NEWS: Does Michael Moore Represent the Democratic Party?

POLITICS: Does Michael Moore Represent the Democratic Party?

Culturally liberal George Bush supporters are often asked to defend their vote for the Presidential candidate of a party in which reactionary Christian conservatives increasingly influential. The most common response is to say that, while the Republicans have Tom DeLay and Trent Lott and Tom Coburn and the Federal Marriage Amendment, Democrats have their own "fringe": people like Michael Moore. Some center-right commentators have claimed that John Kerry's failure to attack Michael Moore cost him the election.

Even if one accepts the highly questionable claim that making an anti-Bush movie is the moral equivalent of writing discrimination into the Constitution, it's easy to see the problem with this analogy: it compares Republican elected officials and official policies to celebrities with no formal connection to the Democratic Party. Matt Welch completely demolishes this line of reasoning:

When Michael Moore gets elected to the United States Senate, or has his favorite policies written into the Democratic Party Platform, we can talk about whether he cancels out Tom Coburn or Jerry Falwell. Until then, the analogy is a non-starter.

i think moore's presence actually helped conservatives more than it helped dems this year. he served as a lightning rod for the right. they could rally their troops around an intense disdain for him and say "look! that's the face of the democratic party! see what the misrepresentations! he hates america, and blah blah blah." i always cringe when i see him on television or hear him speak becuase i know he will just stir up the bible-thumpers, gun nuts, and other conservatives...

...this is not to say that i disagree with his politics but much of the time i wish he would go away.

Uh... someone doesn't have to be a politician to be influencial in politics. Moore may not be an elected democrat, but I know far more democrats who are fans of his work than republicans.

i can't wait until people start voting based on their own knowledge of a canidate's policies rather than "hey, let's not vote for who that liberal guy supports."

As I recall, Michael Moore didn't lose the election. He wasn't even on the ballot. In fact, Michael Moore motivated more young voters to vote Democratic than for any other candidate since Vietnam.

The way I look at it, the wedge issue of gay marriage on many ballots throughout the country motivated Evangelical Christians to come to the polls on Nov. 2nd. Luckily, this matter, like the sodomy laws in Texas, will be resolved in the courts. Unfortunately, the only way the Senate can obstruct Bush from appointing strict constructionists to the Supreme Court is through divisive fillibusters. Hopefully, that will be enough. Perhaps there is another Justice Souter waiting in the wings.

its just the republicans' victim complex to see anything 'anti-bush' as 'pro-democrat'. it comes from seeing the world in black and white.

Ok here we go again

Democrats looking for reasons why the guy they picked lost other than their ineptness at picking a winner.

Mike Moore did all he could to get Kerry elected and now the democrats want to turn on him and blame him for his support.

Great idea winners!!

Kerry looked like a loser.

Kerry's wife looked like she wanted to lose.

Hell half the time Kerry looked alseep until the very end when Bush nearly handed him the election on a platter.

The reason the democrats lose is that democrats feel that charisma and thoughtfulness are opposing qualities.

They arent.

No one wants a geek as president they want slick willie because they know running the country is not a spelling bee.

Al Gore had no charisma, neither did Dukakis or Mondale.

The only reason Clinton slipped in was no one thought W's dad could lose.

If they did they would have eaten Clinton up the same way they threw Dean to the press at the first moment possible.

People aren't fed up with the democratic party for what they say they want to do, it's for thier total lack of ability to get anything progressive done.

Michael Moore is a fierce proponant for his agenda and the democrats should take it for what its worth and leave the rest.

They should be skilled enough to pull this off if they want control of the free world.

Doncha think?

Risk

But here's the problem, in what basically boils down to a two party system, if your not for us, you must be for them. He may not be a elected member of the Democratic party, but that doesn't mean people aren't going to equate his anti-Bush/anti-Republican message with Democratic candidates.

Though it may be stupid to do so, it doesn't mean people aren't going to do it, because it's basically a matter of opinion.

It's not a matter of opinion, it's a logical fallacy.

what I meant by "opinion" is on the issues... more taxes? yes or no, it's an opinion. stem cell research, yes or no, someone is going to vote based on thier opinion.

kerry ran a bad campaign.. just as gore did in 2000... as a democrate we really need to learn to run the show a little better and when we lose stop blaming everyone else but ourselves.

Welch's comments are all very logical, but ultimately wind up sounding apologetic to me - 'oh no no no, we're not like that Michael Moore guy.' In my opinion, Democrats, which I count myself among, need to take a more offensive stance. Logic is wasted on these retard/fascist/robber-baron republican pieces of shit anyway, otherwise they wouldn't be republicans. We just need to tell em to shut the hell up and do what we say. I also agree with the charisma argument. Kerry, while very book-smart, was yet another classically bad pick by the Democrats.

[Edited on Nov 11, 2004 2:53PM]

How does winning the popular vote translate into "a bad campaign"?

Thats not remotely the point however. The point is that Michael Moore is being pointed to as a mealey mouthed rationalization by an entire cadre of centrists who voted for Bush as a way of sidestepping their responsibility for the his massively conservative agenda. Michael Moore is not the democratic party. He makes no policy. He's a filmmaker with an opinion. He doesn't cancel out the radical conservative fringe with massive actual power that these Nimrods put in place and he's being trotted out as the new Clinton blowjob retort every time other people point out how craven it is to vote for a guy who you violently disagree with on core issues.

You voted for Bush? You get a stem cell ban, and the global gag rule, and a war on drugs, and a war on homosexuals, and diminished civil liberties and an ally-less war in Iraq, and underfunded social services, and a spiraling national debt.

You broke it, you bought it. Don't blame it on a guy for making a movie.

diversionary rhetoric is the right's stock in trade.

But for a lot of them thats really the point. They rationalize their vote by pretending that they didn't really vote for homophobic imperialists who hate women, they voted for the mythic moderates. The GOP isn't really about that sort of thing at all you see, that's just the fringe crackpots like, y'know Michael Moore is. They don't represent the real Republican party.

That Ann Coulter is one scary bitch. I read the inside of the dust jacket of her new book and threw it down as quick as I could, I was so disgusted. She supports taking over other countrys and converting them to christianity. That's truely scary that anyone could support this woman and her lunacy.

i'm not a fan. politically charged cinema bothers me as a filmmaker. i slap my forhead everytime i see a democratic picket sign that says "see the movie".

with all due respect man, Bunning isn't far right wing, he's just a crazy old man who's completely out of touch with reality, and gets his news from FOX (when he watches the news that is). I suspect he'll be retiring within a year or two due to "health reasons". of course he'll be replaced by some right wing nut job appointed by Gov. "Hey Bert" Ernie (I'm going to cut health care for state employees so I can call a special session of Congress in the middle of an election year and waste KY tax payer dollars when I should be working with Congress on a State Budget) Flecher. maybe even old "Rubber Duckie you're the one" Ernie himself.

Logic is wasted on these retard/fascist/robber-baron republican pieces of shit anyway, otherwise they wouldn't be republicans.

Comments like these are the rhetorical equivalent of a boxer punching himself in the mouth while saying, "Take THAT!" to his opponent..

That such juvenile name-calling occurs in a statement about LOGIC... is just cinnamon on the applesauce.

SImply delicious.

As for Mr Moore and the Democrats, wouldn't a fair measurement of the degree to which they embraced him (and he, them) be the level of honor he was accorded at their national convention during the campaign?

So... How was he treated? As a pariah? A welcome guest? A key media personage?

Anybody want to field this one...?