The Democratic Party Won Tonight

The Democratic Party won tonight.

I was proud of my party tonight.  I was proud of the showing of all of the candidates on the stage in New Hampshire tonight.

I saw a solidarity in this party that I have not seen since I was probably eleven years old.  There was something more cohesive about the messages that all of the candidates were offering that has been missing for years.  It wasn't a debate of folks who were lock-step raising their hands mindlessly like Republicans.  It was a debate of folks who wouldn't raise their hands just because Wolf Blitzer (or any other media pundit) commanded that they do so.

They ALL questioned authority tonight.  They all questioned conventional wisdom and they all stuck together for the most part when one took the lead in questioning conventional wisdom.  They are THINKING!!!!!!  Yay!

There are differences between these candidates.  That is clear.  But they all stood on a similar platform tonight which was not for the first time in 25 years compromised by some idiot who wanted to pander to an audience and who was willing to throw the entire party over to cop a few votes.

I know people are angry with the Democrats lately and Kucinich didn't get any points from me taking our private family fights in public tonight, but he couldn't undermine this movement towards being a team.  It was bigger than any one candidate.

I am not sure that anyone agrees with me.  But I would love to know if anyone else saw what I saw tonight.  It requires that you step back from your personal preferences and assess the candidates' performance as a whole - as a real team - but I was really satisfied overall.  I was really happy that they dueled at certain points, but I was elated to see them stand together and refuse to answer when asked ridiculous questions right from the pages of "24".  Compare that to the Republican field many of whom cheered on the use of torture and seemed to enjoy the thought.  Compare that to the paricipants in the Republican field who raised their hands to indicate that they did not believe in evolution.  Compare that to the Republican platform and we finally have a great group of candidates who represent our party well and seem to actually care about it.  Give yourselves out there in blogland and grassrootsland for that positive trend.  Democracies are always better for the participation of their citizens.  Please don't give up.  You are making a difference.  In the next few months the voices here and from all corners of the country which are not normally considered centers of power WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE THAT I PROMISE YOU WILL BE PROUD OF IN THE LONG RUN.

Thanks to everyone who spoke up because you have helped make the difference.

Finally, this diary is a dedicated "screw you" to Candy Crowley, John King and John Roberts who all seemed to want to portray our party as being in total disarray - again.  If they were really the straight reporters they claim to be they would have told you what I did tonight.  They know as well as I do that the Democratic Party has not been so alligned and so strong in probably 30 years or more.

•  Tip Jar. Names Alphabetical.

  Please note that I put all the names in the tags in alphabetical order.

  I really am pleased with the team tonight.  The whole team.

  We can't get cocky, but we really could turn this country around and I hope you all can keep the faith.

  Peace.

  by inclusiveheart on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:47:18 PM PDT

  •  you're earning your screen name tonight :-)

    by Wee Mama on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:03:13 PM PDT

    •  I'll take your word for it

      I don't have cnn and they are "editing" it on the website, or is it even the same debate? livebloggers said they are sitting: this on is a standup, and they only show a snippet only on Iraq...this little video is titled candidates spar over Iraq

      anyone have better luck on computer?

      by dotcommodity on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:17:04 PM PDT

      •  There was no clear winner tonight - that's clear.

        There were a lot of very smart people giving substantive answers. I like all the Democrats. I think Clinton, Edwards and Obama stayed the same - although Edwards was a lot fiesttier towards Clinton. Biden and Dodd and maybe Kucinich picked up some supporters. And I, though I could be wrong, that Richardson lost support.

        by lorelynn on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:49:57 PM PDT

        •  richardson is a good guy. i am surprised

          his showing hasn't been so stellar. oh well, they'll be plenty for him to do in the new dem administration.

          by stodghie on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 09:30:47 PM PDT

          •  I think he was brilliant tonight

            Richardson, I mean.  He was dead on when it came to the issues, I was furious that he was cut off at every turn by Blitzer when the top tier was allowed to speak uninterrupted (and felt a lot of pity for Gravel and Kucinich, they were treated like potted plants).

            The MSM wants to annoint the candidate, and it is a lot easier to do that from a pack of three than a pack of eight.  This is a really nice diary, and I am grateful for it.

            by liberaltruthsayer on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 10:05:32 PM PDT

            •  thanks for your comment.

              by stodghie on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 07:31:40 AM PDT

      •  that headline should tell you everything

        they did not spar - they discussed.  There was a small exchange from Obama that said - 4 years ago you voted for it.  But all and I Mean ALL made it perfectly clear that while the differences were minor in the application, they all made it clear that the #1 would be to get out of Iraq.

        by totallynext on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:54:32 PM PDT

•  That is one way of looking at it I guess.

  I would say that it is a bit much poured on there. I think the war is pulling them apart like immigration is pulling the republicans apart. Many in the base want to stop the funding. The establishment and many in the new 06 coalition are against cutting off the funding which leaves dems powerless on the biggest issue they got elected on. What did we put them in power for if they don't have the guts to end the war?

  by Common Cents on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:50:03 PM PDT

  •  Yes. On second thought they all suck and there

    is absolutely no reason in the world to support a single one of them much less an entire party.

    The "establishment" has taken hold and I am now convinced that the "establishment" is really interested in destroying this country and this democracy.  They are all liars and thieves and I don't even know why anyone bothers because the system is too corrupted now to fix it.

    THERE IS NO HOPE AND NO HONESTY TO ELICIT FROM THESE PEOPLE AND THERE PROBABLY IS NONE WORTH PURSUING FROM ANY HUMAN BEING ANYWAY.

    Thanks for setting me straight.  God forbid anyone would work towards a positive outcome that can't possibly exist as you so readily point out.  Thanks for the reality check.

    by inclusiveheart on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 06:48:44 PM PDT

•  Very pleased with our slate of candidates.

  By and large, they are showing that they are listening to the American public.  Across the board support for universal healthcare, getting out of Iraq, etc.  

  Loved that Hillary jumped on Wolf about "hypotheticals"...now if only in the next debate they'd scold the host for using republican frames.

  by tjb22 on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:50:25 PM PDT

  •  Next time

    they should all take rating flags and after each question they should rate it collectively. If the average score exceeds 50% they should answer it, otherwise they send it back for a recast.

    If someone is an outlier and rates it really low, they should ask for their explanation for their score.

    They have to learn not to play the game, to disrupt it and take control.

    If they can't do that with the hairdos on CNN, they sure as shit can't do it to Bushco.

    by Deep Dark on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:15:21 PM PDT

  •  I would still like Gore in the mix!

    by dangangry on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:29:48 PM PDT

•  Ditto.

  I so agree with you on this.  Thanks for putting it in print.  

  As I watched the debate, I realized about halfway through that I could happily vote for any of those people.  Well, except Gravel, who I think is nuts.

  But that being said, even Gravel would be a vast improvement over any of the Republican candidates.  I also watched all of their first debate, and it scared the crap out of me.

  by Miss Blue on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:50:26 PM PDT

  •  Everyone needs a crazy uncle on the team

    and the geeky nudge too.  It isn't a "team" without 'em :)

    by inclusiveheart on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:53:04 PM PDT

  •  I don't think Gravel is nuts

    I think he is honest to a fault. He is not there to win an election but to express anger and outrageous disbelief at what has been happening in this country. I'm not sure I'd appear any saner.

    Hmmm... perhaps using myself as a standard for sanity isn't the best idear but I think you know what I mean. :)

    by Andrew C White on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:54:38 PM PDT

    •  I agree...

      We need those who are willing to raise the questions that "leading candidates" find too politically explosive.  They provide a much needed service.

      by tjb22 on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:56:35 PM PDT

      •  Moving the Overton Window

        a fascinating concept I first learned about here on DKos!

        by Freakinout daily on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:20:57 PM PDT

        •  Before I knew it had a name,

          I saw it happen in local elections.  In most locals, there seem to be a couple of off-the-wall types that often just come in with one issue...that issue, ofcourse, being something that the more "establishment types" don't care to discuss....

          by tjb22 on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:25:18 PM PDT

          •  Socrates should really get the credit -

            that guy Overton was about two thousand years behind the curve.

            Open debate leads to better understanding of the issues and better choices in the end.

            by inclusiveheart on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:29:05 PM PDT

            •  Okay duh - two thousand is actually totally

              wrong - I am tired and am up past my bed time - 2500 years give or take a couple decades.

              by inclusiveheart on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:44:48 PM PDT

    •  I'll tell ya this --

      for what it's worth, people I know who are NOT very keen on following politics have been asking me who the Gravel guy is. He's getting attention by saying stuff that piques peoples' interest. That's important, because it's getting people back into thinking about ideas in politics.

      Personally, I think the three-way between Biden, Kucinich and Gravel is going to be mighty entertaining. It'll be the only time I've intentionally watched FoxNews in my life.

      by kath25 on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 10:31:45 PM PDT

  •  I have to admit I like Mike Gravel

    Sure, he's nuts.  But he's got a heart and a brain, even if he's, um . . . a little around the bend.

    And I'd sooner have Mike Gravel than Fred Thompson or ::shudder:: Ghouliani.

    by Gemina13 on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:18:03 PM PDT

•  Great insight

  and in that respect - presenting a mature, thoughtful, competent, responsible, questioning, professional Democratic Party - a really great debate.

  thanks for the diary.

  by Joffan on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:51:11 PM PDT

•  I agree for the most part

  The Democratic Party looked good tonight.

  My first comment on the debate threads was a comparison of a stage full of sane and thoughtful Democrats to the 10 almost uniformly insane Republicans I saw at the Reagan lovefest.

  by Andrew C White on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:51:15 PM PDT

  •  Right

    Our folks raise their hands to poll on sane issues--Republicans raise their hands to say they think the universe is 7000 years old.  I'm okay with uneducated fundamentalists saying this--under the Descartes rule.  But a President who actually believes this is either pandering (which means he's lying, not a good trait) or an idiot.  Well, actually, at the moment, we have both.  Don't need another.

    by Tenn Wisc Dem on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:56:18 PM PDT

•  Agreed.

  It is possible to disagree and still play fair...

  by mommyof3 on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:51:19 PM PDT

•  Inclusive, I agree with every point in your diary

  We had a couple--three guys on the stage who shouldn't be President but otherwise we have an embarrassment of riches--this group is really talented and the Republicans are all up from the minors, trying out for the Show.  (Okay, I watched Bull Durham again last night so baseball metaphors have flowed all day).

  by St Louis Woman on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:53:05 PM PDT

•  "Would you use military force in Darfur?"

  I was impressed by the answer to that. They displayed nuance. Instead of blindly raising their hands they asked "How much force?"

  That's how thinking people answer questions. I like that Hillary called him out on those stupid types of questions.

  by Pav on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:59:30 PM PDT

  •  Yep, You Have To Give HRC Credit For Calling

    them out on the more stupid aspects of the questions. Hope this catches on in future debates.

    by MO Blue on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 10:55:48 PM PDT

•  Thanks for your comments

  The real losers tonight seem to be the DC media, who are getting lazier and dumber by the day.  Candy Crowley, John King and John Roberts were once top-notch journalists, but you can watch the life and intelligence being sapped out of them the longer they stay in the DC bubble.  They don't seem to have an original thought or be able to do any research of the facts.  Very sad.

  by davidkc on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:16:52 PM PDT

  •  I've been extremely disappointed

    with CNN coverage for quite some time.  I will say that they did a better job with the actual debate than MSNBC did, however, the dusty old talking heads they use for analysis often remind me of the old guys on "The Muppet Show" who sit up in the balcony.

    by tjb22 on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:20:23 PM PDT

    •  Excellent analogy. n/t

      by inclusiveheart on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:24:43 PM PDT

    •  Statler & Waldorf!

      The geriatric paparazzi strike again!

      by keirdubois on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:43:18 PM PDT

      •  Ah! Thank you.

        Couldn't remember their names...but I am instantly reminded of them everytime they bring out Larry King and his merry band of seniors to offer political insight.

        by tjb22 on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:47:08 PM PDT

        •  That and

          ...the McLaughlin Group. Batty old coots.

          by keirdubois on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 09:35:05 PM PDT

  •  I have to tell you that on election night

    in 2000 I have this clear memory of Candy Crowley reporting that George Bush had lost and she did NOT hide her disappointment at all at the news.  I remember being stunned at the fact that she was the reporter assigned to that candidate (which was all she was at that point) and that she was showing her disappointment.  As we all know, an hour or two later she was able to gleefully report that GWB had won - and again she did not hide her emotions.  She has never held any credibility in my mind since that night.  She was, as rumor has it, brain-washed well before she ever made it here to DC - GWB even had a pet name for her.

    by inclusiveheart on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:24:10 PM PDT

    •  Do you remember what it was?

      I do. "Butterball".

      by keirdubois on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:43:52 PM PDT

•  Rick Sanchez on CNN

  Is doing a hit-job on the Democrats telling the audience that Clinton, Obama abd Dodd voted to continue funding.

  by RandySF on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:22:48 PM PDT

  •  Rick Sanchez is a piece of sh*t.

    AND I haven't a clue why anyone listens to a guy who opts to have himself tasered.

    He really should be pictured in the dictionary under the definition of "bonehead".

    by inclusiveheart on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:26:36 PM PDT

•  I agree with the many comments here that

  the whole slate was excellent.  What a difference from the Repub debate over who is more willing to kill and torture.

  by beemerr90s on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:29:14 PM PDT

•  Wonderful diary inclusiveheart

  Your points are so well taken, and your tone blew me away.

  All I can add is to say Thanks :)

  by phoenixdreamz on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:29:28 PM PDT

  •  No. Thank you. n/t

    by inclusiveheart on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 09:22:24 PM PDT

•  Yeah

  I'll second that big bird to Candy and the John boys. What wankers.

  by keirdubois on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:38:29 PM PDT

•  I agree!

  I couldn't stomach more than a few minutes of the Zombie-tron of the Republicans all signing the same song - "We love Reagan" and "We're tough on terrorists and would love to torture the hell out of them" and "We doubt evolution"...

  Hasn't the country had enough of that shit for 8 years?  Don't ANY of the Republicans realize it's time to move on/forward?  Thankfully I think the difference is "no" and it's proved by these debates.  Thankfully, I hope and pray, it means that we'll have a Democrat in the White House soon.

  As for CNN, first let's give them kudos for sponsoring this right.  I'm still watching Rick Sanchez interview voters and have them respond, and I'm impressed...more time with real people and less with John King.  The only one on the political team I think ever makes any sense is Bill Schneider...he calls it like it is.  Candy needs to get her face out of the candy jar and into the real world - it's not just a horse race or a game we're talking about - it's a Presidential election and can't we just spend ONE NIGHT talking about issues and let the chips fall where they may?  One night?  The others, especially Wolf, just parrot the Republican lines such as "shouldn't English be the official language" or regurgitating lines like "support the troops" or "war on terror"...to make their points....without thinking.

  Again to credit inclusiveheart here, I am proud of these candidates and so far could support any of them except Gravel or Kucinich...I think they are both too far out there.  They come across as thoughtful and articulate, and - dare i say it - electable!  Although, I will still hold my first choice for Gore if he would go for it again...  

  by OptionSF on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:46:38 PM PDT

  •  Run Al, Run!!!

    by dangangry on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:25:00 PM PDT

•  Made this 40-year Dem really proud! n/t

  by ExStr8 on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:47:48 PM PDT

•  I was pleased too..they all sounded great and

  intelligent.

  I noticed how the reporters allkept saying "Left" and "Left Wing" as if they were evil. I am glad they are pulling out of FOX's debate...there just is no point.

  by Temmoku on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:49:39 PM PDT

•  And there really was discussion of the issues

  We showed that we can have intelligent discussions, disagree agreeably, tolerate the crazy uncles, and compliment our opponents. All good traits in a world leader, and in a political party.

  by Tenn Wisc Dem on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:57:46 PM PDT

•  More refreshing is this

  As I have my favorite (John Edwards) I would be proud to support and work hard for all the candidates in the primary and the general election.  that is quite different from 2004 when  the meme during the caucases and the primaries was:  Anyone but Bush.

  And with thought we ended up with John Kerry.

  This time there are so many candidates that the meme should be clear choice = Democrats rule!

  by totallynext on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:58:05 PM PDT

  •  Yeah - I don't feel like I'm relegated to the

    best of the worst this time around.

    Admittely, I have my preferences, but tonight I was just pleased to feel like they were all a team and a reasonable number of them would be decent team captains.  That is an incredibly powerful launch pad for this party and ultimately bodes well for our party's potential to effect positive change.

    by inclusiveheart on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 09:21:38 PM PDT

•  I agree. I'd be happy with any of 'em as prez

  except Gravel or Kucinich. Even Biden, though I'd rather see him as Secretary of State.

  I turned off the TV before the talking heads started in with the horserace BS. They all did well, and I see no real need to declare a winner.

  by Red State Rebel on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 09:26:21 PM PDT

•  I was proud of this group of intelligent,

  patriotic candidates telling the truth about these very complicated issues and challenges that face this nation, largely created or ignored by 6 years of the Bush Mafia.  

  I'm so tired of the juvenile behavior of our media pundits and I was so proud of our candidates for refusing to kowtow to their stupid black and white questions (including elementary school hand-raising).  

  They think it's all about who wins and who loses and give no voice to the grave constitutional and international issues caused by King George's attempt to dismantle all that's good about this country. He and his cronies must be held accountable for their crimes (and they are crimes).  Thank you for giving accurate voice to my thoughts!

  by Nancy Hartley on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 09:56:13 PM PDT

•  i feel the same way;

  for the first time in a long time, I felt just a little, tiny bit hopeful.  That feeling may go away tomorrow, but for now i'm holding on to it.

  by Texas Blue on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:00:40 PM PDT

•  I have always been proud to be a Democrat!

  I was proud of all our candidates tonight, including Hillary!

  by dangangry on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:23:28 PM PDT

•  Great Diary! Thanks.

  Your general positivity is an inspriration.  Sincerely.

  Do you ever get angry?  What happens then.  Beware? ;)

  by Terra Mystica on Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 11:15:10 AM PDT

  •  yes I get angry.

    And yes beware is probably smart.

    I am cranky when I've tried for the best.  It is selfish I admit, but an indulgence that dealing with other people who are just dead set on being cranky no matter what the positives are.  Some days you just can't hang on to the best.

    by inclusiveheart on Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 06:37:20 PM PDT

  •  Thank you by the way.

    Ridiculous that that was not my first response.  I apologize.

    by inclusiveheart on Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 06:38:30 PM PDT