I really don't understand about Kerry... - Page 2

Spiffor · January 22, 2004, 09:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Drogue
Actually, I've never planted a tree in my life

That's because you're not French:

"Why do the French have trees on the Champs Elysées?
So that the Germans can march in the shade" [/yanqui joke]

Drake Tungsten · January 22, 2004, 09:16

Quote:

"Why do the French have trees on the Champs Elyses?
So that the Germans can march in the shade"

It's funny cuz it's true...

Guynemer · January 22, 2004, 12:25

Has anyone considered that it was Karl Rove and the Republicans who gave Iowa to Kerry?

They've spent the last few months talking about how they would love to run against Howard Dean, blah blah blah, please nominate this man. And Iowa turns around and says, "Eat ****, Karl," and chooses an allegedly stronger candidate.

Did the constant yammering and chest-thumping of the right hurt their chances in November?

Shi Huangdi · January 22, 2004, 12:29

"They've spent the last few months talking about how they would love to run against Howard Dean, blah blah blah, please nominate this man. "

Actually, the Republican Party Leadcership never said anything like that. Their line has always been that they expect a very close race like in 2000 no matter who the nominee is. It has been individual pundits on both sides predicting an anti-Dean landslide.

Ned · January 22, 2004, 12:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse

Well yes Lancer - you don't have any left wing parties of any consequence. You have a centre right progressive party called the democrats and a rightwing conservative party called the Republicans.

You have nothing like our Labor Party, or the Greens or Liberals.

Alexander's Horse, I think you mean far-right, extremist-religious party of facist demogogues known as the Republican party. Anyone who is not on the far fringe right, or who is not a complete dimwit, is a Democrat.

Right?

Ned · January 22, 2004, 12:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Mordoch
Democrats are pretty much deciding they want to nominate a candidate that has a good chance of winning, and are starting to thing that Kerry could be that guy.

Kerry isn't THAT much to the center though. He established himself politically originally by being a military war hero and vetran who came home to be an anti-war activist regarding Vietnam. His opening in politics came when he testified before Congress in April of 1971 and asked "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"

In other news, Kerry now has a 10 percent point lead in New Hampshire and his campaign raised half a million dollars in the 39 hours after the end of the Iowa Caucuses.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/..._raising_push/

Kerry's views on Vietnam are now held by most Americans. He is no longer far left on this issue.

Ned · January 22, 2004, 12:48

I think Kerry won Iowa for one reason: Taxes.

He was against raising taxes on the middle class.

Dean was.

Adds touting this were run heavily in Iowa in the closing weeks.

Drogue · January 22, 2004, 13:02

And spending. Kerry spent a lot in Iowa, but the looks of things. He's spent a pittance in the Feb 3rd primaries, so it seems, and concentrated a lot on Iowa and New Hampshire, hoping the money would roll in after that.

Hoping it does

Drogue · January 22, 2004, 13:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
Alexander's Horse, I think you mean far-right, extremist-religious party of facist demogogues known as the Republican party. Anyone who is not on the far fringe right, or who is not a complete dimwit, is a Democrat.

Right?

Great, let's just misrepresent everyone elses posts

You seem to be stuck in purely US ideas of left and right. In the rest of the world, the Democrats would be a Centre or Centre-Right party, with the Repugs being a bit further Right. As AH said, the US does not have a major leftwing or centre-left party. The US is right wing, certainly compared to Europe and Asia, and probably Australia and bits of America too. What you would consider centrist we would consider centre-right. I'm not sure in the US whether the Dems are considered Leftists, as you seemed to suggest, or centre/centre-right as they would seem over here. But I'm pretty sure, because of who the thread starter is, and the examples he has cited, that he was talking about the rest of the worlds general left-right axis. On that kind of axis, AH is exactly right, the Repugs are a rightwing conservative party and the Democrats are a centre-right progressive party.

Jac de Molay · January 22, 2004, 13:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Guynemer
Has anyone considered that it was Karl Rove and the Republicans who gave Iowa to Kerry?

They've spent the last few months talking about how they would love to run against Howard Dean, blah blah blah, please nominate this man. And Iowa turns around and says, "Eat ****, Karl," and chooses an allegedly stronger candidate.

I disagree. It seemed to me more of the nature of the ad campaigns and focus on specific issues that were running just before the caucus.

Dean was really laying it on thick with attack ads and anti-Iraq rhetoric, which lost its lustre after Saddam's capture. Kerry and Edwards were more focused on the economy and health care, and seemed to have a better take on Iowan's sense of important issues.

There was also an incident which Dean lost his temper against a Bush supporter who told him to tone down the rhetoric. This happened during a widely televised "town hall" meeting and took away a lot of Dean's thunder. That bizarre "concession" speech of his seems to support the notion that he is less than presidential in the clutch.

The guys a flake, anyway. How he got as far as he did was beyond me.

Ned · January 22, 2004, 13:22

Drogue, Perhaps your characterization of Austro-Candian-European politics is accurate. But I think you say to much when you characterize this axis as the "rest of the world." By any standard, the Muslim world is far more conservative than any Republican. Ditto the Hindus of India. Even the Communist Party in China is more conservative than the Republican Party.

It would be better to define your frame of reference before you start calling the Republicans far-right.

chequita guevara · January 22, 2004, 13:24

The Republicans gave me $800 back in taxes, and $7500 more in debt. I don't think I came out ahead in that deal. I'll give back the tax cut if I can get rid of the debt, too.

Dean lost for a number of reasons. #1, media image. The media is lazy. They don't like to look at issues, they like to look at style. It's easier. Once an image has been decided upon, they stick with it. Gore was labeled a liar, and that's what stuck, even though he wasn't. Bush was labeled as bumbling but basically honest, even though he wasn't honest (and still isn't).

Dean is labeled as angry and unelectable. Dean tapped into, not just the anti-war feeling of many Democrats, but the anger many Democratic supporters feel at their own party. He adopted Wellstone's mantra of "I represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic party." He was giving voice to the desire to take back the DP from the DLC types who have bassiclly turned the Dem's into a bunch of Republican-lites who offer little resistence to the Republican Party. Hence, the DLC saw him as a threat, and began saying, he's angry, he's unelectabvle, etc. The media picked up on this, and now it's his image.

Iowa caucuses are strange things. It's not like people show up and vote. There's wheeling and dealing and promises and backstabning and all kinds of politics going on to slect delegates. If you don't have enough to get a ful delegate, you make deals with others. The Dean people didn't do this. The Edwards people did, so the Edwards people picked up the extra Gephart support when they couldn't get their guy more delegates.

Dean is still leading in New Hampshire, but we'll see how long that holds.

Ogie Oglethorpe · January 22, 2004, 13:38

Che it really has become a police state. This is the first I've heard that Repubs are going house to house and forcing people to sign for loans.

Hope they cut you a sweet deal on the interest rate.

chequita guevara · January 22, 2004, 13:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
Che it really has become a police state. This is the first I've heard that Repubs are going house to house and forcing people to sign for loans.

It's my share, as a citizen, of the Fed's new debt, smart-ass.

Ogie Oglethorpe · January 22, 2004, 13:43

I'm honored you called me smart. I'll ignore the rest.

Capt Dizle · January 22, 2004, 13:57

Quote:

Originally posted by NeOmega
I sent Howard Dean $100 today. I couldn't have been the only one.

I'd be darned if I would admit that in public man.

chequita guevara · January 22, 2004, 13:57

And he's a libertartian, too.

Capt Dizle · January 22, 2004, 14:08

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

It's my share, as a citizen, of the Fed's new debt, smart-ass.

Your personal accounting methods remind me of Enron's corporate accounting methods. I'd suggest you boil yourself in a pot of water to kill this capitalist infection Che.

chequita guevara · January 22, 2004, 14:12

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick
Your personal accounting methods remind me of Enron's corporate accounting methods. I'd suggest you boil yourself in a pot of water to kill this capitalist infection Che.

Okay, it's just $1750 this year (which is still a bad trade).

Capt Dizle · January 22, 2004, 14:17

Gephardt's stacked all his chips on Iowa and bet them on a union straight. This was the correct play looking backward at his 1988 win there. But things changed. Dean tapped into internet wackos like NeOmega and anti-war sentiment and other factors drove the turnout skyward. Sensing trouble Gephardt ran attack ads versus Dean; Dean countered. This turned off the voters who then went to Kerry because they knew him and to Edwards because of his postive message. And that is what happened in Iowa.

Reading here the thoughts of those who feel that the Democratic party is a right centrist party...yall have defined who you are. And I respect your opinions. It's just that there will never be enough of you in this country to poll in double digits.

Capt Dizle · January 22, 2004, 14:20

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Okay, it's just $1750 this year (which is still a bad trade).

You may have a stroke to hear it, but I think Bush is awful on the economy. We have some commonality.

(that left a bad taste in my mouth, ugh)

GePap · January 22, 2004, 14:27

On Dean as a fiscal liberal: when he took over Vermont, the state was in debt and had the lowest bond rating in New England. BY the time he left office, the state had the highest bond rating in New England and due to his rainy day fund the cuts and tax increases in Vermont to make up for the economic porblems were the least draconian in NE also. And every kid in vermont has health insurance and 98% of new mothers voluntarilly sdign up for state employees to go and give them advice on infant care.

He supported welfare reform and opposed the assault weapons ban. Man, what a ranging leftie that guy was!

ON Bush and taxes- lets say you are a lower middle class family with a child that goes to state schools- you don;t see any gains from capital gains tax cuts, maybe you got , like Che, $800 back. But since Bush took office state tuitions went up 20-30%, your out of pocket health care bills went up and up- and that by itself probalby wipped out any gains from the tax cut. Add to this that local taxes probably went up, and you are behind (and state taxes went up cause washington demands states fund out of thier pockets federally mandate programs- and then the feds go eve further and don't give the states in need[all of them] a dime) now, but you did not stop spending becuase you took out a new mortage due to low interest rates, which is still a loan, then bought things on credit.

So, while their out of pocket expenses have gone up, and their debt has also gone up, everyone is happy and the economy is on the up and up!

chequita guevara · January 22, 2004, 14:29

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick

You may have a stroke to hear it, but I think Bush is awful on the economy. We have some commonality.

(that left a bad taste in my mouth, ugh)

*thud*

Ogie Oglethorpe · January 22, 2004, 15:36

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick

You may have a stroke to hear it, but I think Bush is awful on the economy. We have some commonality.

(that left a bad taste in my mouth, ugh)

Can't say I agree with him either in totality, but was interested in which portions you find objectionable?

Ramo · January 22, 2004, 16:06

Quote:

Dean is still leading in New Hampshire, but we'll see how long that holds.

Zogby gave Kerry a 3 point lead today.

chequita guevara · January 22, 2004, 16:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Ramo
Zogby gave Kerry a 3 point lead today.

I see Dean 5 to 10 points behind Kerry in NH on Salon now. Damn that's quick.

GePap · January 22, 2004, 18:16

Kerry is far easier to paint as a tax and spend liberal than Dean, which is the Republican's favorite scam-though, better tax and spend than borrow and spend, which is the Bush admin.

chequita guevara · January 22, 2004, 18:18

What I don't get is the number of center-right folks who prefer Kerry (the most liberal of the serious contenders) to Dean. MtG, Imran, Japher, and others, have stated they'd vote for Kerry, but will vote for Bush should Dean take the nomination.

Edan · January 22, 2004, 18:22

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Dean is labeled as angry and unelectable.

Perhaps he was "labeled" that way, but he certainly played himself into the part. He was all about being anti-Bush, and you can rarely win an election by making your campaign about being anti-incumbant (just look at how trying to get Clinton failed).

Quote:

Dean is still leading in New Hampshire, but we'll see how long that holds.

Actually, tracking polls have him third and continuing to lose ground while Kerry makes large gains. Clark is regained his lost ground and inching his way up slowly.

Arrian · January 22, 2004, 18:24

The fickle mood of the electorate. Herd of sheep. Dean's meteoric rise was just as fast.

I was listening to some political commentary on the radio today on my way to work. Flipping between NPR and a Mass. rock station (whose morning guys were talking to a Kerry supporter... obviously involved somehow, but I didn't catch the beginning). It's PAINFULLY obvious that most people can't be arsed to actually look at the stuff that matters: a candidates stand on issues and (this is key) their track record on same. No, most people blather on about how candidate A looks goofy and candidate B sounds funny.

And Che's right about the media - they play along with the lowest common denominator portraits of the candidates. The main networks, anyway. You can probably get some decent info on C-SPAN.

-Arrian