The All New United States 2004 National Elections COUNTDOWN!

DM -
I honestly hope we don't go through another nightmare nuclear election scenario of 2000 again. Sheesh.

I agree.

The campaign will really begin once the Dem nominee is finalized, but I don't think the GOP will start to unload until then.

Yes, although we are already seeing signs that the general election campaign has begun.

Bush has the tendency to lay traps and lull people into thinking he's easily beatable, and then he comes back and bites you in the arse.

This I 100 percent agree with. I think a lot of Bush's strategy is to get people to 'misunderestimate' him. If both he and Kerry have one thing in common, its the ability to fight when backed into a corner.

The Democrats cannot take anything for granted. I am happy that thus far Kerry has been an aggressive campaigner and not coasted at all.

OWM -

Deathstarr, good points all around.

Why thank you.

Now will you people let me get some work done!

 

Hey, I have a hypothetical for y'all (since we keep talking about the South, I just had to throw that in):

If Bush loses, who takes control/becomes the prominent person of the Republican party?


When Gore lost, there was nobody to take control of the Democrats, and consquently, there party began to fail. Will the same thing happen to the Republicans, or do they have a person who will rise to the top?

 

I still think that all these issues that all of you are talking about come in a very, very distant second to the economy. I still hold the belief that the only real issue for an average American in a voting booth is how much money he has in his pocket.

But maybe I am wrong.

 

JF,

Dennis Hastert, (who I might add, is from Illinois) is the Speaker of the House, and the most powerful Congressman.. I imagine he would have no trouble stepping up..

 

It the partial-birth abortion issue has more of an effect than you think, V03, especially to Southern voters. Social issues are extremely important here, especially with the anarchy going on in San Fransisco. People will definitely be concerned about it.

Concerned, yes. I am one of them. But they may not necessarily be concerned for the reasons you think. For example, as a very religious Catholic, you see this issue as an automatic disqualifier. To you, the fact that Mr. Kerry voted against the ban automatically seems to mean he is someone you cannot vote for. There are plenty of americans, a lot of them in the south, who feel the way you do.

But you don't represent the only mode of thought on this issue. Mr. Kerry voted against the act not because he supported the practice, but because he felt that the evidence behind the claim that it was "never medically necessary" was shoddy (as do a lion's share of the nation's physicians) and did not want to support congressional regulation of medical procedures. The failure to contain an exemption for the health of the mother didn't help either. The ends are the same, ergo he voted against the act, but the means are very, very different. It simply depends on which aspect you wish to focus on. For you, the ends are the final say on the matter, but others may focus on the means as well, even in the south .

Additionally, Mr. Kerry supports leaving late-term regulation of abortion to the states. This is by far nowhere near a "liberal" position; legally, it is quite conservative, as it a) shows support for states rights and b) follow the precedent laid down in Roe. Not very liberal at all, IMHO.

Also, I feel compelled to point out that the statistics showing overwhelming support for the ban tend to be skewed by pro-life groups. The support is strong for elective late-term abortion bans, but this drops off dramatically when no exception for the mother's life or health is added into the mix. I've said my piece on this issue numerous times in the abortion thread, so I will leave it at that.

The DOMA is probably even more of an issue here.

Agree with you 100% on this one. I think this will hurt him a lot more than abortion, IMHO.

Unemployment rate 5.6%, that's really not much of an issue (6.0% is considered full employment). The economy is in recovery. The deficit is bad, but Mondale tried to use that issue along with the exportation of jobs to Japan and such, and it didn't work, either.

Kerry isn't Mondale, and he isn't Dukakis. We are still down millions of jobs from when Bush took office, and, fault or not, he is going to take the blame for this, just like Clinton has taken the blame retroactively for a lot of missteps by the Bush Administration. The truth is probably a bit more muddled, but I do not cede the ground of firm economic recovery to this sitting president. Not yet.

I'm quite sure people also prefer the way Bush is handling terrorists than the way Clinton did, and Kerry will bring us back to that era. The GOP will surely make the valid comparisons of how each men would handle the War on Terror and captialize on that.

Maybe, maybe not. There are a lot of americans who don't particularly care for the way the GOP has handled the war on terror, and, since we remain free of attacks since 9/11 (for whatever reason), this could end up being a lot less of an issue than the republicans hope. They can beat the drum on war and terrorism, but if you have no health insurance, no job, you don't trust the president on either, and you're willing to give the other guy a chance, you aren't voting for Bush.

Don't forget also, there is a strong anti-Bush sentiment out there, not just amongst the left-wing fringe. And a great deal of liberal and democratic unity. This is rare for the donkey party; usually they fragment a great deal more than they have been. The GOP has done so well with a solid rallying around the leadership, and if the dems come together, Bush could lose. He refuses to ac

 

I refuse to accept that people must adopt a civic principle because of their religion. I know plenty of pro-choice CATHOLICS. I know plenty of pro-gay marriage supporters who avidly follow Christ.

Liberals manage to be devout religous people and civic liberals, there is no EXCUSE for people of religion to hold right wing views. The right has been hiding behind religion for too long.

 

McCartney, religion is what a person believes. If they believe that religion and believe it is true for everyone, then it will be a civic principle to one degree or another.

 

OWM, can I ask if you have abandoned any concept of standards here?

It seems like lately, every one of your posts contains a generalization or stereotype, and is focused on some form of "hatred, bigotry, or religion.."

Is everything ok, or are you just wrapped up in the process?

 

Well, Mr. 44, I suppose if you must know I have been playing a proxy game in order to annoy someone. What can I say, I am a bored law student with too much time on my hands, my girlfriend is thousands of miles away and most of my friends live in Chicago or SoCal, and I'vce become a political junkie. PM me if you really care to find out more.

Furthermore:

Republicans worried over the Economy

Bush's Bad Six Weeks Continues.

 

Well, I just wanted to find out if everything was ok..

Politics aside, I think we have a pretty good dynamic among the regulars here, and I wouldn't want anything to be wrong with anybody...

or maybe I'm just too nosy for my own good..

Anyway, your six week article illustrates what most people are thinking, at the moment.

I don't think the clear winner has to emerge before the WHite House actually begins to defend itself..

 

Thanks for the concern, Mr. 44. Honestly, I never get upset with any of you, ESPECIALLY those of you in this thread, I know my language can be jarring and annoying. And you Mr. 44, are my target audience most of the time, because on most issues, like me, you seem to be open to the possibilities. But when I go a little overboard usually its to shock and awe the hardliners on your side of the aisle.

And yes, that's why the protracted race is so great. The Bush White house helped bring down Dean, and they don't want to make that mistake with Kerry. Problem is, they can't attack him until he has clearly won the nomination. Which means Kerry is able to define himself for months before Bush can attack him, whereas Dean suffered from everyonedefining him first.

 

Politics aside, I think we have a pretty good dynamic among the regulars here, and I wouldn't want anything to be wrong with anybody...

Indeed.

For what its worth, the AFL-CIO endorsed Kerry.

EDIT:

OWM
Honestly, I never get upset with any of you, ESPECIALLY those of you in this thread, I know my language can be jarring and annoying...But when I go a little overboard usually its to shock and awe the hardliners on your side of the aisle.

Thats why when I'm President, you will be my Senior advisor.

 

Senior-MOST advisor?

8 months, 12 days until the forces of darkness are taken out of the White House.

"I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me! A day may come, when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of Fellowship. But it is not this day! This day? we fight!?

-Good stuff DS.

 

Warning to retentive Aussies, the following post uses liberal in a modern American manner.

Forces of darkness indeed. Why is it liberals must maintain this black and white world view proclaiming all who oppose liberal views are evil? Seriously you people need to wake up to reality and understand there are shades of grey.

 

Warning to retentive Aussies, the following post uses liberal in a modern American manner.


LoL!

 

It makes the overall result of self-loathing that much more enjoyable..



(I mean in a Robert Smith/Morrisey kind of way... )

 

Farraday, I was merely poking fun at TripleB. So its funny that since I said what he normally says, that you say what I normally say when I respond.

 

Ender_Sai:
Hang on, Kerry's record doesn't make him appear far left. Didn't he support Fritz Hollings, a Conservative Democrat, when most liberals wouldn't? I don't see Kerry as a far leftist, I see him a centre-left. Dean was more liberal than Kerry.

Nay, E_S, Kerry was far more liberal than Dean.

farraday:
Forces of darkness indeed. Why is it liberals must maintain this black and white world view proclaiming all who oppose liberal views are evil? Seriously you people need to wake up to reality and understand there are shades of grey.

I'm sure OWM was just being zealous. And it's conservatives, especially President Bush, that need to wake up to the fact you spoke of.

---

Anyway, as was mentioned the [b]AFL-CIO[/b] endorsed Senator Kerry today. My question: Did the AFL-CIO just do this because labor champion Rep. Richard Gephardt supported Kerry as well? Because there's no other conceivable explanation (besides the beating Bush factor) that the AFL-CIO would want to support a free trader/NAFTA supporter like Kerry.

 

But he still beat Edwards.
I fail to realize the significance this has when the only people voting were registered DNC supporters; only voting for what the DNC is touting will be the candidate.

It will be extremely tough for any Democrat. But there are other parts of the country too. Sometimes Southerners forget that.

The very same thinking can be applied to the DNC/Kerry strategery. Again, why not give the GOP TWO regions to worry about? By cedeing the south that just plays into Bush's 'misunderestimating' strategery.

Besides, issues like jobs, health care and national security will be large factors.

Who says these aren't big issues in The South? Those are probably the 3 biggest issues in the south. Have they not learned anything from the Gore campaign?

When Gore lost, there was nobody to take control of the Democrats, and consquently, there party began to fail.

If you subscribe to the Hillary in 2008 theory, Gore was only allowed to have the power because his 2 terms would have ended in '08. When he lost, The Clintons re-established their control. Kerry is their man. That's why Edwards isn't getting any DNC help.

 

Always nice having good discussion with ya, V03!

---

As far as Catholic doctrine goes, OWM, it has been decreed that no Catholic politician who advocates abortion shall receive Holy Communion by the Bishops. In my opinion, any Catholic who supports such in the law should be excommunicated. That's simply my religious opinion, though, not a political one (obviously, I don't advocate that these people be restrained from running or holding offices, et cetera).

 

They were talking about it today on the radio. John Kerry told the Teamsters President Hoffa that he was open to drilling in ANWAR, yet Kerry has vehemently led filibusters against any consideration of it.

Tells one story to one side, tells another to another. Kerry is learning to talk like Bill Clinton.

 

Crying wolf
Charles Krauthammer

February 20, 2004


WASHINGTON -- As the Democrats enter the final stages of their primary race, the emerging story is how the Republicans are preparing to go negative in the general election with a campaign of singular viciousness against John Kerry.

Kerry's spokespeople have already sounded the alarm, warning darkly that ``the right-wing smear machine'' is gearing up, and declaring amusingly that ``it's time for George W. Bush to call off his right-wing slime machine.''

When exactly was it called on? No matter. A CNN anchor dutifully picks up the theme, noting ``how ugly this is turning so early on.''

Republicans turning ugly?

You are an average citizen following the election campaign so far. What have you gleaned from the wall-to-wall cable news coverage of the candidates' debates, rallies and victory/concession speeches?

First, that President Bush has ``deceived'' (Al Sharpton), ``misled'' (John Kerry, Howard Dean), indeed, outright ``lied'' (Kucinich) us into a pointless and ruinous war that, as Kerry's chief campaign surrogate, Edward Kennedy, thunders, was ``made up in Texas'' for pure political advantage. Hence, Bush's hands are dripping with the blood of 500 brave soldiers who died for a lying president seeking better poll numbers.

Second, that his own personal military service was dishonorable: AWOL from the Air National Guard, declares Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe; perhaps even a ``deserter,'' the charge that Wesley Clark repeatedly refused to repudiate.

And these are just Bush's depredations abroad. At home, as John Edwards tells it at every campaign stop, there are little girls from the ``other America'' crying into the night because their dads, now with the blank stare of hopelessness on their faces, have lost their jobs. Why? So that ``Ken Lay and his boys'' (Dean) and other friends of this president could make obscene profits for their outsourcing ``Benedict Arnold companies'' (Kerry). And that's while Bush was at the same time despoiling the water, polluting the air and, by God, trying to kill the Arctic caribou to please his parasitic oil industry pals and to fatten up Halliburton.

Vote him out? Given all that, shouldn't the man be drawn and quartered? Rarely has there been a political assault more concentrated, more unrelenting, more unrebutted -- all occurring not as political advertising but on free media as campaign ``coverage.''

Part of this is serendipity. After Dean and Gephardt destroyed each other with mutually negative ads in Iowa, the other candidates became terrified of saying anything even mildly negative about their opponents. They directed all of their fire not inside the corral, as is usual in a primary battle, but outside -- at the president. As the intra-Democratic campaign turned kid gloves, the main competition among the candidates consisted of who could be more hyperbolic in delineating the crimes of George W. Bush.

Part of this, too, is the candidates' exploitation of media conventions. The cable channels all covered the Tuesday night victory/concession speeches, which the candidates invariably turned into opportunities to deliver their stump speeches to a national cable audience. Dean's Iowa scream is the counterexample that makes the case. The rule is: Forget the crowd, face the camera and denounce the president.

And now, after six weeks of carpet-bombing Bush, the Democrats are shocked -- shocked! -- that the Republicans might answer back with ``negativity.''

What, in fact, have the Republicans mustered? A single Internet ad about Kerry, the Senate's king of special interest money, denouncing special interests. And one speech by the Republican National Committee chairman on Kerry's conventional liberal (i.e. budget-cutting) positions on defense and intelligence.

The Republicans have yet to go after Kerry on his most critical vulnerability, his breathtaking penchant for reversing course for political convenience:

-- Votes against the Gulf W

 

That's rich, coming from you, DM, the man who had a Kerry/Clinton cigar joke as a sig for a while!

 

Hey, I'm not exactly representative of the RNC or the Bush re-election campaign, s&v. That was just an individual joke.

The article remains correct.

 

That cigar joke was freaking hilarious!


Anyway, that article, was it an op-ed? I mean, by the same token, he's SHOCKED that the Democrats are warning about a slime-machine? Come on, that's politics, of COURSE they are going to limit the fall-out! How long have the Bush people been whining about the convention bringing up negative news? It's just that the Democrats get the opening act, but the President will have his turn, he has the Presidential advantage, its only fair.

Besides, Clinton didn't spend his millions on TV ads going negative, he focused his millions on running distinct issue and candidate ads in 'under the radar' areas, Bush was PLANNING on staying above the fray and looking Presidential, but he's had a bad run of things, so has decided to get down off his presidential and pedastal. If the attacks on the President (hey, smart move by the Dems, the GOP wouldve done the same thing) hadn't worked, the President wouldn't have to go negative.

But he does, so the Kerry Camp is bracing themselves.

But hey, they already convinced me, I don't think Kerry is the best candidate, but he's certainly better than Bush. Even Bush Sr. was better than Bush. I almost wish Bush Sr. beat Clinton to change the space time continum to prevent Bush Jr. from his unpopular victory.