Saturday, November 20, 2004
Why 2004 stings a lot worse than 2000
What Ezra said:
After 11/2, everything changed...
Still, in "What have we got that's good" mode, these are no mean accomplishments. Now, if Kerry will continue to lead, Dean gets to be head of the DNC, and we at the grass-roots continue the delicate operation of transplanting a spine into the Beltway Dems... All may not be lost.
NOTE On another note, Xan points out that I've been punk'd by the Hoosier Gazette! On the other hand, isn't it great to have a new parody source? And from the heart of Republican darkness in Indiana, too. Ah well, we know where roses grow best, don't we...
All theprogressives[proud Democrats ;-)] I know found our newfound unity and clean loss far-and-away the most intolerable aspect of the election. That we could unite behind a single candidate, marginalize Nader, win the debates, run an unheard-of field operation and still lose to bigotry and fear left a much sourer taste in our mouths than 2000, where we lost unjustly but could comfort ourselves with the knowledge that more Americans agreed with the Democrat than the Republican.
(via Pandagon)
After 11/2, everything changed...
Still, in "What have we got that's good" mode, these are no mean accomplishments. Now, if Kerry will continue to lead, Dean gets to be head of the DNC, and we at the grass-roots continue the delicate operation of transplanting a spine into the Beltway Dems... All may not be lost.
NOTE On another note, Xan points out that I've been punk'd by the Hoosier Gazette! On the other hand, isn't it great to have a new parody source? And from the heart of Republican darkness in Indiana, too. Ah well, we know where roses grow best, don't we...
