I really don't understand about Kerry...

[Edan]

2004 New Hampshire Democratic Tracking

3-Day Results Jan 16-18 Jan 17-19 Jan 18-20 Jan 19-21

Clark 20% 19% 18% 19%
Dean 28% 28% 26% 22%
Edwards 8% 8% 9% 9%
Gephardt 3% 3% 2% 1%
Kerry 19% 20% 24% 27%
Kucinich 1% 2% 1% 1%
Lieberman 6% 7% 7% 7%
Sharpton 0% 0% 0% 0%
Other 0% 0% 0% 0%
Undecided 15% 13% 13% 14%

Sample size 617 617 718 811

Democrats 432 436 511 573
Undeclared 185 181 207 238
Undeclared (%) 30% 29% 29% 29%
Margin of error is ± 4 percentage points
Methodology


Tracking Results from December 28, 2003 - January 3, 2004

Tracking Results from January 4-10, 2004

Tracking Results from January 11-17, 2004




Beyond Ballot Preference - January 22, 2004
The sample size was increased to 302 completed interviews on January 20 and 303 interviews on January 21. The theoretical margin of error for the daily sample sizes of 300 is plus or minus 6 percentage points, 95% of the time.

Ballot Jan 20 Jan 21

Clark 18% 21%
Dean 24% 17%
Edwards 10% 10%
Kerry 29% 29%
Kucinich 1% 1%
Lieberman 7% 7%
Sharpton 0% 0%
Undecided 11% 15%

Sample size 302 303

Is Howard Dean heading to third place in New Hampshire?

As the results for January 21 indicate, Howard Dean continues to lose support. This trend may continue as Dean's favorable continued to drop on January 21. In the 3-day sample ending January 19, 57% of likely Democratic primary voters had a favorable opinion of Dean, 19% had an unfavorable opinion of Dean, and 24% were aware of Dean but undecided. In the January 20 sample, 39% had a favorable opinion of Dean, 30% had an unfavorable opinion of Dean, and 31% were undecided. In the January 21 sample, 33% had a favorable opinion of Dean, 30% had an unfavorable opinion of Dean, and 37% were undecided. The movement from favorable to undecided signals a continuing drop in ballot preference for Dean.

In 1992, Bill Clinton dropped from 37% to 25% in 5 days, giving up the lead to Paul Tsongas. By the eighth day of his drop, however, Clinton was able to begin to regain support (by appearing on "60 Minutes" and holding a televised town meeting in New Hampshire, among other things). The Dean campaign does not have the luxury of time because the Clinton model would have Dean just beginning to regain support on primary day. Also, Clinton's campaign responded immediately to Clinton's drop.

http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/nhpoll/demtrack/

[chequita guevara]

Howard's End?
By SAM SMITH

Dean is in trouble, no doubt of it. Primary cause is the most excessive and gratuitous media assault on a presidential candidate in recent times...Dean failed to accept the fact that before you can get elected by the people you have to be selected by the crowd in charge. You don't just run for president in the Democratic Party (unless you're a Sharpton or Kucinich doomed from the start); you ask permission nicely just like Clinton did. Show the elite that you want to come to Washington to serve them, not lead others.

It's bad enough when a Georgia peanut farmer like Carter tries it, but Dean came out of the establishment himself so his crime was worse: betrayal rather than naiveté. And he paid the price.

It's not political. Washington is a place where more things are done illegally or under the table than just about anywhere in the world. Where your laws are made--and broken--as Mark Russell used to say. And it's the world's most powerful private club. If you want to get ahead here the first thing you've got to do is shut your mouth. And show you respect the people who really run the place. Dean didn't do that.

Dean had some other problems, though. The exit polls suggest that he had far narrower appeal than it originally appeared. He had the young and the very liberal but these were the only groups squarely in his camp. They were out there and being counted early. What wasn't being counted were the undecideds and the initially apathetic. Part of the really bad news for Dean is that he was unable to expand his core constituency.

Finally, not since Muskie cried in New Hampshire and Dukakis was photographed with his ears sticking out under a tank helmet has a candidate so facilely hurt himself as Dean did with his election night hysterics. One got the feeling that the doctor might have tried to dope himself up on tranquilizers but somehow picked the wrong bottle.

THE WAR AT HOME

The good news is that the exit polls show the economy and jobs as top issue (29%), followed by health care (28%), and only then trailed by the war (14%) and national security (3%). It is likely one reason that Edwards picked up steam was his ability to put the economic issues in plain language.


WHY DIDN'T YOU LOVE ME IN NOVEMBER LIKE YOU DO TODAY?

Dick Gephardt had all the candidates slobbering over him as they attempted to pick off his supporters. If he had really been as great as they said he would, why did they bother to run?

WHAT'S LEFT

Dean has probably done himself in, Clark hopefully will follow suit, aided by HIS constant braggadocio such as the claim, "I won a war," which not only ignores the others involved, but overlooks the minuscule strength of the opponent. . . This pretty much leaves us with an arrogant preppie who thinks he knows everything or a affable southern trial lawyer who doesn't know what he doesn't know.

That Kerry presents a political danger to the Democrats is suggested by the uncomfortably telling phrase that conservative columnist James Tarranto always uses in mentioning the senator: "the haughty, French-looking Massachusetts Democrat, who by the way served in Vietnam."

Besides, if Kerry runs, that means our choice will be limited to two members of Skull & Bones and if either one were to actually tell us the true meaning of that, they would have to immediately kill us.

[Ned]

I assume, Che, that the left does not like Kerry.

[TCO]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
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.

you left out the months and months of unemployment that you sucked up and all the goofing off you did and how you only got serious about a job once the checks stopped coming.

[Imran Siddiqui]

As a neocon youth, your words mean nothing but angry conservative banter trying to get the Democrats and the Republicans to fall in line and salute your fuhrer.

Actually I AM a neocon (thought not that young), and I'm for Kerry. Try again.

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.

Kerry is not as far left as some would have you believe. Sure he's for universal health care and more affordable college education, but which Dem in the primary isn't... and if you look at the issues on his website (which are very extensive) he is more for tax credits for individuals and companies that follow social norms, rather than increasing the social programs... which is seen as better to me on the right side of the spectrum.

That and character does matter a bit. He's been a US Senator for a long time. I think experience in Washington is nothing to be ashamed of and will help in legislation.

And I generally like his foriegn policy, which agreed to go into Iraq, but didn't like how we pissed off our allies.

[TCO]

I would vote for Dean before Kerry. it is a bit like asking GePap if he prefers Reagan or Nixon though...

[TCO]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


And I generally like his foriegn policy, which agreed to go into Iraq, but didn't like how we pissed off our allies.

If you had a choice between going into Iraq and pissing off the allies or not going in and keeping them happy, which would you choose.

Yes, I realize you think it was possible to convince the French and Germans somehow by asking nicer...but just to humor me, if you were faced with those choices, which would you pick?

[Ramo]

Kerry is not as far left as some would have you believe.

Kerry is not by any means a real leftist (only Kucinich and Sharpton could be called that), but he's definitely to the left of Dean (as well as Edwards, Lieberman, and probably Clark).

[Imran Siddiqui]

If you had a choice between going into Iraq and pissing off the allies or not going in and keeping them happy, which would you choose.

You could have still gone in and kept them happy (at least no worse than when we went into Kosovo). Bush handled it incredibly rough. The choice need not be made.

But since I AM a neocon, you can guess my pick.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


But since I AM a neocon, you can guess my pick.

thanks.

[Alexander's Horse]

Howard Dean's role was mainly as a lightening rod.

Is Edwards any good?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Edwards is very inexperienced (1st term Senator) and it shows.

[Alexander's Horse]

I like General Clark - but I don't know anything about US politics.

[Aqualung71]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
sadly yes - but hopefully not for much longer.

And what is the acceptable alternative?

[Capt Dizle]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
I like General Clark - but I don't know anything about US politics.

Neither does General Clark.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Ned
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.

That is true. They are more conservative. However right wing is largelt about economics. The Chinese Communist party is still left wing, even though it is autocratic, to a large extent. For a western country, the Republican party is conservative. Maybe there are some nations that it wouldn't be considered as that, but they wouldn't be developed nations, for the most part.

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

I never called the Republicans far right, as AH didn't either. You have added that. I say they are, but the standard of Europe, Australia and North America (bar the US) a right-wing party. They are conservative by western standards, and right wing by economic standards. That is true for the US too, so it seems. Most US people would see the Republics and a conservative, right wing party. Not far right, but they believe in lower taxes and less regulation, by and large, which would make them a right party.

The main difference between the US political specturm and the Europe/Aus/Canada one is that the Democrats would be a centre-right party, although they are progressive. They believe in a lower tax and less regulated system than centre opinion in Europe, Australia and Canada, whereas in the US they seem to be a centrist, even slightly leftist party.

I don't believe the Republicans are far right in the sense of Facism. I do believe they are economically quite far right, in that the levels of tax, welfare and regulation they desire is lower than the centre right parties of Europe.

The Democrats remind me a lot of our New Labour (progressive, the leaders of which being centre-right, on our scale, but the opinion of individual party members being from far-left to centre-right) while the Republicans seem like our Conservative party, but with lower tax, lower welfare, less regulation and stronger in their conservative views. The point I was making is not that the Republicans are far right and authoritarian, but that the Dems are not a leftist party by the standards which most of the developed world lives. Thus, at least for Euro/Aus/Canada, AH's comments were true.

I just want you to stop strawmanning people who say that the Dems are centre-right and the Republicans are right but saying that they believe they are a far right party. I doubt many here would think of the Repugs as a Fascist style, far-right party. But economically, as the linear right-left would usually mean when accompanied by a conservative/progressive that would explain their social views.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Howard's End?
By SAM SMITH

the uncomfortably telling phrase that conservative columnist James Tarranto always uses in mentioning the senator: "the haughty, French-looking Massachusetts Democrat, who by the way served in Vietnam."

So what is "French-looking"? I can understand not liking the French for the war, but I've never heard an anti-war protestor insulting someone by saying they're "American-looking".

[Drake Tungsten]

North America (bar the US)

What was the point of writing this? "Canada" is shorter and more descriptive...

[lightblue]

And how does kerry look French. That big chin is about as American as it comes

[Drogue]

Is it just me or does Kerry look a little like Jimmy Hill?

[Cruddy]

Damn. I thought this thread was about Kerry the place, not the person.

* Cruddy twiddles his thumbs

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
I assume, Che, that the left does not like Kerry.

I dunno. I don't like his personality, but you gotta respect a war hero who returns his metals and helps organize against the war he fought in. His politics are certainly more to my liking than Deans, but he's got no fire in the belly. Plus he's Irish, and I always gotta like a fellow son of the Green Isle.

I would say that many on the left are attracted to Dean's insurrgency-style campaign, and that if Dean weren't in the race, would probably be all about Kerry. Those of us on the hard left, however, would not be, officially anyway. As a human being and an American, it's hard not to get caught up in these things emotionally.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by TCO
you left out the months and months of unemployment that you sucked up and all the goofing off you did and how you only got serious about a job once the checks stopped coming.

I was looking for work 8+ hours a day. I got a job before my unemployment ran out (though I did need an extention). Towards the end we were planning on moving to what we hoped would be a better job market.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Quote:

North America (bar the US)

What was the point of writing this? "Canada" is shorter and more descriptive...

Is it shorter than Canada, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

If you had a choice between going into Iraq and pissing off the allies or not going in and keeping them happy, which would you choose.

You could have still gone in and kept them happy (at least no worse than when we went into Kosovo). Bush handled it incredibly rough. The choice need not be made.

I am getting tired of agreeing with you lately!!

[Ned]

I heard Kerry to say that he would never go to war without our allies' approval, meaning France, and perhaps (and this was not clear) the approval of the UNSC. (The latter position would appear to be inconsistent with his position on Kosovo.)

His whole position, then, boils down to French approval.

Bush has signalled that he will make this position a campaign issue when he talked about conditioning America's security on a "permission" slip from France.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
His whole position, then, boils down to French approval.

Bush has signalled that he will make this position a campaign issue when he talked about conditioning America's security on a "permission" slip from France.

If the United States is ever threatened, France would stand beside us. The U.S. was not threatened by Iraq in anyway, shape or form. Just because your friend tries to stop you from beating a homeless person doesn't mean he isn't your friend. He's just trying to stop you from doing something evil and stupid.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ned
Bush has signalled that he will make this position a campaign issue when he talked about conditioning America's security on a "permission" slip from France.

Which is a pure propaganda stunt. Not only do you have other allies that opposed your adventure in Iraq (Germany, Belgium, Greece, to name a few), that are exactly in the same status as France...
But also, your allies never withheld whater "permission slip" you were supposed to get when you were defending your security. If you had managed to document that Iraq was a threat to your security, the opposition to war would have been lifted.

[Drake Tungsten]

Is it shorter than Canada, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama?

Yes, because we all know he was talking about the long history of left-leaning liberal democracies in Central America...

[Drake Tungsten]

but you gotta respect a war hero who returns his metals and helps organize against the war he fought in.

Kerry didn't give his medals back. He threw back medals that belonged to someone else.