, like just now, mocking me.  Maybe for some reason I can't see your e-mail address.  It's simply not there.  There is no "My profile" on the link I provided you.

                      Hence me asking you for it 100 times.

                      I donated to Lamont on yours, kos, and other fp's advice,

                      and now, suddenly, you say he's not going to win like it's no big thing, call me a lieberman supporter when it's not true and i've never even expressed anything less than disgust for the man, and you expect some type of what?

                      by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:04:04 PM PDT

                      •  Absolutely not

                        You made an outrageous attack on me.

                        Your protestations to the contrary you knew EXACTLY what you  were alleging.

                        Groveling is not what I asked. Persuasion.

                        I can be very fair and admit my mistakes if I misjudged you.

                        But your CONDUCT I did not misjudge and you will NOT convince me of that.

                        You charges were outrageous.

                        by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:06:33 PM PDT

                        •  I claimed now and then

                          it was both (1) odd and (2) insensitive.

                          If I thought you were a jew hater I'd just say it.

                          I am not afraid of the label, and I've tagged people with it when justified.

                          by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:14:57 PM PDT

                          •  Goodbye

                            Nothing left to say.

                            by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:19:48 PM PDT

              •  Examples

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 11:42:13 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                8. Same context [0.00 / 5] Replies: 1

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 11:41:11 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                9. Yes [0.00 / 6] Replies: 0

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 11:39:03 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                10. Of course it's a lifestyle [0.00 / 6] Replies: 1

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 11:38:08 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                13. Ditto. [0.80 / 10] Replies: 2

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 03:28:27 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                14. is it good energy? [0.80 / 5] Replies: 1

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 03:27:45 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                15. so [0.00 / 5] Replies: 2

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 03:20:28 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                16. Yeap [0.80 / 5] Replies: 0

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 02:54:22 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                17. I dont either [0.00 / 4] Replies: 1

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 02:31:48 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                18. If i am lying [0.80 / 5] Replies: 0

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 02:22:11 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                19. Digging [0.00 / 6] Replies: 1

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 02:20:59 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                20. It's a jewish [0.00 / 6] Replies: 4

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 02:18:13 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                21. The point is [0.80 / 5] Replies: 1

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 02:16:42 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                22. I am not [0.57 / 7] Replies: 3

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 02:05:23 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                23. I did make a charge [0.44 / 9] Replies: 1

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 02:03:53 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                24. I do deny it [0.66 / 6] Replies: 1

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 01:52:03 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                25. I didn't and I don't! [0.33 / 12] Replies: 3

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 01:42:48 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                27. Liear [0.44 / 9] Replies: 1

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 01:36:33 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                29. How [0.36 / 11] Replies: 0

                posted by dpmaine on 03/26/2006 01:29:42 AST
                attached to Why I am a Ned Lamont Delegate

                by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:57:38 PM PDT

                •  surprise

                  and I am sure you know how averages works.

                  by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:59:42 PM PDT

                  •  Of course I do

                    I am an admin of the site.

                    I was a FPer last year. I have FP privileges NOW.

                    Why did you NOT read nyceve's advice to you?

                    You  fooled yourself into believing the support Tamifah and a few other haters gave you was representative?

                    I have an extended history at this site. Whatever you thought of my behavior, and I would do it all NOW again, did you not consider that many others would not agree with you nd your attacks on me?

                    Look, you want a fresh start? You need to convince me you are not a troll, o convince the community.

                    I am not so convinced right now.            

                    by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:04:21 PM PDT

                    •  I don't care

                      who you think you are.  It doesn't matter to me.

                      What matters is that you are wrong, and a bully.

                      You posting a big "do you know who I am" further re-inforces my position.

                      I am not embolded by some support, I don't need others to understand the position I am.  

                      I never attacked you, not one single time, never, not once.  You made that up, Armando.  I said the phrase along the lines of "an odd choice words" or "an odd phrase".  There was another user who called your racist and bigoted.  

                      You repeatedly distorted or lied in the thread, and started an avalanche of downratings, including downrating threads entirely unrelated to our conversation, which you know is both unfair and wrong.

                      You made tons fo claims that you refuse to back up.  Like saying I called you an anti-semite, which I didn't.

                      Like saying I attacked you, which I didn't.

                      Re-read the thread: who called who insane?  I posted a legit question about diary content guidelines which you completly misread and butchered.  I posted a legit question to diarist which you mocked.  I agreed with another poster who thought the title of the diary was misleading.  All big freakin deals.

                      You then went and just made things up and I pointed it out and you hated it.  And now comes the silencing.  Which is fine.  It's the community and I can deal with that.

                      But you made statements like "I called people putzes al the time" - I spent hours looking through your post history.  When?  When did you do that?

                      I am not out to convince you, you acted like a big bully and you know it.

                      by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:10:45 PM PDT

                      •  Well

                        We have nothing left to say then.

                        Enjoy your stint here.

                        Goodbye.

                        by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:19:14 PM PDT

        •  Also

          YOu demanded me to send an e-mail; you have now entirely ignored all requests to obtain your e-mail address.

          Will you either provide it here or e-mail to me at my listed address?

          Or are you afraid of being PROVED wrong again?

          by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:44:06 PM PDT

          •  You are an idiot

            It is in "My profile."

            Do you not understand English?

            No you are a liar.

            by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:46:17 PM PDT

            •  Excuse me

              http://www.dailykos.com/...

              This is the link available to you.

              Cut and paste your email into a post.

              Because it's clearly not there as far as my excellent eye sight allows.

              by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 08:53:57 PM PDT

              •  MY PROFILE

                click the link.

                by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:08:00 PM PDT

                •  This whole email

                  thing is a clear symptom of your entire attitude towards me:

                  screenshot of your user page

                  Please.

                  Re-consider your entire attitude.

                  by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:30:04 PM PDT

                  •  Sigh

                    You know my user name? You know to use @? you know the name of the site?

                    Put them together.

                    by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:40:55 PM PDT

                    •  Even

                      when you are PROVEN wrong with PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE you still insist on being an asshole.

                      Really.  Why?

                      by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:44:02 PM PDT

                      •  Excuse me

                        I have never had the problem you are having EVER.

                        This must be recent.

                        You have been such an asshole for so long, I just assumed it was more of the same.

                        Where is your e-mail? I just told you mine. And the reason I didn't write it out is the reason NOBODY does, you know it right?

                        by Armando on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:46:57 PM PDT

                        •  Well see

                          Maybe you aren't just wrong on this one issue.

                          I just sent you the email.

                          Mind you, you called me a liar a dozen times over the e-mail issue alone.

                          If you are wrong about that, what else are you wrong about?

                          Maybe you should re-read the whole thread.  

                          by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:53:01 PM PDT

                          •  I am wrong on many issues

                            I am also right on many issues.

                            by Armando on Mon Mar 27, 2006 at 09:36:26 AM PDT

•  Sorry

  Posting in the wrong thread.

  My mistake.

  No more drama, I swear.

  by dpmaine on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 09:01:56 PM PDT