Burnt Orange Report

Has anyone other than Dean laid out a plan for the direction or long term strategy of the plan?

I thought Ron Kirk would be a good choice, being from Texas and black would be great for the DNC and I brought his name up on some blogs. The response was not positive. Some said he should have spoken out against the Tulia incident early on and he did nothing until it was politically correct. I looked up some old articles on the NET and there was some truth in them to that. Can you shed more light on this? I love Dr. Dean but it seems a waste of talent to put him in. He is going to be on MTP in an hour so hopefully he will address whether he really wants this position.

I actually meant the question. What other person has put out a public strategy? I didn't support Dean in the '04 primary. He was actually near the bottom of my list, but he is the only person I have heard from who actually has a plan. Its not that bad either.

Great, just what the Dems need--another Republican wanna-be. I like Ron Kirk as a person, but we need someone who is interested in rallying our base. I just don't think Kirk is that person. And our base is not made up of suburbanites, contrary to popular belief.

Y'all don't have enough 'base' to win anymore. Need to attract some new people, make some converts. Andrea, your thinking is only going to get you what y'all have right now. Do you enjoy where y'all are right now? Any questions?

Not enough 'blue' kids, low birth rates in majority of Kerry's blue states, bottom 16 all voted for him. Y'all are aborting too many Democrats. It's only going to get worse for y'all till you change that approach.

Your savior, Bill Clinton, showed you the way, and you continue to look elsewhere. He worked with Republicans, y'all don't.

For those of you keeping tract:

President Bush 61,934,053
Senator Kerry 58,901,260

You keep wishing, I'll keep counting.

Our base is intact. We didn't lose because of turnout. We need to expand our base, not just rally it. We lost because of an inadequate candidate, and the lack of a dumbed down message that America could understand besides ABB.

we lost because they cheated. with no paper ballots to check and keep them honest, we have no proof who actually won. All the voting machines are owned and OPERATED by Republicans. How do you think Republicans would feel if the machines used were owned by Michael Moore and George Soros? Peter, you give me me the receipts of how folks voted and I will grant you won...but you can't because there aren't any receipts.

Let's see, if I remember correctly, Kirk's reasons to vote for him as Senator were: I'm black; I agree with Bush; I agree with Bush; I worked with GOPers in Dallas; I'm black; I agree with Bush.

Did I forget anything?

Yeah, this is just what we need heading up the DNC.

"Y'all are aborting too many Democrats."

Please tell me you are kidding and you are not that ignorant. Please.

I have to say that I agree that Kirk is an empty suit. He doesn't want the job for any other reason than it means he's the head of the Democratic party.

It's true we need to expand our base. We just can't win with the numbers we've got now. But I don't see Democrats turning out in record numbers to vote for a candidate because he supports privatization of Social Security and vast corporate subsidies. Our base is made up of various minority groups, if our nominee says right off the bat that he's very conservative, then they might as well stay home because their lives are going to be shit either way.

Here's a crazy idea, let's find out why it is 40% of our country felt they weren't necessary for the continuation of democracy on Nov. 2. I'm sure we can find 2 or 3 million more votes in there somewhere.

We don't necessarily have to convince Republicans to become Democrats, we don't have to adopt conservative agenda points to get swing voters who lean a little to the right. We can win, but we have to do it by being Democrats and understanding what that means, otherwise it is completely pointless to win.

I agree Nate and the one thing that can be done now is register voters. Why wait until 3 months before the next election to start. Isn't it easy enough to get a list of registered voters and go to addresses not on the list? Use the Net wisely. Cannot a grassroots effort do that?

Peter represents the Republicans very well.

Andrea, NYTimes 12/07/04 David Brooks article titled "The New Red-Diaper Babies". Think about it Andrea, which party practices abortion more? Your answer is Democrats by a .5 percentage( 2.25 per for Dems, 1.75 per for Reps). If you keep depleting your people count, less people to vote your way.

Andrea, without abortion there would be another 18 million voters available for the 2004 vote. With Dems being the majority party in registrations 51 to 21% in 1979, there would be more than enough voters to have kept Gov. Bush from EVER being our President.

Vice President Gore 51,003,926
Governor Bush 50,460,110

President Bush 61,934,053
Senator Kerry 58,901,260

For the 2008 vote that number increases to 24 million. The general idea is that children normally follow their parents voting ideology. I know this to be a fact in my household so far 3 out of my 4 kids are Reps, 2 are voting Reps. The fourth still needs some work.

There have been 50 million abortions, thats the fact. No ignorance here, there is a price for these missing people not being here. Your party is paying more of that price than mine.

Another thing Andrea, babies born now are being refered to as the "W" generation.

You keep wishing, I'm still counting.

link for NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/opinion/07brooks.html?ex=1260162000&en=ebdde83f03fe6d2e&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland