Jedi Council Forums - Official 2004 US Elections Thread

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 » - ~~Previous~~ | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Official 2004 US Elections Thread
Obi-Wan McCartney Registered: Aug '99	Date Posted: 7/6/04 5:44am Subject: Official 2004 US Elections Thread - Date Edited: 11/3/04 4:43am (6 edits total) Edited By: Kimball_Kinnison
	The following political offices will be up for election on November 2nd, 2004. All have been verified based on Politics1.com and Yahoo Elections search. During the course of any discussion, the following terms should be used in descriptions of political campaigns. LOCK A Lock means that the incumbent and/or challenger, short of some sort of biblical disaster, is virtually assured of re-election to the point that it will be a no-contest, slam dunk affair. Favored A Favored rating means the candidate seems to have certain things in their factor and is in all likely hood heading to re-election, but is by no means assured of re-election on the same vice. Bad misteps, the opposition putting out a good candidate, but for this person to lose would be an upset at the time I write this. TossUp Depending on whom is sent up against him, a FAVORED or LOCk can become a TOSS UP, if the conditions are right; also for states which have a tradition of one thing but a senator who stands for something else. This really is just what it means, that it could go either way, and at the time of this writing, regardless of mis-steps or disasters, or what the opposition does. Vulnerable Candidates who are vulnerable are candidates, for example, who have been caught up in a major scandal; who are running states which in all likelyhood won't re-elect that person. A candidate has to be in major trouble to be VULNERABLE. OPEN - If a candidate has chosen not to run for Re-Election, or is being Term Limited out in certain governors races, then the seat is OPEN, with no incumbent holding the seat. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Candidates for the office of PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA George W Bush, Incumbent Senator John F Kerry -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES *All 438 US House Seats will be up for Re-Election/Election in November 2nd, 2002. Vacancies could occur between now and then, for example, if a person dies while in office, steps down to run for a different office, and such. There could be more re-districting in several states. Key Information 1) Texas Redistricting, expecting to add as many as a dozen new seats for the GOP in Texas. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- United States Senators up for Re-Election in 2004 Senators whose Terms of Service Expire in 2005 DEMOCRATS Bayh, Evan Indianna- Boxer, Barbara-CA. Breaux, John-LA has announced his retirement, making this a Open Seat Dodd,Christophter-CT . Daschle, Tom-SD- Dorgan,BYron-ND . Edwards,John-NC has announced he will not seek Re-Election, making this an Open Seat Feingold,Russel-WI Graham,Bob-FL has announced he will not seek Re-Election, making this an Open Seat Hollings,Ernest-SC has announced he will not seek Re-Election, making this an Open Seat Inyonee,Daniel-HA Leahy,Patrick-VT Lincoln, Blanche-ARK Mikulski,Barbara-MD Miller, Zell- GA - Senator Zell Miller has announced he will not run for Re-Election in 2004, making this an Open Seat. Murray,Patty- WA. Reid, Harry- NV Schumer, Charles- NY Wyden, Ron- OR . Republicans Bennett, Robert-Utah Bond, Christopher-MO Brownback, Sam- KS Bunning, Jim-KY Campbell, Nighthorse-CO Crapo, Mike-ID Fiztgerald, Peter-IL has announced he will not seek Re-Election, making this an Open Seat Grassley, Chuck-IA Gregg, Judd-NH. McCain, John- AZ I Murkowski, Lisa-ALaska Nickels, Don- OK Shelby, Richard- AL Specter, Arlen- PA- **Voinovich, George- OH -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State Governorships up on November 2nd, 2002 Montana- Governor Judy Martz (R), Incumbent Washington- Governor Gary Locke (D), Incumbent. Delaware- Governor Ruth Ann Minner (D), Incumbent North Carolina- Governor Mike Easley (D), Incumbent. West Virginia- Governor Bob Wise (D), Incumbent Indiana- Governor Frank O'Bannon (D) is being term limited out in 2004, making this an Open Seat. North Dakota- Governor John Hoeven (R), Incumbent. Utah- Governor Mike Leavitt (R), Incumbent Missouri- Governor Bob Holden (D), Incumbent Vermont- Governor Jim Douglas (R) Incumbent =================================================== Ok, finally we now know Kerry's Veep choice. Some may call it the "safe" choice, but in an election this close, I think the Democrats are best served with Edwards. Most interesting will be the debates between Edwards and Cheney. Was anyone surprised? How do people the race will play out now that the Democrats have chosen a full ticket? This thread was initially started with the permission of Kimball, of which I was unaware. As such, I will re-open it. My apologies to ObiWanMcCartney. KK EDIT: Fixing markup/capitalization errors. KK EDIT #2: Locking. -----signature----- God Bless J-Rod's Wife! Obi-Wan McCartney: Model Forum Member since 1999! America's Beatles are far better than England's precious Rolling Stones
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Vaderize03 Title: Manager Emeritus Registered: Oct '99	Date Posted: 7/6/04 8:17am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney
	Good move on Kerry's part. While inexperienced, and undoubtedly going to come under attack by republicans for it, Edwards charm is a nice counterbalance to Kerry's dryness and just might win him some battleground votes. We shall see. Peace, V-03 -----signature----- "Bring your pretty face to my axe....." B-O-H-I-C-A !! (that was funny DM!) "I'm what Willis was talking about"
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Obi-Wan McCartney Registered: Aug '99	Date Posted: 7/6/04 8:28am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney
	Here is some info about Edwards from his Senate Website: ====================================================== Sworn into office on January 6, 1999, Senator John Edwards has emerged as a champion for issues affecting the daily lives of regular people in North Carolina and the nation. Senator Edwards was a chief sponsor of the Bipartisan Patient Protection Act, strong and far-reaching patient protection legislation that passed the Senate in 2001. Senator Edwards’s bipartisan accomplishments also include a major investment in America’s public schools, strong antiterrorism measures, modernization of the nation’s banking system, sweeping campaign finance reform and legislation to fight corporate corruption. The News & Observer of Raleigh described Senator Edwards as “smart, disciplined, [and] hard-working” with “a down-home manner.” The Wall Street Journal called him a senator who “impresses colleagues in behind-doors deliberations.” The Washington Post said Senator Edwards has “the ability to think on his feet...master complex issues and...communicate in plain language to ordinary people.” Senator Edwards serves on four committees: Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Intelligence; Judiciary; and Small Business. As part of his commitment to North Carolina, Senator Edwards has been to all 100 counties in the state, from Murphy (where he went to a college) to Manteo (where he honored Andy Griffith). Every week that the Senate is in session, he hosts Tar Heel Thursday, town-hall style meetings open to all North Carolinians visiting Washington. Born in 1953, Senator Edwards grew up in Robbins, a small town in the Piedmont. His father, Wallace, worked in textile mills for 36 years. His mother, Bobbie, had a number of jobs including working at the post office. A product of North Carolina public schools, Senator Edwards was the first person in his family to go to college. He worked his way through North Carolina State University and graduated with an honors degree in textiles in 1974. He earned a law degree with honors in 1977 from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He met his wife, Elizabeth, when both were law school students at Chapel Hill. They married in 1977, and have had four children. Their first child, Wade, died in 1996. Their eldest daughter, Catharine, is a student at Princeton University. The Edwards household also includes a six-year-old daughter, Emma Claire, and a four-year-old son, Jack. ==================================================== For balance, here is what the RNC is saying about Edwards. It's long and you can tell they have been preparing this for a while. It starts out with Kerry's own attacks and then the launch into their own. -----signature----- God Bless J-Rod's Wife! Obi-Wan McCartney: Model Forum Member since 1999! America's Beatles are far better than England's precious Rolling Stones
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Cyprusg Registered: Nov '02	Date Posted: 7/6/04 8:43am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney
	I love it. Great move on Kerry's part. -----signature----- The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Crix-Madine Registered: Aug '00	Date Posted: 7/6/04 9:28am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney
	Best move he could have made, period. -----signature----- The will is everything. If you make yourself more than just a man, if you devote yourself to an ideal, you become something else entirely. Are you ready to begin?
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
JediSmuggler Registered: Jun '99	Date Posted: 7/6/04 9:57am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney - Date Edited: 7/6/04 10:31am (1 edits total) Edited By: JediSmuggler
	Edwards is going to help Kerry a little in terms of votes from women. However, there are some big problems that selecting Edwards has created. * The Chamber of Commerce will be working against Kerry/Edwards. For a Democrat to win the Presidency, they have to keep the Chamber of Commerce on the sidelines. There will be a backlash from business that will lead to action. There is a visceral dislike of trial lawyers. * Edwards will hurt Kerry in places where medical malpractice premiums have forced doctors to close up shop. Pennsylvania is one of those states. So is Florida. The "lawyer tax" created by class-action lawsuits is an issue now. * Face it, Kerry courted McCain big-time and got spurned. Edwards is his second choice. Kerry even took some shots at Edwards in the primary. This could be painted as another Kerry flip-flop. * Edwards might not really help in the South. It wasn't even a sure thing that he would win re-election. He retired to run for President. Gephardt would have been a much better choice, IMO, but he was probably viewed at too hawkish. Edwards does shore Kerry up with the anti-corporate wing of the Democratic party. The problem is, business will not sit still for the selection of Edwards. EDIT: Fixing a messed-up tag... -----signature----- The military-industrial complex has kept America strong and safe.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
DarthKarde Registered: Jun '02	Date Posted: 7/6/04 10:01am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney
	A sensible move on the part of Kerry. The two contrast each other nicely. -----signature----- The UK Independance Party - http://www.ukip.org The Freedom Association - http://www.tfa.net Better Off Out - http://www.betteroffout.co.uk Say NO2ID and the database state - http://www.no2id.net/
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
KnightWriter Title: Administrator Emeritus Registered: Nov '01	Date Posted: 7/6/04 10:03am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney
	Well, I think this is a fantastic move on Kerry's part, and certainly moves me solidly into their camp. I'm a moderate, but Bush (and perhaps more importantly) his administration must be removed from office. It would be dangerous to this country to give them four more years. Edwards is charismatic, intelligent and quick-witted. He'll hold his own in the debates and do a superb job of campaigning. People who paint Kerry's selection of Edwards as another flip-flop wouldn't have voted for him anyway. Let them throw another dart at him. For people like me, this is a move that puts us solidly behind John Kerry in November. We'll see if it lasts. -----signature----- Opposing Scrooge Economics since 2009
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
dizfactor Registered: Aug '02	Date Posted: 7/6/04 10:07am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney
	The Chamber of Commerce will be working against Kerry/Edwards. For a Democrat to win the Presidency, they have to keep the Chamber of Commerce on the sidelines. There will be a backlash from business that will lead to action. There is a [i]visceral[/i[ dislike of trial lawyers. i'm afraid to admit you may have a point here. however, i think that his energy and charisma will help motivate the Democratic base like none of the other contenders could have, and that has to be their first priority. hopefully, it will be enough. Everyone knows John McCain was Kerry's first choice for VP. And Kerry courted him quite a bit. Edwards was his second choice. the very public courtship was a really bad move on Kerry's part. i think, honestly, that McCain believes Kerry is the better man for the job, and i don't doubt that he, personally, will vote for Kerry once he's inside the booth. he has a deep bond of mutual respect and a long history of working with Kerry, and he clearly thinks Bush is an *******. that said, whatever you want to say about a "unity" ticket, McCain would basically have to leave the Republican Party. he's on tenuous ground within the party to begin with, and that would burn all the bridges he has left. i think McCain is still a Republican, still proud to be a Republican, and most importantly feels he can serve his country better as the unofficial leader of the quasi-moderate faction of the GOP than he could by essentially surrendering the party to Karl Rove and Cheney and DeLay and the rest. and, frankly, i think he's right. i'd rather him be working on reforming the GOP from within than see him switch sides. even if it would mean a slam-dunk for Kerry in November, long-term it's better to have reasonable people on the right than to win any single election, even this one. courting him so publicly was monumentally stupid for Kerry. -----signature----- "Play is going to be for the 21st century what steam was to the 19th century." Julian Dibbell "You gotta love an elite killing force that you can fool by putting on a hat." Gryph
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Vaderbait Registered: Sep '01	Date Posted: 7/6/04 10:25am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney
	I like Edwards, but he won't help much, I don't think. He didn't do too fantastic in the primaries, remember. Personally, I think Bush/Cheney is favored for the presidency. The debates will help them out, too. Bush is more likable and straight to the point than Kerry, and will easily make Kerry look like he's trying to fool the AMerican public. However, I think Edwards has the edge on Cheney in likability, but Cheney knows more about the world and things.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
ShaneP Title: Lucasfilm Projects Gremlin(Manager ) Registered: Mar '01	Date Posted: 7/6/04 10:26am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney - Date Edited: 7/6/04 10:28am (1 edits total) Edited By: ShaneP
	Referring to McCain as a "moderate" just shows how conservative this country has become. The real Reagan legacy. McCain is about as big a spending cutter as you will find in either chamber. Well, except for Ron Paul. They both are solid Goldwater-Reagan Republicans. -----signature----- Keep Your Words Sweet. You May Have To Eat Them.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Crix-Madine Registered: Aug '00	Date Posted: 7/6/04 10:28am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney - Date Edited: 7/6/04 10:29am (2 edits total) Edited By: Crix-Madine
	Face it, Kerry courted McCain big-time and got spurned. I imagine the Kerry camp realized that he probably wouldn't cross over to run with Kerry. However, given the ticket possibility it was too much to pass up. That kind of ticket would spell doom for the Bush administration and isn't something you do not make an attempt at. They knew from the beginning the chances were slim. Edwards is a fantastic choice. I'm behind Kerry no matter what, but this was the pick I called from the beginning and I think it's going to turn out fantastically. He didn't do too fantastic in the primaries, remember. Actually he did the best after Kerry. So from that standpoint he did pretty well. -----signature----- The will is everything. If you make yourself more than just a man, if you devote yourself to an ideal, you become something else entirely. Are you ready to begin?
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
KnightWriter Title: Administrator Emeritus Registered: Nov '01	Date Posted: 7/6/04 10:29am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney
	They both are solid Goldwater-Reagan Republicans. And McCain holds the same Senate seat that Goldwater had, which I find fitting. Dennis Hastert blasted McCain for wanting to cut spending on Iraq, saying that McCain didn't know the meaning of sacrifice. What an unqualified fool (Hastert, that is). Moving on, I think Edwards' inexperience could be painted as a strength, if done right. He hasn't been absorbed by the hallways of Washington and is ready to learn on the job. -----signature----- Opposing Scrooge Economics since 2009
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Darth_Deus Registered: Dec '00	Date Posted: 7/6/04 10:30am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney
	I don't see anyway Bush can win this one. I don't hear anyone who voted for Gore in 2000 saying they will vote for Bush this time around. But I hear LOTS of people who voted for Bush saying they will vote for Kerry this time. Bush didn't win last time, he stole it. Face it, you know it's true. He didn't have the popular vote, and he won't get it this time either. -----signature----- * America's Most Wanted's 800th Capture! * http://www.amw.com/fugitives/brief.cfm?id=28102 *** Captured by yours truly....
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
ShaneP Title: Lucasfilm Projects Gremlin(Manager ) Registered: Mar '01	Date Posted: 7/6/04 10:32am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney - Date Edited: 7/6/04 10:37am (1 edits total) Edited By: ShaneP
	So let's see: We have a billionaire by marriage and a millionaire by birthright at the top of the tickets. We have a trial lawyer and big oil man at the bottom. Yehoo! Great choices. EDIT KW, when I first saw "unqualified fool" I thought it read "tool". lol. Either one would be fitting. I dislike most of the House republican leadership. DeLay is the worst. -----signature----- Keep Your Words Sweet. You May Have To Eat Them.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
KnightWriter Title: Administrator Emeritus Registered: Nov '01	Date Posted: 7/6/04 10:37am Subject: RE: It's Unofficially Official: Kerry/Edwards v. Bush/Cheney
	Bush didn't win last time, he stole it. Face it, you know it's true. He didn't have the popular vote, and he won't get it this time either. Could we please dispense with those kinds of comments here? It does nothing but detract from discussion. You don't need the popular vote to win the election in this country, and Bush wasn't the first president to win the election without winning the popular vote. You have to win the electoral vote, and that's what he did. End of story. I suggest we move on from 2000, except as it directly relates to the upcoming election. -----signature----- Opposing Scrooge Economics since 2009
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 » - ~~Previous~~ | Next | Reload