# The official "Mr. Moto is a clueless right-wing Republican shill" thread **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 29, 2005, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797 "2005-07-29T19:54:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/181 "2005-07-31T19:57:53Z")
> [@Zhao Daoli](#): > > This is one argument that really annoys me. Since the Democrats clearly have a broad platform that even a cursory glance through DNC materials reveals, the only charitable way to interpret this argument is: judging from liberal doper’s rhetoric, they don’t have a platform. Right. And the Republicans have a nice, broad based party paltform as well. Problem is that these platforms are completely worthless, as any real political expert will tell you. I can’t tell you the last time I looked at one from any party. All a platform is is a collection of sops to activists designed to keep them onboard at election time. A better indication of party intentions and discipline is legislative and executive action. This is where the rubber meets the road, and where Democrats have been losing ground over the last generation or so. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/182 "2005-07-31T20:28:55Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Not in my perception, and especially not on the SDMB. There were several attempts, by me and by others, to actually try to debate Kerry and the Dems’ positions before the late election. With a few exceptions ( **BobLibDem** was one, IIRC), repeated attempts to get the Usual Suspects to explain _in detail_ what was attractive about Kerry failed. Like a dog to its vomit, the threads were dragged back, willy-nilly, to the constant mantra that apparently constitutes the sum total of political thinking for far too many Dopers - BushLiedBushSuxBushLiedBushSux… > > Some Dopers were quite straightforward - they would vote for literally _anybody_ who wasn’t Bush. And once they said, “I hate Bush”, they had apparently said all that they had to say. > > I really got the feeling that this is all there was to it, in a good number of cases. > > There is a reason why the term “knee-jerk” exists. > > Regards, > Shodan Well, maybe I interpreted your claim to be stronger than it was. If your argument is that some (even a lot) of Dopers don’t represent their party platform very well, I can hardly disagree. Though, I think that argument cuts equally for both parties. Do you agree that the Democrats do have a party platform that is expressed eloquently by some (say, at least 10 prolific posters) on this board? > [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Right. And the Republicans have a nice, broad based party paltform as well. Problem is that these platforms are completely worthless, as any real political expert will tell you. I can’t tell you the last time I looked at one from any party. > > All a platform is is a collection of sops to activists designed to keep them onboard at election time. > > A better indication of party intentions and discipline is legislative and executive action. This is where the rubber meets the road, and where Democrats have been losing ground over the last generation or so. Completely worthless? I disagree, and so do many “real political experts” (unless the word “real” is meant to indicate those with whom you agree). But platforms not being a particularly good judge of future action? Yeah, of course I agree. That’s one of the main problems with the system. As for legislative and executive action, I’m not enough of a political scholar to debate with you much of Clinton or Carter’s records (I was born in the early 80’s). But the debate in this thread is whether Democrats currently have a coherent platform that they act on. And as I have shown, they do (which can be demonstrated, among other ways, in voting patterns). Further, your claim that votes tell about a parties’ intentions and discipline only goes so far. As a political expert, you surely recognize the immense complexity of Senate votes and even Presidential vetoes. ---
**Author:** ![Updike](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ec9cab/32.png) [@Updike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Updike)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/183 "2005-07-31T20:52:16Z")
> [@Zhao Daoli](#): > > The reason a lot of this may appear as a “hate-bush” platform is not because of a pre-concieved hatred (at least from most), but because his actions contradict nearly all of the Democratic platform (contrary to his charade as a moderate during the 2000 election). Even if one buys your argument that Bush ran a charade as a moderate in 2000, in 2004 people had four years experience with his Presidency and re-elected him by a larger margin. The Democrat platform, at least as presented by Kerry/Edwards, was rejected by the voters. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/184 "2005-07-31T21:02:50Z")
> [@Updike](#): > > Even if one buys your argument that Bush ran a charade as a moderate in 2000, in 2004 people had four years experience with his Presidency and re-elected him by a larger margin. The Democrat platform, at least as presented by Kerry/Edwards, was rejected by the voters. Ok, so you agree with me that they have a platform? Your point? You seem to have mistaken me for a Democratic apologist. But it gives me an opportunity to make one more point about platforms: The fact that the party allows the document to contain certain elements tells about motivations, especially on social issues. Are many of the planks and sub-points just candy for activists? Yes. But the main thrust of the document says a lot. Remember, The contract with America and the New Deal were party platforms. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/185 "2005-07-31T22:05:15Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Like a dog to its vomit, the threads were dragged back, willy-nilly, to the constant mantra that apparently constitutes the sum total of political thinking for far too many Dopers - BushLiedBushSuxBushLiedBushSux… And yet, you conveniently overlook the fact that Bush _did_ lie. “Oh, how _dare_ these evil lefties tell the truth about our emperor?!” ---
**Author:** ![Updike](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ec9cab/32.png) [@Updike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Updike)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/186 "2005-07-31T22:29:30Z")
> [@Zhao Daoli](#): > > Ok, so you agree with me that they have a platform? Your point? You seem to have mistaken me for a Democratic apologist. Yes, they have a platform, but that platform and a buck two fifty will buy you a cup of coffee. So what? Most voters, especially when the platform has been packaged from 2004 to present as “anybody but Bush”, aren’t buying it. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/187 "2005-07-31T22:29:34Z")
As someone who believes that Bush has lied about several important matters, I think the above post serves absolutely no purpose other to inflame. This being the pit, that’s fine, but don’t pretend you’re making an argument. The threads we have about Bush lying never end with a pro-Bush poster conceding the lie. They end in argument. So someone like **Mr. Moto** says that you’re just repeating something you’ve not proved. That’s \*not \*my objection. People that believe that Bush (and company) lied don’t just say “Bush lies!” as \*\*Shodan \*\*and **Mr. Moto** imply. They use evidence, memos, and transcripts to prove it. But then Pro-Bush posters argue with the interpretation of the evidence and with the validity of the sources, but these points cannot really be absolutely resolved so we all just call it like we see it. At some point, you’ve got to pick a side on this because the arguments can go on _ad infinitum_ (to source indicts, differing standards of evidence, etc.). So I think, **rjung when you say “Bush lied,” you aren’t just making some shrill declaration devoid of evidence as Mr. Moto and Shodan** have stated. _But you aren’t convincing anybody either_. It’s as meaningless as an off-topic post about giraffes or something. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/188 "2005-07-31T22:31:51Z")
> [@Updike](#): > > Yes, they have a platform, but that platform and a buck two fifty will buy you a cup of coffee. So what? Most voters, especially when the platform has been packaged from 2004 to present as “anybody but Bush”, aren’t buying it. Yes. I agree. What exactly is your point? I was rebutting the notion that Democrats have no serious platform. That argument is just a way to not have to debate the real issues. ---
**Author:** ![boret](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@boret](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boret)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2005, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/189 "2005-07-31T23:13:59Z")
Yes, the Democrats have a “serious” platform. But how many people base their vote on the “official” platform? I’d guess not many, and my guess is supported by polls and election results. **Sam Stone** , and others, have posited that the Democrats need to move to the center. But based on the polls, the Democrats currently in office _do_ represent the center. “Centrism” isn’t an ideology, in and of itself, is it? If anyone makes that claim, I’d like to hear that argument. So what are we left with? People aren’t that happy with George Bush, but they are also not very excited by the Democratic Party solution to the Bush admin. Anyone disagree? I disagree with **Sam Stone** in that I don’t think “moving to the center” is the solution for Democrats - because they _are_ the center, based on polls and the political environment that exists today in the US. Just because they are _inept_ at making that clear to the teeming masses doesn’t mean it isn’t so. **Sam** , I ask you, who are the elected Dem Pols who reflect the views of “MoveOn”? And what influence do they have, even inside their own party? I mean really now… Could it be that both parties are “dead”? This is a radical view, I know, and I’d prefer to think that _both_ parties can rebound from the current climate. But my hopes may not necessarily reflect reality. What transpires if both parties truly are dead is open to speculation. ---
**Author:** ![wolf\_meister](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolf_meister/32/15202_2.png) [@wolf\_meister](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolf_meister)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/190 "2005-08-01T02:23:10Z")
**boret** _Could it be that both parties are “dead”? This is a radical view, I know, and I’d prefer to think that both parties can rebound from the current climate. But my hopes may not necessarily reflect reality. What transpires if both parties truly are dead is open to speculation._ Perhaps not the greatest political philosopher but comedian Lewis Black has said “The Democrats are the party of _no_ ideas and the Republicans are the party of _bad_ ideas.” ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/191 "2005-08-01T02:58:31Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > …a disaffected Democrat would still vote for the devil rather than, say, Rick Santorum. No, I can’t see Tom DeLay getting any support from Democrats, no matter how bizarre their affect. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Highwayman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@The\_Highwayman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Highwayman)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/192 "2005-08-01T05:50:38Z")
_…And the Republicans go on and on forever and ever maintaining their majority and never pissing the voters off. Those same voters also never blamed them when things invariably went sour and everyone lived happily ever after._ That’s called a fantasy and it will never happen. However, if we, the Democrats, keep letting them define us, it will be a prolonged majority. The beautiful part about being the underdog is that your day will come again as sure as the sun rises. We are going to be in the ascendancy for years while they have seen the high water mark and embark down the road to their future low point. Tell me how do we have it so bad? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/193 "2005-08-01T06:40:06Z")
> [@The Highwayman](#): > > _…And the Republicans go on and on forever and ever maintaining their majority and never pissing the voters off. Those same voters also never blamed them when things invariably went sour and everyone lived happily ever after._ > > That’s called a fantasy and it will never happen. However, if we, the Democrats, keep letting them define us, it will be a prolonged majority. The beautiful part about being the underdog is that your day will come again as sure as the sun rises. We are going to be in the ascendancy for years while they have seen the high water mark and embark down the road to their future low point. Tell me how do we have it so bad? With respect, it is not American Democrats that “have it so bad,” it is the innocent prisoners being kept without trial in Guantanamo, Americans and Iraqis killed in wartime because of a lack of careful planning and proper equipment, poor women who die in backalley abortions because the US cut aid funding to their overseas clinics, and American CIA officers and foreign agents exposed when foreign governments found out they’d had contact with Valerie Plame’s cover company. And that’s just shortlist off the top of my not-particularly-partisan head. Time will heal many of the wounds bared by this and other countries, but not all of them. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 9:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/194 "2005-08-01T09:14:57Z")
> [@Zhao Daoli](#): > > As someone who believes that Bush has lied about several important matters, I think the above post serves absolutely no purpose other to inflame. This being the pit, that’s fine, but don’t pretend you’re making an argument. The threads we have about Bush lying never end with a pro-Bush poster conceding the lie. They end in argument. So someone like **Mr. Moto** says that you’re just repeating something you’ve not proved. > _But you aren’t convincing anybody either_. **Xtisme** spake those famous words, ‘on review of the evidence I have changed my mind’ and a small flower bloomed. Remember the lurkers. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/195 "2005-08-01T13:38:43Z")
> [@Zhao Daoli](#): > > Well, maybe I interpreted your claim to be stronger than it was. If your argument is that some (even a lot) of Dopers don’t represent their party platform very well, I can hardly disagree. Though, I think that argument cuts equally for both parties. Do you agree that the Democrats do have a party platform that is expressed eloquently by some (say, at least 10 prolific posters) on this board? I don’t know about numbers, but… Democrats had a platform in 2004. But very few Dopers seemed to give a rip what it was. The number of pro-Kerry or pro-Democratic platform voices on the SDMB were drowned out by the screams of “anybody but Bush” repeated _ad infinitum_. For heaven’s sake, look at the posts between my earlier posts and this one. Not a single mention of anything pro-Kerry. _All_ of it is a repetition of anti-Bush. _Hardly anyone on the SDMB gave a shit about Kerry or his positions._ There comes a point at which you have to assume, not that the platform is being presented badly, but that it is being presented as it is. The platform, for many Dopers and most of the Usual Suspects, was completely summed up by the one phrase expressed a thousand times a day leading up to the elections - “BushSux”. The Democrats picked the last liberal standing after the primaries. He had nice hair and had left-over credentials from his anti-Viet Nam positions. So they stamped their imprimatur on his ass, and ran him for the White House based (as far as could be told from debate on the SDMB) on one position - “I’m not Bush.” And then, he lost. And none of the Usual Suspects seem to have learned anything from that besides, more of the same, only louder. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/196 "2005-08-01T14:34:50Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > _Hardly anyone on the SDMB gave a shit about Kerry or his positions._ Well, its disingenuous to say they didn’t care about his positions. They assumed he had positions like: no lying; no invading without sufficient evidence; when you invade and the CIA warns you about civil war, make some back-up plans; corporations will not voluntarily solve environmental problems; no appointing underqualified and overly partisan civil servants, etc. Because nearly any candidate, including many Republicans, hold these positions, Kerry in particular didn’t matter much. Now, I’m sure you object to the implicit arguments against Bush (that he lied, invaded hastily, etc.), but they do represent reasoned positions about which there was fierce debate on this board. Had there not been so many controversial actions taken by the administration, the debate may well have been about trade policy, social issues, more on the economy, etc. But the fact that there was minimal debate on these topics does not prove that the Democratic platform is just irrational hatred of Bush. > [@Shodan](#): > > There comes a point at which you have to assume, not that the platform is being presented badly, but that it is being presented as it is. The platform, for many Dopers and most of the Usual Suspects, was completely summed up by the one phrase expressed a thousand times a day leading up to the elections - “BushSux”. > > The Democrats picked the last liberal standing after the primaries. He had nice hair and had left-over credentials from his anti-Viet Nam positions. So they stamped their imprimatur on his ass, and ran him for the White House based (as far as could be told from debate on the SDMB) on one position - “I’m not Bush.” > > And then, he lost. And none of the Usual Suspects seem to have learned anything from that besides, more of the same, only louder. > > Regards, > Shodan The assumption behind your argument is that “I’m not Bush” is not a reasonable position to run on. It is a reasonable argument if you believe that Bush is responsible for many, many mistakes. You further assume that it was this oversimplified position that caused Kerry’s loss. I disagree. From the exit polls, Kerry lost because of “moral issues” which I believe means pro-life and anti-gay voters. Not to mention the woeful number of Republican voters who didn’t even know the basic facts about the Iraq War [(Cite.)](http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/Report10_21_04.pdf) Both assumptions, at a minimum, require \*some \*defense from you. Especially given what I’ve said above. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/197 "2005-08-01T16:05:47Z")
> [@Zhao Daoli](#): > > Well, its disingenuous to say they didn’t care about his positions. Based on the amount of attention they paid to Kerry’s positions, I disagree. My experience is that people talk more about things they care more about, and less about things they don’t care about. Thus, based on the amount of time the Usual Suspects spent talking about what Kerry would do differently, and the amount spent in red-faced hysterical screams about Bush, I would judge they cared very little about the one and quite a lot about the other. Especially given what I mentioned - that certain posters can reliably be depended upon to chime into thread and prove exactly what I say. As did the OP. > [@Zhao Daoli](#): > > The assumption behind your argument is that “I’m not Bush” is not a reasonable position to run on. It is a reasonable argument if you believe that Bush is responsible for many, many mistakes. I am not arguing (here) whether it is reasonable or unreasonable. What has been demonstrated is that it was not a winning strategy. As you probably noticed, Democrats have not been doing too well in elections of late. But, for some reason, liberals on the Dope get tetchy when you tell them “you can’t beat something with nothing”. And if the nothing in question doesn’t have any big ideas to focus his campaign around, then it becomes that much easier for the other side to point out that you are a veteran (who accused his fellow soldiers of routinely committing atrocities), a war hero (who threw away his medals), deeply committed to affordable health care (who never, even once, sponsored any major legislation on the issue), and thus frame the debate so as to become the first President since Reagan to be re-elected with a majority of the popular vote. So lots of those on the losing side have made it clear they don’t want advice from the winning side. OK by me, I suppose. But I think it would be better for all concerned if they reconsidered. If the Dems are just going to say “Nyet!” to whatever Bush proposes, this is a bad thing for the country in general. If, for instance, both sides agree that there is a looming problem with Social Security, and one side sees their job as finished once they have prevented anything from being done about it, without suggesting anything else, I think this is bad overall. For a lotta Dopers, YMMV. Loyal Opposition is clearly a hard row to hoe. Maybe eventually they will get over the bitterness. I kind of doubt it, based on the leftovers from the 2000 elections, but it could happen. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/198 "2005-08-01T16:11:36Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] Based on the amount of attention they paid to Kerry’s positions, I disagree. My experience is that people talk more about things they care more about, and less about things they don’t care about. /QUOTE]Is your whole position based on this? Well, I disagree. I think you can find Christians who talk on and on about how important Christ is to them. You can also find Christian who hardly talk about it at all. That doesn’t mean that their faith is not important to them. Also, do you suppose that it might be possible that republicans who mischaracterize democratic goals might have to do a little with how bitter they (dems) feel? ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/199 "2005-08-01T16:13:08Z")
:smack: > [@Shodan](#): > > Based on the amount of attention they paid to Kerry’s positions, I disagree. My experience is that people talk more about things they care more about, and less about things they don’t care about. ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2005, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797/200 "2005-08-01T17:29:37Z")
> [@Zhao Daoli](#): > > The assumption behind your argument is that “I’m not Bush” is not a reasonable position to run on. It is a reasonable argument if you believe that Bush is responsible for many, many mistakes. It may seem to you to be a reasonable position to run on, but as a _campaign tactic_, it’s a loser. “I’m not Clinton” was Bob Dole’s strategy in 1996, and it didn’t work any better for him than “I’m not Bush” worked for Kerry. The Republicans learned from their mistakes and now they hold the reigns of power in Washington. The Democrats seem determined to persist in their mistakes and are revving Hillary up for an ignoble, disastrous defeat in ‘08. Suggesting that the Democrats may want to rethink their "strategy’ a little seems to me to be prudent. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-official-mr-moto-is-a-clueless-right-wing-republican-shill-thread/314797.md?page=11)