Marjoribanks bet me $200.00 Bush would not win the '04 election. I've
encouraged him to pay up now, but I guess he wants to hope against hope.
Don't forget, Marj.
2. vonKreedon - 1/14/2004 6:30:55 PM
I will have a better description up as soon as I figure out how to do so. I
don't intend for this thread to just be about the Presidential contest, but any
of the US elections; e.g., Congress, Governor, etc.
I do not want this
thread to be a dumping ground for other, non-election related, political issues.
For examples, talking about how the Dems/Repubs can best spin/respond to events
in Iraq with an eye to the elections is fine; talking about whether or not we
should go to Mars or sanction Gay marriages is not.
3. concerned - 1/14/2004 7:29:05 PM
The Dean of Mean for Democrat presidential nomination.
4. Al D - 1/14/2004 7:29:21 PM
Banks bet $200 against Bush in '04? Did you give him odds? The odds on Kucinich are something like 32 -1 against winning any primary. My ex is a big supporter of his. I told her to bet all the money she has left out of what she extorted out of me in the divorce. I told her if she put up enough dough, I'd give her 1,000-1. It should be obvious she is not too bright since she let me get away. Maybe it is evident from the fact she married me in the first place. Is it a coincidence that marry starts with mar?
5. jexster - 1/14/2004 7:30:29 PM
Ah I get it...issues discussed in political strategic terms good, policy
terms bad..
OK here ya go..
GWOT Line of Advance: Demos
Should Attack from the Right
6. concerned - 1/14/2004 7:36:21 PM
rdb -
Good luck getting your winnings out of marj.
7. concerned - 1/14/2004 7:52:47 PM
Ex-S.C. Gov. Beasley Enters Senate Race
Beasley
served one term as governor before losing to Democrat Jim Hodges in a 1998
election known for heavy spending from the video-gambling industry that Beasley
said he would outlaw.
Beasley, 46, also was battered by his stand to
remove the Confederate flag that flew atop the Statehouse dome.
Beasley sounds like a straight shooter and just the guy to help wash the
Democrat Jim Crow legacy out of SC politics.
8. jexster - 1/14/2004 7:58:34 PM
The New Republic endorsement of Likud Lieberman caused huge dissention
in-house. My impression was that the Beinhart decided by fiat. So they have
published dissenting editorials.
This is from the pro-Clark one and
shows the problems and promise of a Demo attack from the right:
the
question was never whether the world would be better off without Saddam--of
course it is. The question was whether the costs of ousting him outweighed the
benefits. And, on that question, the jury is still out.
After all, the
costs have been significant: the lives of 483 American soldiers (as well as
thousands of Iraqi civilians), $150 billion, an immeasurable loss of U.S.
authority abroad, and the diversion of military and diplomatic resources from
other threats. (Newsweek, noting that Special Forces units were pulled out of
Afghanistan in early 2002 for redeployment to the Middle East, reported,
"Privately, some U.S. officials acknowledge that the search for weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq may have seriously drained away resources from the hunt for
[Osama] bin Laden.") As Clark has argued, "The administration zeroed in on Iraq.
But focusing on Iraq made no sense--if the real goal was to protect the United
States either from weapons of mass destruction or terrorism. The hundred tons of
loosely guarded nuclear-bomb-making material and bioweapons in Russia presents a
far more tempting target for terrorists. But this administration has not made
that a priority. The nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea were more advanced
and more threatening than Iraq's, but for months they paid little attention.
Their actions made no strategic sense; they downplayed the greater threats and
exaggerated the lesser one."
Despite its inherent logic, this critique
seems lost on those Democratic candidates-
9. jexster - 1/14/2004 8:05:57 PM
Well that is exactly where I found myself in 1970-1974 first as an anti-war
student taking National Security policy emphasis for my Pol Sci major (the Left
didn't understand Hawk Talk..iocomprhensible). Only "militarists" could
appreciate how devastating a classically cast strategic and tactical critique
was but by the time it started to emerge in the debate, the voices were too few
nnd their investment in strategic folly too substantial for them to bother.
I am rather more hopeful now, but I did encounter some of the same blank
stares when I held forth in conversations at anti-war demonstrations.
I
have to confess, some on the Left still just don't get it but the radical neocon
loons have made our case oh so much easier this time around.
10. jexster - 1/14/2004 8:08:28 PM
Today though you'll find anti-war hawk talk in the US Naval Institute's' Proceedings not to mention in the halls of the Carlisle Barracks AWC
11. jexster - 1/14/2004 8:11:00 PM
Jim Crow can now be seen now wearing a respectable Republican cloth coat in the Palmetto State, TD.
12. winstonsmith - 1/14/2004 8:22:49 PM
For what it's worth, here are some thoughts on the election.
Dean:
The Republicans will cast him as being much more liberal than he really is and
will play upon peoples fears of another attack to undermine trust in his ability
to handle the job.
Clark: He's not perfect but he's smart and will be
able to challange Bush on the war and national security.
Edwards: Runs a
pretty classy camaign compared to most of the others.
Kucinich: I really
like him but he has no chance.
Overall, I think a Clark/Edwards ticket
would have the best chance against Bush.
WS
13. winstonsmith - 1/14/2004 8:24:17 PM
For what it's worth, here are some thoughts on the election.
Dean:
The Republicans will cast him as being much more liberal than he really is and
will play upon peoples fears of another attack to undermine trust in his ability
to handle the job.
Clark: He's not perfect but he's smart and will be
able to challange Bush on the war and national security.
Edwards: Runs a
pretty classy camaign compared to most of the others.
Kucinich: I really
like him but he has no chance.
Overall, I think a Clark/Edwards ticket
would have the best chance against Bush.
WS
14. winstonsmith - 1/14/2004 8:25:36 PM
Sorry about the double post. Can posts be removed?
15. rdbrewer - 1/14/2004 8:29:15 PM
Don't worry about it. Just be careful clicking "post". And don't recycle the screen when you have words in the box. I don't know why, but that seems to cause a double post too.
16. winstonsmith - 1/14/2004 8:29:47 PM
Thanks.
17. rdbrewer - 1/14/2004 8:29:49 PM
Con'd, I'm sure Marj is an honorable man, as am I.
18. rdbrewer - 1/14/2004 8:34:36 PM
Al D, we went straight up on it.
19. arkymalarky - 1/14/2004 9:04:45 PM
Hey Winston!
If Dems don't nominate Clark I think RD will be able to
collect. Evidently Con'd does too.
20. jexster - 1/14/2004 9:05:14 PM
Well I'll be damned....maybe they are getting it after all.
The Axis of War: Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz
"America,
Iraq and Presidential Leadership." Sen. Edward M Kennedy's Address to the Center
for American Progress
Full Text - Salon
"We
cannot simply walk away from the wreckage of a war we never should have fought
so that President Bush can wage a political campaign based on dubious boasts of
success."
21. winstonsmith - 1/14/2004 10:29:31 PM
Hi Jexster and Arky.
Jex, I agree. It will be really tough for anyone
to beat Bush. I think Clark is the only one with a decent chance.
What
do you guys think about the idea of Clark/Edwards ticket? Would somebody else be
better for VP?
22. winstonsmith - 1/14/2004 10:33:40 PM
BTW, I listened to some of Kennedy's speach on the Sean Hannity radio show. Sean was putting it down but I was thinking it was great.
23. wonkers2 - 1/14/2004 10:36:16 PM
Clark/Edwards would be good, but I prefer Dean/Edwards or Dean/Clark. The idea of someone going from General to President doesn't work for me. It didn't with Eisenhower and it doesn't with Clark. It's not as bad as going from Hollywood (Schwartzenegger) to governor or president. Politics is a profession like any other that benefits from experience. Nobody would knowingly want to be the first patient of a heart surgeon. So, why subject the country to a neophyte? Nothing like starting at the top.
24. jayackroyd - 1/14/2004 10:39:01 PM
Ah I get it...issues discussed in political strategic terms good, policy
terms bad..
That's what I was never able to achieve in politics
thread. I hope vK can do it here. You know, rather than spinning how your guy
didn't fuck up, saying that he did fuck up, and how that was gonna affect the
race.
Like I'm at this point committed to Dean as the best anti-Bush
candidate. But I'd rather talk about Gephardt's attacks today from an
intellectual (look at the timing, look how hard they were, and look at the
calendar) way than in a pro Dean way.
It looks like desperation from
Gephardt, to me. But it also looks like Dean has peaked too early, in Iowa, and
in NH, and that Kerry and Gephardt smell blood. Beware of Edwards. His message
is good, centrist, southern, and if Dean doesn't meet the high expectations he
has created, SC may be very interesting.
25. Absensia - 1/14/2004 10:48:01 PM
Where's Estes Kefauver when we need him?
26. arkymalarky - 1/15/2004 12:06:28 AM
We're not trying to go from General to President, Wonk. We're trying to get from Bush to someone else.
27. winstonsmith - 1/15/2004 12:08:11 AM
"Clark/Edwards would be good, but I prefer Dean/Edwards or Dean/Clark. The
idea of someone going from General to President doesn't work for me. It didn't
with Eisenhower and it doesn't with Clark"
By better, I mean more
electable. Eisenhower was elected.
I would prefer Kucinich.
28. robertjayb - 1/15/2004 12:53:41 AM
Carol Moseley Braun will drop out of the nomination race tomorrow and endorse Howard Dean, the NYTimes reports.
29. winstonsmith - 1/15/2004 1:15:11 AM
30. concerned - 1/15/2004 1:23:12 AM
Re. 11 -
What alternate universe do you live in? Jim Crow &trade
is a wholly owned subsidiary of Democrat Plantation, Inc., held in perpetuity.
31. concerned - 1/15/2004 1:30:52 AM
Kucinich's own crusade
The problem with Democrats today is that
they don't follow their hearts enough.
32. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 1:50:25 AM
Wonk wrote: Politics is a profession like any other that benefits from
experience. Nobody would knowingly want to be the first patient of a heart
surgeon. So, why subject the country to a neophyte?
Clark has more
experience successfully performing executive tasks than any of the other
candidates, even Gov. Dean. Gov. Dean has the experience of running a state with
the bureaucracy and associated rules/regulations and in-fighting, but a state
does not have allies and a military. Gen. Clark, as CinC Souther Command and
then SACEUR has both the experience of running a state-like bureaucracy
responsible for the health, education, housing and safety of the community, but
he also has the experience of dealing with allies and military.
As far
as being a politician, while Clark has never run an electoral campaign before,
the essense of a politician's job happens after the campaign, the deal making,
arm twisting, cajoling, negotiating, and finally leadership are really the art
and profession of politics. One does not rise in the military to the level Clark
acheived without excellent political skills in this sense.
33. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 7:30:18 AM
Do you suppose Michael Moore is angling for a cabinet slot with Clark?
34. Magoseph - 1/15/2004 8:45:03 AM
The most drastic error the administration made, in my opinion, was not to
extend the unemployment compensation. The piddling amound of money required to
extend it would have restored some sense of balance in this administration.
The strong stock market is hurting Bush in a big way. It confirms the
position taken by his critics that through his policies the economy is being
stimulated at he expense of the unemployed and the poor. It also promotes a
growing realization that the corporate boom to some extend is being driven by
the lack of bargaining power in the work force. As a result, every time the
market makes new highs, these points are driven home.
As Bush continues
to throw billions and billions around, the frustation accelerates and is rapidly
translated into support for anyone who can reverse his priorities.
Please
comment!
35. concerned - 1/15/2004 10:08:50 AM
How much below 5.7% unemployment would we need to go for this to be canceled out, IYO?
36. Wombat - 1/15/2004 10:11:15 AM
Concerned doesn't seem to understand that a fall in the unemployment rate combined with little or no job creation means that people are taking themselves out of the job market (giving up). He would be wise not to keep touting this as an indicator of a healthy economy.
37. concerned - 1/15/2004 10:15:07 AM
Wombats doesn't seem to understand that the rate of job creation is not an immutable constant - if the economic pickup continues as many forecast throughout the coming year, job creation is likely to surge. And I have not touted the unemployment rate as an indicator of the health of the economy for several months, IAC .
38. PelleNilsson - 1/15/2004 10:30:26 AM
To come up with the idea that anybody, anybody at all could possibly regard
the rate of job creation as "an immutable constant" says a lot about concerned's
grasp of these issues.
I think it is a statistical fluke but it will be
interesting to see the growth figure for the fourth quarter.
39. concerned - 1/15/2004 10:41:40 AM
Pelle wouldn't comprehend sarcasm if it had him by his nose.
40. concerned - 1/15/2004 10:42:28 AM
What I'm saying, Pelle, is that Wombat was playing the fool, but you are one.
41. PelleNilsson - 1/15/2004 11:00:41 AM
Pretended sarcasm. The well-known escape route.
42. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 11:16:16 AM
Guys - Please take a look at the thread guidelines and then get back to discussing the elections instead of each other's personality defects.
43. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/15/2004 11:29:52 AM
I heard Kerry make a stump speech on last night's News Hour and I definitely
noticed a much more effective speech, delivered with conviction and passion.
Edwards has grown in his canditate skills as well—it's becoming a genuine horse
race, overshadowing Rove's obvious ploys to steal the news cycle limelight.
44. Magoseph - 1/15/2004 11:46:48 AM
Maybe Kerry read P.J. O'Rourke's article in the Atlantic: "Speaking of the Candidates" Our correspondent looks much too closely at the current crop of stump speeches.
45. robertjayb - 1/15/2004 11:48:42 AM
Spouse saw Kerry on C-Span yesterday and was much taken. He is now her
candidate.
Of course she has always been a fool for a handsome man.
heh
46. jexster - 1/15/2004 12:02:15 PM
Ruy
Teixeira: The State of Public Opinion
President Bush is preparing
in his State of the Union address to tout his accomplishments in a number of
areas, as well as offer some new initiatives. He will, of course, put the best
possible spin on these accomplishments and insist that Americans are happy with
those accomplishments and want to continue moving in the direction he has taken
the country.
But there’s another side to the public opinion story here.
In reality, Bush faces a public skeptical in important ways of what he has done
and where he proposes to go. Here’s an issue-by-issue guide to this skepticism
in key areas likely to be addressed by the president (polling data cited are the
most recent available for a particular question).
Iraq
• Twice
as many Americans (31 percent to 15 percent) believe the capture of Saddam will
increase the threat of terrorism against the US than believe it will decrease
that threat (CBS News/New York Times poll, December 21-22, 2003)
[Teixeira follows with the latest detailed data on issues that will
be central to the Campaign]
47. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/15/2004 12:02:45 PM
Handsome?—if you find Bloodhounds appealing! 
I sent his campaign
a donation early on, but switched my support (and many more donations) to Dean
because Kerry supported Bush on his Iraq War. Now, however, I'm starting to
wonder if he supported Bush because he was indeed fooled by the many lies of
Dubya&Co..
As a Vet, I'm torn because Kerry showed amazing courage
in Nam. I think when people learn of his story and his actions there,
perceptions will change with regard to him being an " elitist yankee"—
especially if he teams up with Edwards—he may have a much better shot than Dean.
48. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 12:03:17 PM
Jex - So what do you think, as opposed to what Teixeira thinks?
49. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 12:04:34 PM
Wiz - Why Kerry vs. Clark? What is it about Clark that leaves him out of your
consideration?
And - What is it that people like about Dean? Why does he
have such support?
50. jayackroyd - 1/15/2004 12:09:06 PM
Mags, did you like that PJ piece? I think he's hilarious in general; Eat the Rich is both funny and informative. But the atlantic article I found boring.
51. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/15/2004 12:13:05 PM
Wiz - Why Kerry vs. Clark? What is it about Clark that leaves him out of
your consideration?
I don't trust Clark. His comments praising GW,
then becoming a lobbyist and getting $800,000 in fees and not telling CNN about
it when he hired on as an Iraqi War consultant. I think he's more ambitious and
pragmatic than he is inspiring and courageous.
And - What is it that
people like about Dean? Why does he have such support?
In a word:
scrappy or in two: aggressive and determined. Dean would be up against thugs and
those two qualities are a prerequisite in this upcoming campaign, in my opinion.
But if Kerry starts to find the spine he exhibited in Viet Nam, I'll support him
in a heartbeat.
52. jayackroyd - 1/15/2004 12:16:52 PM
I can say what I like about Dean.
I don't think that any of the
others, with the exception of Clark, have a chance to win in November. Bush has
won the triangulation battle, Rove having gone to school on the Clinton years.
Gephardt is Mondale, the midwestern labor liberal with a message for a previous
generation. Kerry just doesn't know how to campaign. Lieberman is Bush lite, and
can't go to war over the stock market scandals, because he's a big part of the
problem.
Dean can attack Bush on the war from the right. He can attack
him on the budget from the right. And he can attack, which is gonna be an
essential element of this campaign. The RNC threw down the gauntlet with the ad
accusing "some" of being against the war on terror. Dean and Clark are the only
ones who can pick up that gauntlet.
I don't like Clark because I think
he's too green, and it shows. I have a personal dislike from reading his book
about Kosovo, as I've said before. He's self-agrandizing in a way that grates on
me.
Finally, his greenness has led him into the clutches of the
consultants. Bush's consultants are better than any of the democratic
consultants.
Dean/Zinni.
That's the ticket that could beat Bush.
53. robertjayb - 1/15/2004 12:18:31 PM
Four-way statistical dead heat...(John Zogby)
Jan. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Senator John Kerry edged into a tie with
former Vermont Governor Howard Dean and Representative Richard Gephardt in a
poll of Iowa Democrats, four days before they hold the first contest for the
party's presidential nomination.
Kerry has support from 22 percent of
likely Iowa caucus voters, a single percentage point lead over Dean and
Gephardt, according to a Zogby International poll for MSNBC and Reuters. Senator
John Edwards is fourth with 17 percent. The spread between the top four
candidates is within the survey's 4.5 percentage point margin of error.
54. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/15/2004 12:21:24 PM
It's a long way to November but there a many things that will change the
political landscape that needs to factored in. A case in point . . .
September 11: Will Terror Panel's Report Be an Election Issue?
By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
Jan. 19 issue - A new
political battle is brewing over the federal panel investigating the 9/11 terror
attacks, NEWSWEEK has learned. Facing a May deadline that many members no longer
think they can meet, the panel is weighing asking Congress for more time to
prepare its report. Some members want a few extra months—which would push back
its release into the summer. But the prospect of unleashing the report in the
middle of the election season is creating anxiety inside the White House. Some
aides fear that the document will contain fresh ammo for Democrats eager to
prove Bush was inattentive to terrorism warnings prior to 9/11. As a result,
Bush officials recently floated a surprise strategic switch: they might OK a
delay, but only if the report were put off until December, thereby "taking it
out of the election," said a commission source. Late last week, though, the
White House told the commission it was sticking with its longstanding position
of no give on the May deadline. . .
55. jexster - 1/15/2004 12:21:56 PM
Question for Dean - How Solid a Base?
Good question. He's
already lost me to the Strumabeitlung...er C Corps mein fuehrer...er Mister
President
56. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/15/2004 12:22:26 PM
a=are . . . to BE factored in!
57. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 12:22:37 PM
Dean is the only one of the viable candidates who was an early opponent of the war. Also, his tax and economic and health care proposals make a lot of sense. The election isn't or shouldn't be a personality, grooming or spouse contest. However, Dean is more spontaneous and willing to take a clean position on the issues. When Kerry is asked a question he thinks to long and comes up with answers that are too complicated and transparently designed to avoid alienating anybody. Dean comes across as not worrying so much about pleasing everybody.
58. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 12:28:21 PM
Wiz - The current campaign against Clark seems to come down to "He's not a
real Democrat." Personally I don't care if someone is a "real Democrat", I care
about two things: 1) what policies does the candidate propose 2) Does the
candidate have a chance in hell of defeating Bush. On both these counts Clark,
IMO, comes out well ahead of the rest o the pack.
Further, the fact that
Clark voted for Reagan and is willing to be nice to the Repubs is a significant
advantage that none of the "real Democrats" possess. In order for the Dems to
win against Bush they must capture a majority of the swing voters. The "real
Democrats" are going to vote Dem if for no other reason than to vote against
Bush, so the contest is for the swing. A large portion of this consituency also
voted for Reagan, and other Repubs, and are known as "Reagan Democrats". Clark
has a far better chance to appeal to this block than does Dean who has gone out
of his way to alienate them with his "I'm from the Democratic wing..." campaign
theme.
59. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 12:29:56 PM
I was an early supporter of Kerry, but he didn't inspire me. I like the way Dean and Clark and Edwards handle themselves better than Kerry and Lieberman. And I don't agree with Gephart's protectionist trade policies. It won't work to be an internationalist on anti-terrorism, arms control, the environment and a trade protectionist. I want more complete internationalist.
60. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 12:31:45 PM
Wonk - Clark was an early opponent of the war. What first attracted me to Clark was his analysis on CNN. He was consistent and clear that this war was elective and unwise. Finally, in the last couple of weeks before the invasion, he did say that the administration had pushed the nation into a corner and it would now cause us more strategic harm to not go to war. And I agree with this, though I don't think that either of us thought that the administration would be so incompetent in the aftermath of the invasion.
61. jayackroyd - 1/15/2004 12:36:29 PM
58
So you reject this cycle's conventional wisdom, that it's not
about the swing. It's about turning out the base.
If you buy that (and I
to some extent do), then Dean's gonna do two things. 1) Energize the base 2) Add
to the base.
I think Bush is endangering his base, right now. The
libertarian conservatives are starting to freak out about the budget, and
yesterday's 12 billion dollars to open the door to 200 billion or more in manned
space research is not gonna reassure them. The racist wingnuts are not gonna be
happy about the immigration proposal. He's been all hat, no cattle on the
movement conservative issues. And it's time for him to move the center.
We'll see. They are very savvy campaigners. There was an interesting
piece in the Times recently about Bush campaign staffers showing up on local
talk radio shows around the country. They are creative in reaching the base in
stealth ways like that. Dean can counter that with his internet
strategies--although that seems to have peaked at the moment.
62. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 12:38:10 PM
Seems to me Clark has waffled a bit on Iraq. But I've liked Clark ever since I first saw him on television during the Kosovo, Bosnia period when he was head of NATO. He's probably the smartest career officer to come down the pike since WWII. As I said he's my first choice for VP after Dean wins the nomination. Dean-Clark would be an unbeatable ticket, although there could be friction if they were elected because they both have strong personalities.
63. jayackroyd - 1/15/2004 12:40:04 PM
60
I will take this moment to make my one annual "I told you so."
In March, as the war began, I said that I didn't believe that this
administration could handle the aftermath.
Politically, that may not
matter. I think people have become numb to the casualty figures. They'll paint
this as a tremendous victory for the Iraqi people no matter what happens, and
they've got 200 million dollars to buy canvas and oils. Only, IMO, Dean and
Clark have a chance to counter that message.
64. robertjayb - 1/15/2004 12:49:14 PM
They'll paint this as a tremendous victory for the Iraqi people no matter
what happens...
See Riverbend's blog, linked in Conflict...
65. robertjayb - 1/15/2004 1:06:11 PM
They'll paint this as a tremendous victory for the Iraqi people no matter
what happens...
See Riverbend's blog, linked in Conflict...
66. robertjayb - 1/15/2004 1:15:25 PM
Scuse the double, please...
Maybe more than you will want to know
about how the Texas congressional races are shaping up after the GOP/Tom DeLay
gerrymander is available here from Off the Kuff.
BTW Stenholm and Frost have
endorsed General Clark.
67. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/15/2004 1:35:20 PM
58. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 12:28:21 PM
vK- I don't have a
lot of time to respond fully, but I disagree, in part, with some of your views.
I think there is another factor besides "swing voters" and Reagan Democrats.
I think there is a morass of complacent non-voters out there who'll vote now
because they're tired and afraid of Bush's foreign and domestic policies.
With regard to Clark, you mislabel my rationale for not trusting Clark
(who is probably as smart as Jimmy Carter who wasn't as great a president as he
is a former president)—I don't find the man courageous or inspiring but rather
ambitious and whater the hell I said above! ;-)
That will have to
suffice for me, for now.
68. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 1:43:16 PM
Appealing to the Swing - Part Deux:
Conventional wisdom, backed by
polling, is that the US swing voter agrees with the Dems on domestic issues and
with the Repubs on security issues. In the post-9/11 context security trumps
domestic, so for the Dems to win they must be able to show that their candidate
is better qualified than Bush to ensure US security. Dean cannot do this, only
Clark is in a position to beat Bush on security issues.
69. jayackroyd - 1/15/2004 1:49:09 PM
Dean/Zinni trumps that argument.
70. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 1:51:41 PM
Jay - I disagree because the strength must be at the top of the ticket. Further, Zinni is unknown to the electorate. Hell, Clark is just starting to be known.
71. jexster - 1/15/2004 2:09:31 PM
That's not what Teixeira thinks vK
If you bothered to read the link,
that's what the American public thinks on any number of critical national issues
according a compendium of latest polling results, provided as a service to you
and readers of this thread.
So what's the question?
What do I
think about how all this relates to the 2004 election? Some part of it?
Well I think that it suggest substantial weakness that the Democrats can
exploit expecially Iraq/Foreign policy, health care, the economy, and control of
the country by radical fanatics who have raped our national fisc for the benefit
of their fat cat benefactors esp Big Erl 'n Gas.
Now what does it all
boil down to? Perhaps that's your question.
1. I agree with my friend
Charlie Cook whom I taught everything he knows (inside joke) - no matter who the
Dems nominate this will be a close election.
2. Bush is vulnerable on
foreign policy to attack from the right
3. The overarching theme for the
Dems in 2004
Liars incompetents
incompetents liars
Lying
incompetents
72. jayackroyd - 1/15/2004 2:11:51 PM
70
I see your point. But the attack dog guy is usually the veep. And
on security issues the attacks are going to have to be unusually strong, and
from the right.
The veep doesn't have to be a name guy, especially in an
outsider run.
73. jexster - 1/15/2004 2:12:26 PM
and the Jexster Election Index for January 15, 2004
Google Bush/moron
count - 105,000 up from 70,000 two weeks ago
74. jexster - 1/15/2004 2:13:38 PM
I THINK thar reflects the O'Neill expose
75. jayackroyd - 1/15/2004 2:33:12 PM
Talking points memo has a
lengthy quote from Clark congressional testimony on the dangers of Iraq and the
possible responses. the full transcript is
also on the site.
It demonstrates that Clark has an eloquent, fully
formed understanding of the nature of the problem, and a series of responses.
And that the various quotes he's given that have been seen as contradictory are
consistent with that testimony. For example:
First of all, I do
believe that the United States diplomacy in the United Nations will be
strengthened if the Congress can adopt a resolution expressing U.S.
determination to act if the United Nations can not act. The use of force must
remain a U.S. option under active consideration.
Such congressional
resolution need not, at this point, authorize the use of force. The more focused
the resolution on Iraq, the more focused it is on the problems of weapons of
mass destruction. The greater its utility in the United Nations, the more nearly
unanimous the resolution, the greater its utility is, the greater its impact is
on the diplomatic efforts under way.
76. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 5:27:13 PM
Regarding "Dean the Outsider", to continue a conversation form Politics.
Dean endorsers:
Gore, Sen. Harkin, The American Federation of State,
County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), AFL-CIO, Service Employees
International Union (SEIU), Ex-Sen. Paul Simon, Ex-Sen. Braun
Clark's
endorsers:
Abenaki Nation, Rep. Ortiz, Rep. Frost, Charlie Stenholm, Rep.
Gonzalez, Michael Moore, John Dalton, Mary Frances Berry
I don't see how
Dean can claim to be the outsider any more. Or is it being claimed that the DNC
is working against him in fear of his nomination will result in the Dems being
crushed?
77. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 5:41:06 PM
Well, Gore is the only establishment Democrat who has endorsed Dean. For example, Michael Moore is hardly establishment. Neither are Moseley Braun or Harkin. And it appears to me from watching the "Tube" that NBC and CNN favor either Clark or Kerry over Dean. Clinton appears to be supporting Clark although he hasn't said so. Also, you omitted Jexter from the Clark supporters.
78. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 5:47:07 PM
Jexter is a reliable guide to where the big Democrats are coming from. A couple of years ago there was another motie from D.C. who appeared to be wired in to the DNC. What was her name? Sounded Oriental as I recall??? Whatever happened to her? Anybody know?
79. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 5:48:56 PM
Wonk - Several people have said that Harkin is not establishment, why not?
I would say that the two unions cited are part of the Dem establishment,
do you disagree?
Regarding Clinton's support of Clark, well, yeah, but
done with typical Slickness. What Clinton seems to have done is all very behind
the scenes calling in of favors to get various Clintonistas to work for Clark.
Somehow I just don't see Jex as "establishment" material.
80. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 5:49:31 PM
Are you thinking of JadeGold?
81. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 6:00:12 PM
Harkin is too far to the left of center and a bit of a maverick. Don't
underestimate Jexter. He's from just across the river from Baton Rouge! He's
connected.
Ah, yes, JadeGold. Very bright and well informed lady??
82. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 6:01:20 PM
Well...a bright selectively informed vicious partisan hack would be how I would describe her.
83. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 6:02:21 PM
Jade, the anti-Ace.
84. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 6:06:45 PM
She was partisan but not a hack and I don't recall she was vicious. Whatever she said was predictably down the line DNC. Ace was the one who was vicious and nasty. They were a good match! Jexter is also quite predictably down the line DNC. Perhaps a bit left and ahead of the party line, actually.
85. robertjayb - 1/15/2004 6:09:57 PM
Madonna supports Clark.
86. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 6:19:39 PM
Yeah, it was kind of funny ... see Paris Hilton has been sending me all this
email, like two or five a day, wanting me to check out some video she made, and
I've just been deleting them because I am so not into her any more. Anyway, then
this email from Madonna shows up and I'm thinking....
turned out she only
wanted me for my donation to Clark.
87. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 6:32:50 PM
I'm sure your donation to Clark had nothing to to with it!
88. robertjayb - 1/15/2004 6:44:25 PM
Enough of this heavy stuff....Has anyone seen the video of Howard Dean
flipping pancakes?
How does he do that?
89. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 6:46:07 PM
I am even more sick of the Dean pancake video than I am of the Paris Hilton video, man have I seen that a lot.
90. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 7:13:45 PM
Kerry is now leading in at least one of the polls.
91. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 7:36:18 PM
Martin Sheen and Rob Reiner are campaigning for Howard Dean in Iowa. Sheen because he was the first and strongest to oppose the war in Iraq and Reiner because Dean will bring a big change in course from where Bush is taking the country.
92. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 7:38:04 PM
Rob Reiner: "The American people like a plain spoken, unscripted person."
Sheen: "I shouldn't have called Bush a moron. But I don't think he's
capable of leading this country."
93. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 7:53:53 PM
Hard to predice the Dem nominee. But IMO Edwards is the most likely VP candidate. And I think he would be a good one. He would add Southern balance to Dean or Kerry, plus a calming influence on Dean. He is smooth, articulate, persuasive and likeable.
94. robertjayb - 1/15/2004 7:58:36 PM
Spouse lies Edwards, too. But like I said, she's a fool for a handsome man.
95. vonKreedon - 1/15/2004 8:21:36 PM
I totally agree on Edwards being the prime potential VP among the Dem contenders. A non-condenter who I think could prime VP is Gov. Richardson.
96. arkymalarky - 1/15/2004 8:24:46 PM
Arky politicians Dale Bumpers and David Pryor are supporting Clark. I think that's really neat.
97. wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 8:31:52 PM
Yeah, Richardson is capable, Hispanic and from the West.
98. jexster - 1/15/2004 10:10:47 PM
But he already delivered Sherman Statement
ATLANTA (Reuters) - In
a sign of the difficulty President Bush (news - web sites) faces as he tries to
win black support for his reelection, several hundred protesters loudly booed
him on Thursday as he laid a wreath at the grave of civil rights leader Martin
Luther King.
"Bush go home" and "peace not war" the predominantly
black crowd of protesters shouted from behind a barrier of buses, as Bush paid
tribute to King on the 75th anniversary of his birth.
99. jexster - 1/15/2004 10:22:38 PM
The predictable workings of the RNC Slime Machine..
This time big
breakdown...folks gettin wise to that act.
So imagine that.
The same day Drudge has his 'world exclusive' with ridiculously
distorted clips of Wes Clark's September 2002 congressional testimony on
Iraq, RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie is in Little Rock giving a speech about Clark
and he's using
the same testimony to riff on.
What a coincidence they were both
using google on the same day with the same idea, right? Amazing.
And
then, according to KnightRidder, it turns out that Drudge didn't even play the
smear straight. To quote the KnightRidder ...
Clark's congressional
testimony was further distorted Thursday by cyber-gossip columnist Matt Drudge,
who quoted selected portions of Clark's testimony and added sentences that don't
appear in the transcript on his Web site Thursday. Drudge didn't respond to an
e-mail request for comment.
Oh what a tangled web ...
-- Josh
Marshall
And what do I think vK?
Liars and
incompetents
Incompentents and liars
TomAto
TomAHto...truth
squads will be in the frontlines this time around
100. vonKreedon - 1/16/2004 12:25:23 AM
Jex - Your Message # 98 really should be in another thread.
101. rdbrewer - 1/16/2004 1:04:57 AM
I could tell from your eagerness to have my thread yesterday that you were
going to turn into Inspector Javert.
102. concerned - 1/16/2004 3:45:53 AM
The NYT is now talking about 'Bush Democrats'. This crossover is a phenomenon
we haven't seen since the Reagan era.
Maybe it's time for Democrat party
operatives to turn up the rhetorical heat to keep their constituency from
leaving the plantation. After all, how can the Democrat Party handle losing the
presidency to someone like GWB a second time after all the rhetorical energy
they've expended describing his shortcomings?
103. Magoseph - 1/16/2004 3:59:17 AM
Ann Richards endorsed Dean, concerned. What do you think about that?
104. concerned - 1/16/2004 4:04:23 AM
Hi, Magoseph. Here's what I think of that: 
Thanks
to Jimmuh Cahtuh, the 'nuculer' engineer for legitimizing that pronunciation.
105. concerned - 1/16/2004 4:13:35 AM
"I'm Al Franken. I'm here to present the funniest ad award. I'm a
last-minute substitution, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill was supposed to
be the presenter, but unfortunately he was murdered."
Ooh, that's
hil-ar-i-ous.
106. concerned - 1/16/2004 4:20:46 AM
Chuck D:
* "But truly, seriously, quite frankly, the people
are smart enough to realize that the world is important and we only have one
life, that's tired of this bullshit, or better than that, tired of this
Bushshit" (big applause)
* "Americanization is like McDonaldization"
* "Son of a Bush and his crew is at it again, because, we do not want 8
years run by a Colon, a Bush and a Dick."
From Margaret Cho:
* "Despite all of this stupid bullshit that the Republican National
Committee, or whatever the fuck they call them, that they were saying that
they're all angry about how two of these ads were comparing Bush to Hitler? I
mean, out of thousands of submissions, they find two. They're like fucking
looking for Hitler in a hawstack. You now? I mean, George Bush is not Hitler. He
would be if he fucking applied himself." big, extended applause) "I mean he just
isn't."
* "I think this last year has just proven how stupid Republicans
are." (big applause)
The above quotes from Soros' Move On Award
meeting as quoted on Drudgereport.
107. concerned - 1/16/2004 4:22:08 AM
jexster has to be loving this.
108. Magoseph - 1/16/2004 4:24:42 AM
Hey, that's off topics, concerned. Neither O'Neill, not Franken is a candidate.
109. Magoseph - 1/16/2004 5:17:18 AM
You are right, Jay, Rourke's column was not funny but the inconsistencies in the stump speeches were hilarious, if not comforting about each candidate's ability to keep issues straight in their memory.
110. wonkers2 - 1/16/2004 8:39:17 AM
Sports.com nomination odds this morning:
Dean 1-3
Clark 13-5
Gephart 7-1
Kerry 7-1
Edwards 12-1
Lieberman
18-1
Clinton 20-1
Gore 60-1
Sharpton 500-1
Kucinich 500-1
111. jayackroyd - 1/16/2004 9:21:56 AM
There's been a lot of poll reporting in Iowa last few days. The stats
education I've had leads me to mostly ignore polls at this stage, because the
sampling error tends to be so large, relative to the numbers. That is, Dean up
25-21 over Gephardt with a sampling error of 5 is a tie, pending the actual
caucus.
I particularly don't pay attention to polls in Iowa because the
effort gap between answering a buncha questions on the phone and attending a
caucus is so great.
Am I wrong about this? Do the polls successfully
predict results?
My gut would bet Dean on the depth of commitment his
followers have. But Gephardt's labor guys know how to get out the vote. And I
suspect that Kerry's surge won't be matched by people trundling out to their
cars on Monday.
Any idea what the weather is supposed to be like on
Monday evening?
112. concerned - 1/16/2004 10:38:21 AM
Kerry Opens 5-Point Lead Over Dean, Gephardt in Iowa Poll
Where's Weasley?
113. judithathome - 1/16/2004 11:06:25 AM
After all, how can the Democrat Party handle losing the presidency to
someone like GWB a second time after all the rhetorical energy they've expended
describing his shortcomings?
To be technical, they didn't lose the
first one and if they lose the second, it will still be America, where anyone
can grow up to be President or at least, if they have enough money, can run for
the office.
And it is still a country where the President's short-
comings are allowed to be the subject of conjecture by not only his oppoents but
by the general public and the media. Unless, of course, the current one has
passed some stealth legislation making it illegal.
I'm sure you'd rather
think a loss to Bush will ring the death knell of the Democrtic party but it
won't. I happen to believe a win for Bush will do some damage to the idea of a
Republican majority, however. It will take time and unfortunately, the entire
country (that portion which isn't wealthy) will suffer for it but it will
happen.
114. vonKreedon - 1/16/2004 11:08:58 AM
Con - Clark is not running in Iowa. He decided that, given his late entry, he did not have the time and resources to effectively campaign in Iowa and so focused on NH and the southern/southwestern primaries on Feb. 3rd.
115. jexster - 1/16/2004 11:09:28 AM
Charlie Cook was wrong. This race is murky before Iowa, not after NH.
Here
Comes Kerry!
116. vonKreedon - 1/16/2004 11:14:57 AM
Speaking of pie-in-the-sky political death knell fantasies, here's mine:
Clark/Edwards score a solid win over Bush/Cheney. Clark appoints either
Powell or Bill Clinton Sec. State. The economy grows gangbusters and we
successfully repair our damaged international relations. Dems retake one or both
houses of Congress. The Repubs get wilder and wilder in their recriminations,
both within the party and conspiracy theories about the Dems/Liberal Media. In
'08 the Clark/Rodham-Clinton ticket wins in a walk. Some Repub's start to tear
off their own heads. In '12 Hillary becomes president and the Repub Party
implodes.
Of course, an equally implausible fantasy can be woven about
the self-destruction of the Dem party.
117. concerned - 1/16/2004 11:58:11 AM
Re. 114 -
Thanks for reminding me of that. I recall reading something
now about a week ago to that effect, but I had forgotten.
118. jexster - 1/16/2004 11:59:12 AM
This is the very first time in my three decades of active involvement in
Democratic politics that I can recall the party rank and file totally abandoning
its concerns over ideological purity in favor of electablility.
Even in San Francisco, the Peoples' Republic, this is so. In the mayor's
race, which was a Demo ideologue fest par excellence, I met Demos and Greens of
all stripe and none from Kucinich to Clark cared about anything but
electablility.
Amazing....
119. concerned - 1/16/2004 12:01:00 PM
Considering what we know now, the Democrat Party's best odds for capturing the presidency for the next decade could well be in '08.
120. concerned - 1/16/2004 12:02:42 PM
Re. 118 -
Don't blame Republicans for that. After all, people of
voting age are considered adults.
121. vonKreedon - 1/16/2004 12:04:28 PM
Jex - That is amazing indeed, and gives me hope. I was very concerned ... well no Concerned mind you ... early in the campaigns that the Dems were so angry about the 2000 election and the passage of both the PATRIOT ACT and the Iraq war resolution that they would insist on draconian ideological purity and ignore the need to appeal to the swing needed to actually get elected.
122. robertjayb - 1/16/2004 12:16:25 PM
Kerry's Climb and his Keyser Soze guru...
The
New Republic Online---There are some obvious reasons for this Kerry comeback.
One is the way he essentially gave up on winning New Hampshire and began
campaigning constantly in Iowa, in the hope that a surprise finish would
slingshot him into New Hampshire with fresh momentum. Another may be a sharpened
stump style, and the well-advised dumping of contrived slogans like "The Real
Deal."
But there might be another, more hidden story--a secret weapon
Kerry unleashed in Iowa several weeks ago. His name is Michael Whouley.
123. jexster - 1/16/2004 12:26:17 PM
The Kerry-nator scenario...
If Kerry does score and Dean doesn't win
(caveat: Iowa polls tell little about caucus performance)...
Clark has a
female problem and Kerry, though I don't know how he polls, has both war record
and I suspect no gender gap problem.
He also has had a ground operation
in place longer than the General in NH
Though Dean will be on the run
after NH, he is sitting pretty here in California (so far) and certainly has the
bucks to do CA media buy...
very interesting
124. jexster - 1/16/2004 12:27:08 PM
Key for Clark - Bury Likud Lieberman
125. jexster - 1/16/2004 12:59:43 PM
Clark Opens Records, Challenges Bush on Secrecy, Coverups
126. jexster - 1/16/2004 1:02:13 PM
clARKY will love this...latest in a series of remarkable policy
initiatives... 
In South
Carolina on Thursday, Wes Clark announced a plan to tackle the persistent
problem of school inequity. Clark argued that for too many children in America,
the education they get depends on where they live and how much money their
parents have.
127. vonKreedon - 1/16/2004 1:04:56 PM
Jex - I really appreciate such posts as Message # 118 and Message # 123, because
in them you express your own opinion and analysis without resorting to
gratuitous invective. Your posts such as Message # 125 are
useful sources of information, and again wonderfully free of gratuitous
invective, but I am more interested in why you think that the information is
important than simply the link to the information.
Finally, I appreciate
that you have been playing, by and large, nicely in this thread. Thanks.
128. jexster - 1/16/2004 1:09:28 PM
De nada. Ask me my views I tell em....my major problem sometimes
129. jexster - 1/16/2004 3:52:41 PM
The General is moving so fast on so many fronts I can scarcely keep track of
it all...
Kinda reminds me of something, I cannot quite put my finger on
it.. 
130. OhioSTOPAS - 1/16/2004 4:28:59 PM
Here
is something refreshing: the press refuting RNC crap instead of just repeating
it.
"Ed Gillespie, the chairman of the Republican National
Committee, charged Thursday that retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark endorsed
President Bush's policy toward Iraq two weeks before Congress voted to authorize
Bush to go to war.
"If true, that would contradict the core message of
Clark's presidential campaign. The complete transcript of Clark's Sept. 26,
2002, testimony, however, reveals that Clark didn't endorse Bush's policy during
the congressional hearing, and that the Republican charge is based on selected
excerpts of his remarks.
"Gillespie . . . chairman didn't mention that
Clark also said America should work through the United Nations to seek a
diplomatic solution and go to war only as a last resort. . . ."
These
reporters (Dana Hull and Drew Brown of Knight-Ridder) can expect never to be
called on at any Bush administration press conference!
The accepted
procedure, as has been amply demonstrated over the last few years, is (as I read
on a blog recently) for the reporter to quote the Republican statement that
white is black and up is down, and note only that "some people say" white is
white and up is up.
131. PelleNilsson - 1/16/2004 4:37:19 PM
jexster
Blitzkrieg?
132. robertjayb - 1/16/2004 4:40:36 PM
Good catch, Ohio.
133. robertjayb - 1/16/2004 5:01:46 PM
Krugman, who gets it, says Clark and Dean do also....
Earlier this week, Wesley Clark had some strong words about the state
of the nation. "I think we're at risk with our democracy," he said. "I think
we're dealing with the most closed, imperialistic, nastiest administration in
living memory. They even put Richard Nixon to shame."
In other words,
the general gets it: he understands that America is facing what Kevin Phillips,
in his remarkable new book, "American Dynasty," calls a "Machiavellian moment."
Among other things, this tells us that General Clark and Howard Dean, whatever
they may say in the heat of the nomination fight, are on the same side of the
great Democratic divide.
134. concerned - 1/16/2004 5:12:54 PM
rjb-
Take that rhetoric seriously? Clark doesn't.
135. vonKreedon - 1/16/2004 5:21:40 PM
Con - Why do you say that Clark doesn't take the things that he says seriously?
136. concerned - 1/16/2004 5:22:30 PM
Who could, given rjb's excerpt?
137. concerned - 1/16/2004 5:26:01 PM
vK -
Make sure you look over this little tidbit:
Among
other things, this tells us that General Clark and Howard Dean, whatever they
may say in the heat of the nomination fight....
138. concerned - 1/16/2004 5:30:31 PM
Maybe Krugman takes it seriously, but I look at him as a special 'case'.
139. vonKreedon - 1/16/2004 5:53:32 PM
Con - The quip you exerpt, whatever they may say in the heat of the nomination fight.... is talking to whatever they may say about each other.
140. concerned - 1/16/2004 6:02:16 PM
If it makes you feel better to believe that Democrats will lie about each other but tell only the truth about Republicans, be my guest.
141. vonKreedon - 1/16/2004 6:07:40 PM
Dude, take off the overly partisaned spectacles and re-read the article. What
is being said is that no matter how much Dean and Clark may disparage each
other's Democratic quals, they are on the same page regarding the nature of the
Bush administration. That's all it is saying. It is unremarkable that opponents
in a race will say bad things about each other, all that is being pointed out is
that at the end of the day both Dean and Clark believe the Bush administration
to be reckless and untrustworthy.
142. arkymalarky - 1/16/2004 8:14:52 PM
Jex,
Clark just won me with that. Our governor's attacking inequity
here by pushing to get everything under his complete control. And I think
he's going to succeed.
Education should be such a major part of any
political platform, and if someone can offer something besides lip-service and
slogans I'm all for it.
143. jexster - 1/16/2004 8:16:55 PM
I know I just said its the electablity stoopid but
THIS IS FUN!
PBS Newshour Making Us Smarter Than the Average Fox Idiot...
Here is
a quiz sponsored by PBS's New Hour and WBUR.org: "Do you really know where the
candidates stand? Learn about the candidates through their platforms, not their
personalities. Read the answers from the nine
Democrats running for
president on 14 major issues. Choose the one you agree with most. Create your
own report card that reveals the candidates you chose for each issue."
The PBS Vote By
Issues Quiz
144. jexster - 1/16/2004 9:30:23 PM
Ruy Teixeira and John Judis authors of the Emerging Democratic Majority, are
about to come with EDM: Afterword...
Excerpt follows...For the record, I
agree with their analysis and would add that it makes weight for my argument
"The Attack forms on the Right Flank"
145. jexster - 1/16/2004 9:30:57 PM
Afterword: “The Enemy is Coming”
John B. Judis and Ruy Teixeira
If the November 2002 elections had been held on September 10, 2001, the
Democrats would have made impressive gains, increasing their one-seat edge in
the Senate and probably winning back the House of Representatives. At the time,
George W. Bush was seen as a weak and ineffective leader, who was most
comfortable reading The Very Hungry Caterpillar to schoolchildren. His approval
rating was at 51 percent, dangerously low for a president in his first nine
months. In addition, the Clinton boom had given way to a pronounced economic
slowdown. Combine these factors with popular support for Democratic positions on
social security, health care costs, the environment, and the economy, and you
had a recipe for a Republican disaster. But nothing of the kind occurred. In the
wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, Bush and the Republicans boosted
their popularity and actually gained seats in both houses, narrowly winning back
the Senate.
The GOP successes in November 2002 gave rise to new theories
about a long-term Republican realignment. In the conservative Weekly Standard,
Fred Barnes described an emerging 9/11 majority. “We are no longer an equally
divided, 50-50 nation,” Barnes wrote. “America is now at least 51-49 Republican
and right of center, more likely 52-48, maybe even 53-47.
146. jexster - 1/16/2004 9:32:06 PM
The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, created a new political era, and
the midterm election on November 5 confirmed it.” Barnes was certainly right
about the Republican tilt of the election, but not about the “new political
era.” The November 2002 elections represented the temporary revival of the older
conservative realignment of the 1980s. September 11 brought to the forefront
national security issues on which Republicans have enjoyed an advantage since
the election of 1980; and Bush’s sure-handed performance in the months that
followed ensured that this advantage would accrue to him and the Republicans in
November 2002. But this advantage will persist only as long as Americans feel
under attack and also feel that the Republicans are best able to protect them
from attack. The 2002 election did not begin a new era, but unexpectedly
prolonged an older one.
And it supports my oft expressed
analysis that Bush used the War in Iraq as a cynical manipulation of public
opinion to gain advantage in the mid-term elections.
147. jexster - 1/16/2004 9:43:33 PM
Bush had motive.
He had opportunity.
Now he's got big trouble...
General Wesley Clark, American Son, American Hero
Karl Rove's
Worst Nightmare
148. jexster - 1/18/2004 6:08:20 AM
vK...
High price vK quality spread for the bar...
Campaign Desk: Critique and analysis
of 2004 campaign coverage from Columbia Journalism Review
149. jexster - 1/18/2004 6:13:39 AM
Timely wrap up of the Big RNC/Drudge Slime of the Week...
or how media
repetition can make sothing out of something...
Echo Chamber
The
Good, the Bad and the Ugly Converge on One Story
The echo chamber is
vibrating with full force after yesterday's distortion of Gen. Wes Clark's 2002
testimony to the House Armed Services Committee, courtesy of the Republican
National Committee, as passed along as gospel by Matt Drudge. At one point in
Drudge's piece, as CampaignDesk has already pointed out, he manufactured a
single quotation with an ellipse that jumps 11,500 words.
That's bad.
But, worse, the false reporting has already leaped into the mainstream.
Yesterday, Democratic Presidential hopeful Joe Lieberman repeated Drudge's error
in a press release he issued highlighting Clark's distorted testimony.
A
number of reporters joined the chorus, passing along Drudge's misrepresentations
without reading the full transcript. The Associated Press and Reuters both
repeated the excerpts of Clark's testimony without noting the true context, and
the Washington Times copied the Drudge charge practically verbatim, taking note
of Clark's denial but quoting an anonymous "Democratic strategist" suggesting
Clark "got an extra pass [from the media] because he was a general."
Thankfully, some reporters did get out their shovels and Campaign Desk
applauds their efforts. Dana Hull and Drew Brown of Knight Ridder released a
story late last night with a headline challenging the RNC release. Hull and
Brown report, "The complete transcript of Clark's Sept. 26, 2002, testimony,
however, reveals that Clark didn't endorse Bush's policy during the
congressional hearing, and that the Republican charge is based on selected
excerpts of his remarks."
By morning most of the major newspapers
including the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Boston Globe ran
pieces reflecting the whole story.
150. jexster - 1/18/2004 10:58:22 AM
George McGovern
Michael "Green Party" Moore
and Madonna
have
one thing in common but I wanna know what Clark is slipping in their drinks!
Still, his great weakness they don't fill
He needs one hot shot
field organizer more than 1000 eyebrow raising endorsements
151. jexster - 1/18/2004 11:33:42 AM
There's been a lot of poll reporting in Iowa last few days. The stats
education I've had leads me to mostly ignore polls at this stage, because the
sampling error tends to be so large, relative to the numbers. That is, Dean up
25-21 over Gephardt with a sampling error of 5 is a tie, pending the actual
caucus.
I particularly don't pay attention to polls in Iowa because the
effort gap between answering a buncha questions on the phone and attending a
caucus is so great.
Am I wrong about this? Do the polls successfully
predict results?
No polls don't predict results. A poll will only
tell you the probability that the statistic it reports would fall within a range
either side of the actual population proportion that would be found in an actual
census taken over the same time period. The sample must be randomly drawn from
the popuplation of voters who will actually vote on election day right? Unless
you manipulate s simple random sample to reflcect likely voters reliably the
poll will not be as accurate. The explosion of cell phones has probably made
telephone surveys less reliable.
You're right about Iowa. There's
probably no poll that queries only likely caucus voters. This favors candidates
with strong field organization(Dean Gephardt) and/or "buzz"(Kerry/Edwards)
152. Magoseph - 1/18/2004 11:41:29 AM
Message # 149
Jex, all this means to me is that when they focus Drudge on a candidate
with that intensity and pull in every chip they have out to make the legitimate
print, you can bet your bottom dollar they're scared to death of him. I have
watched all these people and this man Clark is the fastest and cleverest I have
ever seen. I even believe he tops Clinton if that is possible. The way he
handled Russert recently back was something to behold.
153. jexster - 1/18/2004 11:53:00 AM
Jay look at the spread at any given time shown on this graph of 14 polla of
Bush approval since 2001
And this tabulation
of the average difference in poll results on the approval question since 2001
for several polls from the Ipsos Reid Poll (benchmark=0)
Approval is
more ambiguous than preference, especially the closer to election, and the
spread is smaller on the latter but you get the idea
154. jexster - 1/18/2004 12:06:35 PM
Clark is brilliant no doubt about it...but his late start brought serious
practical disadvantages...insufficient time to build a nationwide field
organization and weak position with state/local party activists, heavy hitting
contributors, union, and officeholder connections.
HE has done well
setting strategy, policy, broad brush stuff but its the nitty grity things that
make stil him a long shot unless the field narrows to 2 or 3 real soon so he
scavenge resources and voter focus advantage, he will have more troubles than
solutions.
155. Magoseph - 1/18/2004 12:26:11 PM
Jex, you may be right. What I want is a combination soldier/Rhodes scholar mind. When I say soldier, I mean someone who has led men in combat and faced enemy fire in addition to top-brass planning. We're faced with a fight to the finish with the barbarians and won't survive led by a crew of draft-dodgers/deserters and seat-of-the pants neocon warriors presently aboard. I can live with either Kerry or Clark with my vice-president as Edwards.
156. jexster - 1/18/2004 2:46:26 PM
Anybody but Lieberman...
157. PelleNilsson - 1/18/2004 2:59:19 PM
jex hast been up and posting for 24 hours now.
158. wonkers2 - 1/18/2004 3:29:10 PM
Try reading his posts instead of bitching about them and you might learn something.
159. jexster - 1/18/2004 3:59:59 PM
So Much for Bush's Saddam Bounce..back to 50%..50% all time NyT Low
11/10-12/03 CBS 50 42 8
12/10-13/03 52 40 8
12/14-15/03 58 33 9
1/12-15/04 50 45
160. PelleNilsson - 1/18/2004 4:19:39 PM
Bitching? I'm admiring his dedication.
161. jexster - 1/18/2004 4:23:23 PM
More like on and off over 8 hours...but who is counting?
You?
162. OhioSTOPAS - 1/19/2004 11:19:55 AM
I'm very glad to see the Kerry campaign rise from the dead. In my opinion, he's the candidate best qualified to be President and the candidate who will run best against Bush.
163. vonKreedon - 1/19/2004 11:24:50 AM
Let's make guesses about under what circumstances various candidates will
drop out of the race.
164. judithathome - 1/19/2004 11:39:38 AM
Lieberman and Gephardt can't understand that they are not "flashy" enough to win a presidential election. You can laugh all you want but I doubt either would be elected no matter what. And as a joke, I doubt they'd even win if they ran unopposed.
165. vonKreedon - 1/19/2004 1:49:46 PM
Ohio - Why do you like Kerry over the other candidates, particularly regarding electability?
166. jexster - 1/19/2004 2:17:51 PM
Is Kerry the 2004 Komeback Kid???
I've heard all sorts of
explanations - he's smart; looks presidential; man of evident good character;
experienced etc but this may be have a little to do with it
Meet
Mike Whouley - Field Director from Hell
Ohio -
The General has ordered me to give you this PASS which allows you access
to all areas under the control of C Corps.
Please keep this with you
at all times or you may be shot - dead. 
167. OhioSTOPAS - 1/19/2004 3:10:01 PM
VonK - I agree with Kerry on the issues, and his intelligence and knowledge
acquired as a Senator make him more than qualified.
I think Kerry's
military experience will be very beneficial in running against a "wartime
President" who is sure to be wrapped in the Flag during the campaign. If AWOL
Bush questions Kerry's patriotism, it'll get shoved down his throat.
General Clark of course also has this advantage. But if Howard Dean is
the nominee, I fear that all we'll hear about right up to election day are
Dean's skiing trips after having been found 4-F for Vietnam service.
(Although Kerry is my preference, every Democratic nominee will be a
better President than Bush and I'll unreservedly support the Democratic
nominee.)
168. OhioSTOPAS - 1/19/2004 3:50:34 PM
In Message # 130
I pointed out a refreshing bit of political journalism: a Knight-Ridder
newspaper article exposing a current conservative/Republican lie (saying Wesley
Clark supported a war against Iraq in 2002) as such.
Unfortunately, that
appears to have been an anomaly. At CNN, it's
business as usual.
169. robertjayb - 1/19/2004 5:12:30 PM
Edwards, Kucinich supporters may team up...
Supporters for Democratic presidential candidates Rep. Dennis
Kucinich and Sen. John Edwards may team up at caucuses tonight, although neither
candidate is either dropping out of the race or endorsing the other, officials
from both campaign officials said Monday.
The candidates are encouraging
voters to join forces in precincts where either one or both campaigns are not
viable, and do not have enough support to win a delegate. A candidate is deemed
viable if he has support from 15 percent of the caucus participants.
In
those situations, the group with the smaller number of supporters will move to
the other campaign, according to a press release from the Dennis Kucinich for
President campaign.
170. vonKreedon - 1/19/2004 5:23:38 PM
I can find a that confirms this, but nothing on the Edwards site. This could push
Edwards over the top to a win in Iowa. I wonder whose idea this was and why
there doesn't seem to be anything about it on the Edwards site?
171. vonKreedon - 1/19/2004 5:24:42 PM
Here, press release
172. robertjayb - 1/19/2004 5:47:20 PM
These Iowa caucuses are very much like the caucuses Texas Democrats use to
select convention delegates from precinct level on up to state.
Iowa
democrats may be more amenable to being organized---but here schemes to
influence the meeting outcome are pretty shaky propositions. Everyone is a free
agent. If your candidate fails to "make," that is cross a minimum level of
representation---here it is usually 15-percent---there is a tendency to want to
go with the likely winner.
Of course the scheme here is to select
delegate to the next level so the largest group will have the most delegate
spots to assign.
173. robertjayb - 1/19/2004 6:03:59 PM
Former McCain aide may join Clark...
DES
MOINES, Iowa (AP) -- Wesley Clark, seeking a bipartisan flavor for his
presidential campaign, is in negotiations with a former adviser to Republican
Sen. John McCain to be his senior strategist.
The Clark campaign and
John Weaver, who helped run McCain's insurgent 2000 primary campaign against
President Bush in 2000, said Monday it is not a done deal.
``John Weaver
has not been hired by the Clark campaign although he has been in discussion with
the campaign about the possibility of coming on to give us some strategic
advice,'' said Matt Bennett, spokesman for the Clark campaign.
................................
Weaver was one of a handful of
aides who helped McCain upset Bush in the 2000 New Hampshire primary on the
strength of broad support among independent voters, who are allowed to cast
ballots in Republican and Democratic primaries.
.................................
Are we having fun yet?
174. jexster - 1/19/2004 7:32:41 PM
Estimates of Iowa Caucus Turnout - 100,000
Shiites in Streets of
Baghdad - 100,000
Can't America do better with its democracy than
the faux democracy in Iraq?
175. jexster - 1/19/2004 7:34:42 PM
Robert...Weaver's nice, McGovern nice, Moore nice too
NEEDS FIELD
DIRECTOR
176. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/19/2004 7:41:27 PM
Okay, here's my prediction: Kerry and Edwards— Bush will be Repug Roadkill come November 3rd.
177. jexster - 1/19/2004 7:43:40 PM
vK...I think you are wrong about Clark and Dean but the complexity I don't
that can be entirely captured in bullets
The situation will be totally
murky through NH at which point we agree, Lieberman probably out if he finishes
<3 and Gephardt if he doesn't win Iowa, probably out after NH if not
earlier...that affects SC where he's fairly strong
What I am trying to
get at is that you have to run a couple or three what if's here and look at
staying power first
Dean will stay through March 3rd because he has the
money and the support in California...he will not piss that away
Clark....is #2 in staying power ..nationwide support and money or
ability get it
Kerry has money but its HIS ...he has to finish no worse
than 3 in NH but he will be hard to discourage if he goes past NH because from
then on he will probably have mixed results upon which he can justify fighting
on
Now
Edwards...lookin good esp if Gephardt drops out in SC
(black vote) as does does
Now what if you add back Lieberman or Gephardt
or drop Edwards if he loses SC then what happens?
Or what happens if any
of what now looks like the second tier, Edwards. Mr. Likud, and Gephardt make
middling finishes...what then?
Too murky for my mind to be able to
predict anything other than at least 3 possibly 4 will make it to the Golden
State
178. jexster - 1/19/2004 7:46:05 PM
Speaking of strange bedfellow
McGovern/Moore - Gen. Clark
Ayatollah Sistani - Bush
How about
Kucinich - Edwards
His votes to Edwards when he can't make 15% threshold 2 nite
179. jexster - 1/19/2004 7:47:56 PM
How COULD I forget
Kofi Annan - George Bush
180. jexster - 1/19/2004 8:57:03 PM
Interesting on CNN..video inside one caucus's second round. An Edwards
precinct captain was counting off his supporters...lots of Kucinich buttons
37% Kerry
33% Edwards
18% Dean
1/3 most rural in
181. robertjayb - 1/19/2004 8:59:10 PM
first cut from Des Moines Register:
645 of 1993 precincts====
Kerry, 37%
Edwards, 33
Dean, 18
Gephardt, 11
182. jexster - 1/19/2004 9:04:44 PM
Gephardt - RIP
183. jexster - 1/19/2004 9:11:23 PM
Lieberman
- Dead Man Walkin and other subjects
Report of interview with ARG NH
Tracking Poll Guy
184. robertjayb - 1/19/2004 9:14:44 PM
1020 of 1993 precinct:
No change in percentages..
Gephardt is toast....
185. vonKreedon - 1/19/2004 10:03:53 PM
Right, so Gephardt drops out now. Big victories for both Kerry and Edwards.
This is bad for Clark in NH and SC as this will really boost Kerry and Edwards
in their neighbor states.
Big winners: Kerry and Edwards
Big losers:
Gephardt, Clark, Dean, McAuliffe
186. vonKreedon - 1/19/2004 10:05:10 PM
Gephardt's already on his way out, Gephardt Scraps Plans to Head to N.H.
187. jayackroyd - 1/19/2004 10:24:57 PM
Edwards.
Wow. He's the new front runner, imo.
188. robertjayb - 1/19/2004 10:57:19 PM
He ran a good race but he ran too slow...
By DAVID ESPO
AP
Special Correspondent
Published January 19, 2004, 9:22 PM CST
DES MOINES, Iowa -- Rep. Dick Gephardt intends to drop
out of the Democratic presidential race after a disappointing fourth-place
finish in the Iowa caucuses, a Democratic official said Monday night.
189. vonKreedon - 1/19/2004 11:01:45 PM
Jay - I included Terry McAuliffe among the big losers this evening because I think that there is no longer a front running; McAuliffe's dream of the nomination being decided by March is in ruins.
190. judithathome - 1/20/2004 9:06:28 AM
So, was Edwards' per centage that high because of Kucinich? What might it have been without Kucinich?
191. Magoseph - 1/20/2004 9:13:58 AM
I listened to all the commentators last night and came to the conclusion that
the Democratic ticket is pretty well set. It will be Kerry and Edwards or Clark
and Edwards. Dean taped into the anger and energized the party. He has served
his purpose and becomes history. The party wants a winner and will only tap into
the Independents with a Clinton type candidate.
192. vonKreedon - 1/20/2004 10:10:37 AM
J@H - That's a good question. Given that Edwards received 32% of the caucus
votes to Dean's 18%, I doubt that Kucinich cross-over votes made much of a
difference in him finishing second.
Mag - I think you are right that it
will be either Kerry or Clark at the top of the ticket and likely Edwards as VP.
193. robertjayb - 1/20/2004 10:15:41 AM
Congratulations to Wiz for calling the election....
194. judithathome - 1/20/2004 10:27:18 AM
If we thought Dean was angry before, watch out! I think this will really tick him off and he will be more determined than ever.
195. Magoseph - 1/20/2004 10:45:22 AM
Won, thanks, I bet everybody came to that conclusion including you.
I
believe this election will be decided the last six to eight weeks of the
campaign depending on which way the pendulum swings during that period. There
will be extreme pressure on both sides not to make a mistake. Caution will be
the watchword of the day as we approach the finale. What do you think in this
respect?
196. Magoseph - 1/20/2004 10:46:44 AM
Angry will not work, Juds.
197. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/20/2004 10:54:13 AM
Thanks for noticing, rj.
Dean will lose for two reasons, imo. 1. His
stance on Bush's Iraq War has lost its power because it's been trumped by the
electability factor. 2. Dean is also an utter ditz when it comes to socializing
and charm. He hasn't a clue when it comes to regulating his responses. He has
only one behavior down — feisty. He's going to become more shrill now that he's
been jolted and wounded.
If Kerry wins in N.H. and Edwards in Carolina,
the Dem ticket will be Kerry/Edwards. Bush will be in trouble because both these
guys are way more personable than Smirk&Sneer.
Moreover, Kerry is a
real hero and Edwards is a real southerner—as opposed to Bush's obvious veneers.
198. vonKreedon - 1/20/2004 11:12:02 AM
Regarding Dean "feistiness", I've heard on CNN/MSNBC several references to Dean's concession speech has being "suprising" and "angry". I've only seen a clip of him on stage taking his coat off and handing it to Harkin as if he was about to get into a bar fight. Is this what is being talked about, or is there more?
199. jexster - 1/20/2004 11:38:56 AM
Two weeks ago the pundits said Kerry was dead.
Two weeks ago the
pundits said John Edwards had better measure drapes for his new law office.
Two weeks ago the pundts said Bush wsa unstoppable.
So much for
the pundits.
President Bush delivers his State of the Union address
tonight to an American public that has become broadly dissatisfied with his
domestic agenda, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll
200. concerned - 1/20/2004 11:40:59 AM
Oh ye of little faith. What happened to all the Dean boosterism I was seeing
around here? IAC, it'll be interesting to see if Weasley can pull rank on Kerry
in New Hampshire. Then, there's that one term NC Senator and tort lawyer.
"Edwards always helped the little guy as long as he got a million
dollars out of it."
201. vonKreedon - 1/20/2004 11:46:14 AM
Con - "...all the Dean boosterism..."? It seemed to me that the liberals at the Mote have mostly been supporting Clark or Kerry. Perhaps you are mistaking this forum for another, conservative, forum where Dean's loss really hurts.
202. vonKreedon - 1/20/2004 11:47:03 AM
Also Con, you quote "Edwards always helped the little guy as long as he got a million dollars out of it." without attribution, are you quoting yourself?
203. judithathome - 1/20/2004 11:47:53 AM
Concerned, there are a lot of little guys out there who have been helped by
lawyers such as Edwards.
And welcome to your worst nightare: an erudite
and articulate rich ex-soldier who fouhgt in a war your guy avoided.
204. robertjayb - 1/20/2004 11:48:07 AM
I don't get it, vonKreedon, unless many in the media have bought into the
angry Dean idea and won't let it go. The post-caucus TV I saw was full of
references to angry Dean. I am reminded of the bogus serial-exaggerator label
that was hung on Al Gore.
Charlie Rose had on a twerp from the National
Democratic Leadership Conference who couldn't let up on Dean and the
unsuitability of his supposed anger. Of course, Dean hasn't tossed many roses at
establishment democrats.
I'm not and haven't been a Dean guy but come
what may I think the party owes him for getting some juices flowing.
205. jexster - 1/20/2004 11:50:55 AM
One interesting CNN finding in Iowa Robt, no matter who a person voted for,
he liked all opponents except for Likud Lieberman.
206. concerned - 1/20/2004 11:51:24 AM
Re. 202 -
It's an anonymous quote, therefore from a Democrat.
207. jexster - 1/20/2004 11:52:33 AM
More on the Vanishing Bush Bounce
- Donkey Rising
A couple of days ago, DR flagged the fact
that, according to the CBS News/New York Times poll, Bush's approval bounce from
the capture of Saddam Hussein had completely disappeared. Yesterday, he
complained bitterly about the New York Times graphic that showed Bush's approval
rating going up at very time it appeared to be losing altitude rapidly .
Now the most recent Gallup poll has been released, which has Bush's
approval rating down to 53 percent, a 6 point drop from their last poll and 2
points below where he was in this poll before Saddam was captured. With this
cofirmation of Bush's disappearing bounce, it's a good time to delve more deeply
into the detailed CBS News/New York Times results and highlight the many ways
his political vulnerabilities have re-emerged as this bounce has dissipated.
....
All this indicates that the brief bounce in support Bush
got from Saddam's capture did not have a lasting effect on the broad vein of
skepticism that the public has about Bush, his policies and their effect on the
country. That skepticism remains and is likely to dog him througout this
critical election year.
208. robertjayb - 1/20/2004 11:53:46 AM
Which demonstrates Holy Joe's wisdom in staying away from Iowa.
209. judithathome - 1/20/2004 11:53:53 AM
There is, of course, totally unbiased coverage of Dean's reaction on the Drudge Report right now...take your cue from the headline: Dean Goes Nuts
210. jexster - 1/20/2004 11:56:03 AM
Sorry, I should never link before first coffee
211. concerned - 1/20/2004 12:05:58 PM
Well, with Gephardt out, I'd say Lieberman is the most statesmanlike of the remaining Democrat candidates, but he's toast because a lot of Democrats won't vote for a Jewish president.
212. jexster - 1/20/2004 12:06:43 PM
He's toast because he's weak.
213. jexster - 1/20/2004 12:07:48 PM
Two weeks ago Ace was chiriping about 'win-win and Pat Robertson was
receiving divine transmissions.
Now Ace is in a spiderhole
214. jexster - 1/20/2004 12:08:18 PM
statesman=peddler of Bush lies
215. vonKreedon - 1/20/2004 12:08:40 PM
Con - Please explain why it is that Dems won't nominate Lieberman because he's Jewish, as opposed to because his policy positions aren't supported by most dems?
216. concerned - 1/20/2004 12:14:41 PM
Re. 215 -
Even though it's not warranted, many LWers associate his
religion with Israel which is a nation that a number of Lefties do not favor.
Then, there's the well known tension between Jews and certain other Democrat
constituencies.
217. jexster - 1/20/2004 12:14:53 PM
A special thanks to George Bush for giving us such fine slogans! 
218. jexster - 1/20/2004 12:15:38 PM
Without 9-1-1, this guy would be Gerald Ford II
219. judithathome - 1/20/2004 12:17:26 PM
Then, there's the well known tension between Jews and certain other
Democrat constituencies.
Being coy does nothing for your biases,
Concerned...why not say what you mean?
220. concerned - 1/20/2004 12:17:50 PM
In 216, I should have posted: "Even though it's not warranted, many LWers have trouble getting past his religious association with Israel which is a nation that a number of Lefties do not favor."
221. concerned - 1/20/2004 12:18:26 PM
Re. 219 -
JAH -
Now you think I'm a Democrat?
222. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/20/2004 12:19:52 PM
vk - I base my appraisal of Dean's shortcomings mostly from footage I've seen
on Cspan or The News Hour and it seems obvious to me that he isn't socially
astute—that is to say he doesn't get it when it comes to spontaneous interaction
with people—he doesn't know how he appears to others and now that it's becoming
more important (the personality factor), he is overshooting the runway by miles.
Just as a funny aside, he was interviewed by a female
interviewer/comedian on The Daily Show last night who was blatantly laughing to
all his sincere attempts to address her first serious question. He just didn't
get the fact that she was ridiculing him—or he realized he was on camera and
just had to cope. However, at the end, she asked, "Well can I at least have a
hug?" Dean complied and read her request as if she was looking for sympathy. It
was a ludicrous which was exactly what the woman wanted. He just wants it too
bad now and I think he's going to sink faster than he rose.
223. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/20/2004 12:22:01 PM
ludicrous moment
224. concerned - 1/20/2004 12:24:53 PM
Okay, here's my prediction: Kerry and Edwards— Bush will be Repug Roadkill
come November 3rd.
Haunting words.
225. Magoseph - 1/20/2004 12:31:15 PM
Two weeks ago Ace was chiriping about 'win-win and Pat Robertson was
receiving divine transmissions.
How do you know that?
226. judithathome - 1/20/2004 12:44:00 PM
that is to say he doesn't get it when it comes to spontaneous interaction
with people
As when he told that old, old man who was heckling him
about being so hard on Bush to shut up and sit down...bad form even if the old
coot deserved it. Someone like Kerry or Edwards would have finessed the
situation much more gracefully.
227. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/20/2004 1:07:03 PM
224. concerned - 1/20/2004 12:24:53 PM
Okay, here's my prediction:
Kerry and Edwards— Bush will be Repug Roadkill come November 3rd.
Haunting
words.
Not for me connie, but maybe for you.
Judith,
thanks—I'd forgotten about that episode.
228. jayackroyd - 1/20/2004 1:43:40 PM
I think you folks are all underestimating Edwards. He has the right message
on domestic issues. He showed enormous discipline in not going negative, and now
his NH results don't matter.
Then we go south.
229. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/20/2004 1:49:12 PM
Maybe, jay, but his inexperience with regard to war and foreign affairs weakens his appeal.
230. jayackroyd - 1/20/2004 1:50:23 PM
You mean like Bush? Or Clinton? Or Reagan? Or Carter?
231. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/20/2004 1:56:00 PM
You mean like Bush? Or Clinton? Or Reagan? Or Carter?
Yes,
because they were all pre 9/11. Do you really think Dubya would have been
elected if 9/11 was on Clinton's watch.
Mean while . . .
Republicans Warn
Bush on Spending, Deficits
Pelosi and Daschle Deliver Pre-Buttal to State of the Union Address
232. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/20/2004 1:57:08 PM
? meanwhile
233. jexster - 1/20/2004 2:06:35 PM
A Victory for Electablity?
The only thing that
matters to Democrats.....and with Bush demonstrably vulnerable and consistently
trailing the GEneric Democrat, just wait until he has to run against flesh and
blood.
234. vonKreedon - 1/20/2004 2:26:20 PM
I think that the Wiz is right about Edwards; his lack of experience in
foreign policy/security issues should keep him from being the Dem nominee. Even
if Dean was as well behaved as Edwards this should have kept him from being
viable as well.
The Dem nominee must be someone who's foreign
policy and military affairs experience puts Bush's to shame. This leaves only
Kerry and Clark as viable nominees.
235. jexster - 1/20/2004 3:27:57 PM
vK's got a rippin bad case of it...
Electability Fever - CATCH IT
236. jexster - 1/20/2004 3:29:46 PM
and so apparently do I..the first thing to go...hand eye coordination
A Victory for Electability
237. robertjayb - 1/20/2004 3:51:53 PM
Let us appreciate a good man, Dick Gephardt, moving on. A straight arrow and dull as dishwater. He never got above his raisin' and he danced, too long, it seems, with who brung him.
238. concerned - 1/20/2004 4:08:50 PM
Re. 237 -
True. He's more suited for the presidency than most of the
other Democrat candidates.
239. judithathome - 1/20/2004 4:28:26 PM
Hardly.
240. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/20/2004 4:35:00 PM
Faulty Logic on Dean's decline
241. wonkers2 - 1/20/2004 5:10:55 PM
Edwards could be a valuable running mate for the eventual nominee.
242. concerned - 1/20/2004 5:44:05 PM
Rank pulling REMF: Well, I don't think that's at all -- Senator (Dole),
with all due respect, he's a lieutenant and I'm a general. You got to get your
facts on this. He was a lieutenant in Vietnam. I've done all of the big
leadership.
Showdown in NH coming up.
243. jexster - 1/20/2004 6:21:21 PM
Gephardt Quits Presidential Race After Iowa Defeat
Likud
Lieberman to the guillotine please
244. Al D - 1/20/2004 6:29:13 PM
WoW
Bush will be Repug Roadkill come November 3rd.
I don't imagine you gamble, since you seem quite a prude about drinking,
but if you have any spare change to back up the above assertion, I'm willing to
take a risk. The amount can be anywhere between $500-$5,000. I would be willing
to let jay hold the bet, since he has been willing to identify himself, and I
think he is a very honorable person.
245. Al D - 1/20/2004 6:31:10 PM
The reason Lieberman could not be elected President as a Democrat is because he would not get a high % of the Black vote, and Dems. can not win in many states without 90% of the Black vote.
246. jexster - 1/20/2004 6:45:00 PM
NH will take care of Lieberman.
What's the black population of NH?
Anyone?
247. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/20/2004 6:47:41 PM
244. Al D - 1/20/2004 6:29:13 PM
WoW
Bush will be Repug Roadkill
come November 3rd.
I don't imagine you gamble, since you seem quite a prude
about drinking, but if you have any spare change to back up the above assertion,
I'm willing to take a risk. The amount can be anywhere between $500-$5,000. I
would be willing to let jay hold the bet, since he has been willing to identify
himself, and I think he is a very honorable person.
Well Al, first
yer talkin' to the son of a bookmaker and a compulsive gambler — I don't gamble.
Secondly, if you think I'm going to put money down on the whimsical decisions of
complacent and lazy Americans who spend little time doing their civic homework ,
influenced by a corporate media circus geared for dunderheads and the largest
political war chest (read bribe money) known to history, then you're dumber than
you are macho.
By the way, I just gave MoveOn.org a hundred dollars for
a new SOTU commercial. 
248. jexster - 1/20/2004 6:47:44 PM
But Al is right and without 90% vote from the freaked out fundie "Base", the
Cheney Regime hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of staying in power.
Now I'll be the first to say that I have major issues with the Base.
Al, do have one with colored folk?
249. jexster - 1/20/2004 6:51:09 PM
I only regret that the Democrats of California won't have the high honor of handing Mrs. Lieberman hubbie's head.
250. jexster - 1/20/2004 6:53:34 PM
Now Wiz, you know that vK has labored mightily to lower the temperature and
raise the tone on this thread.
Those little photo thingies you do piss
Al off no end, you realize that don't you?
251. jexster - 1/20/2004 6:58:23 PM
Wiz..speaking of MoveOn and pissing Al off...
Check out the SOTU ad..
The
Bush Medicare Swindle: Its Enough to Make You Sick Real Player
252. concerned - 1/20/2004 7:03:05 PM
C'mon, WoW. Just a little friendly wager. Al 'n Jay seem like stand-up guys.
253. Magoseph - 1/20/2004 7:22:24 PM
What's the black population of NH? Anyone?
Around 7%, I think,
Jex.
254. jexster - 1/20/2004 7:52:46 PM
Well so much for the Big Bad Negro theory..
FYI Josh
Marshall by popular demand of his Talking Points fans is on the campaign
trail. Now in NH...black ghetto of New England.
255. jexster - 1/20/2004 7:53:30 PM
I'll vouch for Al...not too sure about that Jay fella
256. jexster - 1/20/2004 9:20:21 PM
Kerry is followin on hard with email to supporters
Thank
You Iowa! On to New Hampshire!
There were three tickets out of Iowa -
and we won the gold. Two weeks ago, the pundits counted me out and called Iowa a
two-person race. They didn't count on Iowa voters.
Our campaign is on
the move -- up! We just turned the conventional wisdom on its head and defied
the pundits, because we listened to the voters -- and they listened to us and
not to the polls or the politicians.
https://contribute.johnkerry.com
This first place finish amounts to nothing less than thunderous victory
for our campaign. Front runner Howard Dean had it all. He had the endorsements
of Al Gore, Bill Bradley, and Tom Harkin. He had a record $41 million raised in
the off-year. He had a 20-point lead in Iowa and a 35-point lead in New
Hampshire. He should have beaten every other candidate by a mile -- but he
didn't.
The people of Iowa like our chances of sending George Bush back
to Crawford, Texas in November. They shouted it out of the heartland and shook
the political landscape.
Your support made a difference. I am truly
grateful to you for everything you do for this campaign -- this is not just my
victory, it's ours.
Now, on to New Hampshire! Here we face two
well-funded candidates, but we've got them on the run (we've pulled even with
Clark and we're coming up on Dean) and we're only just beginning. Governor
Jeanne Shaheen told me that we need results in Iowa and the funding to get out
our vote. We've delivered the results, now we need to deliver the funds.
I need your help,...
https://contribute.johnkerry.com
Thank you for your belief in our campaign -- it has made the difference.
On to New Hampshire,
257. vonKreedon - 1/20/2004 9:49:57 PM
Wiz - As Jex pointed out, most of your political art really is not
appropriate for this thread. You have the Politics thread, please keep this
thread for discussion of the elections.
Jex - Thanks for pointing that
out, but you then link to MoveOn's response to the SotU, this would be
appropriate for Politics. I appreciate that you have been posting your own
thoughts at some length in this thread; you have well formed opinions and
analysis and I look forward to seeing more of it.
Carry on.
258. concerned - 1/20/2004 10:17:05 PM
C'mon, people. Don't give up on Dean yet. Remember these?
23.
wonkers2 - 1/15/2004 3:36:16 AM
Clark/Edwards would be good, but I
prefer Dean/Edwards or Dean/Clark. The idea of someone going from General to
President doesn't work for me.
24. jayackroyd - 1/15/2004 3:39:01 AM
...Like I'm at this point committed to Dean as the best anti-Bush
candidate.....
47. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/15/2004 5:02:45 PM
Handsome?—if you find Bloodhounds appealing!
I sent his campaign a
donation early on, but switched my support (and many more donations) to Dean
because Kerry supported Bush on his Iraq War.
And I distinctly
recall jexster throwing his support to Dean earlier in the Politics thread. The
Ship of Dean is only listing and already you guys are deserting. There's a
decent chance he'll make up lost ground in NH. Maybe you people should be called
the Ficklecrats.
259. Al D - 1/20/2004 10:57:46 PM
Is Dean losing appeal from former supporters because he came in 3rd in Iowa or because of the way he behaved afterward?
WoW
Well, it is easy to spout off about the election, but obviously
you don't really mean what you say. And jexster is wrong about me being pissed
off about what you post. At first I was convinced you were a teenager that just
didn't know any better. Now I realize you are an adult that doesn't know any
better. It is somewhat of a mystery to me why people objectify humans as pigs
and monkeys. Well really, when you see what they want to do to those they
animalize, it is not much of a mystery, is it.
261. vonKreedon - 1/21/2004 2:44:24 AM
WoW post #260 has been deleted.
Wiz - Take your attitude elsewhere.
262. wonkers2 - 1/21/2004 9:35:32 AM
I would like to see the post that you deleted. Why didn't you send it to the Inferno. The Mote doesn't benefit from over-weening censors or would-be czars.
263. wonkers2 - 1/21/2004 9:41:00 AM
Dem establishment favorites Kerry and Clark may kill each other off in New Hampshire as Dean and Gephardt did in Iowa.
264. vonKreedon - 1/21/2004 10:12:12 AM
I will move to the Inferno in the future. I hope that will not be necessary.
The post consisted of taunting Al and Con, telling me to shove this
thread up my ass, and a cartoon lampooning the SotU address.
265. concerned - 1/21/2004 11:15:21 AM
If WoW gratuitously included me in one of his insult fests, I feel no particular need to see it regurgitated.
266. judithathome - 1/21/2004 11:18:57 AM
VonK, I think Al ought to get a little chide, also...he isn't immune to button pushing himself.
267. jexster - 1/21/2004 12:02:33 PM
Tracking poll who's got a tracking poll....Dean is in trouble...
Not unexpectedly, John Kerry has made a big jump in this morning's
ARG tracking poll. The Numbers: Dean 26%, Kerry 24%, Clark 18%.
The poll
analysis reads ...
While Howard Dean has a 2 percentage-point lead over
John Kerry in the 3-day average, Kerry has a 1 percentage-point lead in the
2-day average (sample size of 508 likely Democratic primary voters) and Kerry
has a 5 percentage-point lead in the one-day sample on January 20 (the sample
size of 302 likely Democratic voters, theoretical margin of error ± 6 percentage
points). Also, from January 19 to January 20, Wesley Clark is up 1 percentage
point and John Edwards is up 3 percentage points. There is no change for Joe
Lieberman.
Zogby is also running a tracking NH tracking poll now and his
numbers (Dean 25%, Kerry 23%, Clark 16%) are broadly similar.
-- Josh
Marshall
268. judithathome - 1/21/2004 12:07:41 PM
The Ship of Dean is only listing and already you guys are deserting.
I'm wondering why it is LWers don't have the option of changing their
minds? I must have missed that page in the handbook where it says "You will
choose a candidate and stick with him no matter what; it is verboten to change
your support once you choose."
I thought that sort of rule was only in
the RIGHT Wingers Handbook!
269. jexster - 1/21/2004 12:11:18 PM
Electability fever - Catch it!
270. concerned - 1/21/2004 12:13:17 PM
Poll Shows Kerry Surge in New Hampshire
There are now seven
dwarves since they have already consumed two of their own. Dean initially surged
to a big lead as an inflammatory 'anti-Bush' and now Kerry threatens to take the
brass ring from him as the 'anti-Dean' in NH. The NH primary could well be
pivotal to the hopes of both Dean and Kerry given its proximity to their home
turfs, although Dean will be in the running at least into March, regardless of
how it goes for him now, given the support he has from hardcore Bush haters. A
good showing in NH will be important to Weasley also, since Edwards could
potentially eat his lunch if he does similarly or better than Clark there.
271. jexster - 1/21/2004 12:16:47 PM
You are so right TD....it will be hard to knock Dean out with 41 million in
the kitty and a strong CA field op.
He'd be a fool to drop out before
March 3rd. Clark, Kerry and Edwards are certainly more likely to do so esp
Edwards but my hunch is that all four will be in Super Tuesday.
272. jexster - 1/21/2004 12:17:22 PM
Lieberman ought to go back to DC and register as the agent of a foreign government
273. jexster - 1/21/2004 12:18:27 PM
That would be the "statesman" like thing to do wouldn't it?
274. concerned - 1/21/2004 12:25:09 PM
Re. 268 -
JAH -
I just think what happened in Iowa was
somewhat amusing since it seemed apparent enough to me that Dean's popularity
didn't have much of a chance to hold up for the long haul or at least that he
would eventually say too much that was indefensible not to hurt his electoral
chances at some point. I was a little surprised that he imploded in Iowa so
quickly, though.
I even had a rather spirited discussion a week ago with
a (then Dean supporting - I don't know what his position is at this moment)
brother in law about this and the fact that Dean was digging himself into a hole
with his over-the-top accusations. But, no, my brother in law insisted that Dean
was the man because he had so much obvious 'enthusiasm' and 'spirit'.
275. jexster - 1/21/2004 12:29:04 PM
Lest any doubt that Lieberman is toast...first he slings RNC/Drudge sludge
now this..the final nail in his coffin
Lieberman on Tuesday
received the endorsement of the conservative Manchester Union Leader newspaper,
which called him a "man of conviction" and urged independent voters to consider
supporting him in the Democratic primary.
The endorsement drew a
rebuke of Lieberman from state Democratic Party Chairman Kathleen Sullivan. "I'm
very disappointed that he accepted the Union Leader endorsement," she told
reporters. "The Union Leader has not stood with Democratic principles for
decades, and it really breaks my heart to see someone I respect so much accept
an endorsement from that newspaper."
276. concerned - 1/21/2004 12:33:14 PM
Re. 273 -
Ha!
277. jexster - 1/21/2004 1:06:49 PM
You've heard the old saying "You can't beat something with nothing?"
Nothing 45 Something (however meager!) 43...
On the
generic horse race question for 2004, 43 percent say they'd vote for Bush, while
45 percent say they'd support the Democratic candidate. That's down from a 9
point lead Bush had after Saddam was captured and, again, is several points
weaker than he was peforming before the capture.
Address Takes Campaign Criticism Into Account
Analysis:
Bush's reactive tone showed his consciousness of Democratic candidates' attacks.
All in due time little monkey all in due time...
278. judithathome - 1/21/2004 1:28:03 PM
I was a little surprised that he imploded in Iowa so quickly, though.
To be honest, he had a lot of help from the media.
279. wonkers2 - 1/21/2004 1:28:07 PM
Has he gotten Ariel Sharon's endorsement yet?
280. judithathome - 1/21/2004 1:29:18 PM
By that I meant if you tell the public loudly enough and often enough that a
man is insane, they will start to believe it.
Unless, of course, the man
is Bush.
281. vonKreedon - 1/21/2004 1:34:58 PM
Jon Stewart led with Dean's "concession" speech last night. He certainly
looked and sounded like a man in search of a bar fight. The media can harp on
his anger managment problems, but it only has any traction if he gives them
video demonstrating this.
Jon also showed Ted Kennedy introducing Kerry.
Ted didn't look like he was angry, but he did look like his tie was WAY too
tight, and his head might just explode.
282. judithathome - 1/21/2004 2:26:25 PM
but it only has any traction if he gives them video demonstrating
this.
Anyone who watches reality TV (as I'm sure most of you don't)
knows that things aren't always how they seem when the tapes are played. I'm not
saying Dean hasn't made some really huge goofs. Yes, he has given them pleanty
of ammo but just as the Clark quote was passed around out of context over the
weekend and taken up as something "he said", much of the angry, wild-eyed,
raving idiot stuff about Dean has been exaggerated and taken out of sequence.
283. wonkers2 - 1/21/2004 3:52:16 PM
Dean was just trying to pump up his troops. NBD.
284. wonkers2 - 1/21/2004 3:53:13 PM
Why don't we try to focus on substance (policies and programs) not style or the spouse's hairdo.
285. wonkers2 - 1/21/2004 3:54:38 PM
Cap'n Dirty sez "The Cap'n could go fer the Missus Kerry. She's a looker and smart, too!"
286. Magoseph - 1/21/2004 3:59:05 PM
And I sez that I could go fer the Mister Kerry. He is smart and a looker too!
287. wonkers2 - 1/21/2004 4:00:07 PM
Ha! Not compared to The Cap'n!
288. vonKreedon - 1/21/2004 4:02:43 PM
Wonk - I think that we need to focus both on substance and image. And I am afraid that of the two image is the more crucial to getting elected.
289. wonkers2 - 1/21/2004 4:05:53 PM
True. We need a little of Edwards to rub off on Kerry and/or Dean. For me there's something off-putting about both of them. Edwards is almost as slick as "Slick Willy." But I doubt he measures up on policy knowledge.
290. concerned - 1/21/2004 4:20:04 PM
And I am afraid that of the two image is the more crucial to getting
elected.
You have that right, at least with regard to the current
Democrat presidential candidates. It's unfortunate for the Donkey Party that the
'too sedate' Gephardt has already bowed out and that Lieberman's getting no
respect while 'Mr. Popularity's' blowing gaskets.
291. concerned - 1/21/2004 4:24:57 PM
What does anybody want to bet that Howard Dean won't be on a tranquilizer during the next Democrat Candidate debate?
292. concerned - 1/21/2004 4:28:38 PM
Re. 286 -
He looks like something out of the '60's TV series the
'Addams Family' to me.
'You Rannnnnggg?'
293. Magoseph - 1/21/2004 4:42:07 PM
State of the Union: Long on Long, Short on Lofty"
Talking
about image, here is candidate Bush's image to the world!
We like a
confident president, but we don't like a cocky president, and George W. Bush had
too many moments of cockiness last night as he delivered his third State of the
Union address to both houses of Congress and the viewing nation. Often the words
of the speech were written to sound lofty, but Bush had such a big
Christmas-morning grin on his face that they came out sounding like taunts --
taunts to the rest of the world or taunts to Democrats in the hall.
294. judithathome - 1/21/2004 4:47:19 PM
You have that right, at least with regard to the current Democrat
presidential candidates.
Yes, because god knows, the Bloated
Pachyderm Party has a candidate that looks perfect. Forget that he looks like a
confused chimpanzee half the time and walks like one, too. He is what America
and Concerned want...a damned good looking chimpanzee!
Concerned, for a
centrist, you certainly betray which way you skew...
295. judithathome - 1/21/2004 4:48:18 PM
toys!
296. vonKreedon - 1/21/2004 4:51:24 PM
Please, I beg of you all, do not use this thread as a venue for taunt and
insult fests, we have the Inferno for such activities.
Thanks.
297. judithathome - 1/21/2004 4:58:47 PM
Strangely, given my penchant for picking on Concerned, I like the way Edwards
has kept his campaign "nice" and yet, he has admitted if attacked, he will
defend himself and give back what is thrown his way. I think the people in Iowa
liked that he kept a positive approach to his campaigning and it showed in the
way he rose in the numbers the last part of the week.
I don't know how
long he can maintain this position or this approach but it is rather refreshing
to see it attempted on a national level.
298. vonKreedon - 1/21/2004 5:02:10 PM
The Edwards surge was very interesting. Typically people say that they want positive campaigns and hate how negative campaigning has become, BUT when push becomes shove the negative campaign wins. Edwards appeared to reverse that convention, at least in Iowa. I do wonder what that strategy will be like once Edwards becomes the target of negative attention.
299. wonkers2 - 1/21/2004 5:32:23 PM
Re: #296. I assume your edict won't stop us from pointing out what a lieing asshole our President is. As I've pointed out before Moties only go from good to excellent.
300. vonKreedon - 1/21/2004 5:35:29 PM
Wonk - Right, within the confines of discussing the upcoming elections, the candidates are fair game for invective, mindless or thoughtful (not that Thoughtful is given to invective). I just want us to treat each other with more curiosity and respect than that.
301. robertjayb - 1/21/2004 6:09:39 PM
Safire, a slimy but masterful word-wrangler, is on his game in
this Dean piece...
...the qualities that made him a great
underdog made him a disaster as a front-runner. The engaging feistiness was soon
taken to be calculated anger; the Trumanesque cockiness, as he surged ahead, was
seen as smug arrogance. He reveled in the opinion polls and became a sore
winner, but piqued too soon.
302. jexster - 1/21/2004 6:16:54 PM
Democrats 2004 - The Military Vote?
You bet. Attack from the right.
PORTSMOUTH, N.H. (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Wesley
Clark (news - web sites) played to his strengths on Wednesday, stressing his
military experience to veterans and promoting his foreign policy credentials by
pledging to "clean up the mess" in Iraq (news - web sites).
Running third in the Reuters/MSNBC/Zogby tracking poll in New
Hampshire, the retired Army general aggressively courted veterans, who make up a
sizable voting bloc in the state, with rival Democrat John Kerry (news - web
sites), a Vietnam war hero, also seeking their support.
303. jexster - 1/21/2004 6:28:26 PM
Aside from Joe Lieberman, he said, none of the major Democratic contenders
have substantial negatives with New Hampshire voters. The state’s voters support
one candidate or another, but they tend to like the other ones, too
Marshall on the Kerry Cam
