The Religious Left, Dean & the DNC, and our Republic.

Condi Rice will not be running.

I haven't a clue who the GOP will put up in '08.

My guess would be Frist, but he's probably a sure loser for them.

If Giuliani runs, I think he'd beat Hillary in a nationwide contest without much difficulty. Giuliani is a more liberal Republican, and wouldn't have as much trouble securing a State like California.

 

Change the constitution and make it Guiliani/Shwarzenegger and I might even vote for them! Two pro-choice pro-gay rights Republicans who can actually pull off a REAl compassionate conservative mantra!

 

Mark Warner is the Governor of Virginia. He's pretty good.

Anyway...would the conservative base show up for a moderate Republican like Guiliani, especially considering hes pro-choice and (I believe) pro-gay rights? These seem to be very important issues to the conservative base that may be tough to swallow...although hatred of Hillary may bring them out regardless.

I could see a Hillary/Wes Clark ticket. I still am not even close to certain that she will get the nom.

For the record, Asa Hutchinson announced today that he is running for Governor of Arkansas next year.

 

Don't lose sight of John McCain. He'll have all my support if he chooses to run.

 

DM, once again, Guiliani won't make it through the primaries.

 

Change the constitution and make it Guiliani/Shwarzenegger and I might even vote for them! Two pro-choice pro-gay rights Republicans who can actually pull off a REAl compassionate conservative mantra!

While I can agree with the huge appeal of that ticket, I must say I would rather masterbate with fiberglass insolation than vote for that ticket.

(Ouch...kinda hurts just thinking about that.)

 

We are in agreement J-Rod, although I like Ahnold, but not Guiliani.

Perhaps we can run as a ticket against them?

Anyway, I agree with JF, that Guiliani wouldn't make it out of the primaries.

 

I disagree strongly.

Giuliani couldn't secure his own party's nomination without abandoning his more liberal social positions, which will cost him not only the entire northeast, but california as well.

No-one likes a carpetbagger, and Giuliani does not have the kind of national prominence that will allow him to get away with moving to the right in a primary and then trying to get back to the center over the objections of the more conservative wing of the republican party, which currently dominates.

It will be a southerner vs (if the dems are smart) a southerner.

Peace,

V-03

 

V said

Giuliani couldn't secure his own party's nomination without abandoning his more liberal social positions, which will cost him not only the entire northeast, but california as well.

I disagree. I think Giuliani almost certainly will carry most of the "blue states" during the nomination process. While that won't be enough to secure the nomination, it will give him a lot of delegates. Depending on whom is opposing him, it could mean the GOP goes to their Convention without a nominee, in which case delegates would have to select one, and it coudl well be Rudi at that time.

No-one likes a carpetbagger,

The State of New York sure likes a carpetbagger!!! They elected Hillary, didn't they?

and Giuliani does not have the kind of national prominence that will allow him to get away with moving to the right in a primary and then trying to get back to the center over the objections of the more conservative wing of the republican party, which currently dominates.

Rudy Giuliani almost singlehandedly kept Bill Simon , a convervitive facing Democrat Gray Davis's 70 Million Dollar+ Re-Election doldrum, of which nearly 60 million of it was spent in attack ad's, kept him in the race. If he can do that in a bluer-then blue state like California, he can make it close in southern states as well.

It will be a southerner vs (if the dems are smart) a southerner.

We can only wait and see.

 

The State of New York sure likes a carpetbagger!!! They elected Hillary, didn't they?

The State of Texas sure likes a carpetbagger!!! They elected Dubyah Gov, didn't they?

 

The State of Texas sure likes a carpetbagger!!! They elected Dubyah Gov, didn't they?

At least Bush had actually lived in, worked in, and had a record of establishment in the State of Texas, didn't he? HIllary did not even have a NY driver's licence when she first ran and had never lived there, so your little slur is not going to fly!!!

 

The State of Texas sure likes a carpetbagger!!! They elected Dubyah Gov, didn't they?

That really doesn't wash to me. I see Bush as a natural Texan, even if he technically isn't.

 

Dean just keeps digging himself deeper and deeper.... Even Joe Biden is distancing himself from Dean.

IMHO, its unfortunate that the Dems don't have a more rational leader.

In S.F., Dean calls GOP 'a white Christian party'
- Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer
Tuesday, June 7, 2005



Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean, unapologetic in the face of recent criticism that he has been too tough on his political opposition, said in San Francisco this week that Republicans are "a pretty monolithic party. They all behave the same. They all look the same. It's pretty much a white Christian party."

"The Republicans are not very friendly to different kinds of people," Dean said Monday, responding to a question about diversity during a forum with minority leaders and journalists. "We're more welcoming to different folks, because that's the type of people we are. But that's not enough. We do have to deliver on things: jobs and housing and business opportunities."

The comments are another example of why the former Vermont governor, who remains popular with the party's grassroots, has been a lightning rod for criticism since being elected to head the Democratic National Committee last February. His comments last week that Republicans "never made an honest living in their lives," which he later clarified to say Republican "leaders," were disavowed by leading Democrats including Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.

Dean was outspoken -- as usual -- as he trolled California this week, stoking his party's coffers, and meeting with grass-roots activists. His San Francisco visit was at the tail end of a cross-country road trip, and Dean said that he will continue to pound the pavement -- and the GOP -- to get the Democratic message across to new voters, particularly in minority communities.

But Dean's style and rhetoric have sparked increasing criticism from inside the Democratic Party in recent weeks -- and gleeful Republicans say they couldn't be happier.

"Where do I sign up on a committee to keep Howard Dean?" crowed GOP operative Jon Fleischmann, publisher of the FlashReport, a daily roundup of California political news and commentary. "He's the best thing to happen to the GOP in ages."

"I'm thrilled he's the DNC chair," says Tom Del Becarro, chairman of the Contra Costa County Republican Party. "Howard Dean is scaring away the middle. People don't like angry people. They like hopeful people.''

But Simi Valley Councilman Glenn Becerra, a staffer with former Republican Gov. Pete Wilson and a Bush appointee to the White House Commission on Presidential Scholars, said Tuesday he was far from amused by Dean's suggestion that Republicans constitute "a white Christian party," and called the Democratic Party chairman "an embarrassment."

"I'm living proof that the (GOP) isn't what Howard Dean is trying to describe,'' Becerra said during a telephone interview. "It's a sad day when Democrats don't have any ideas to put forward, and they have to resort to race politics. President Bush didn't get 40 percent of the Hispanic vote (in 2004) because we're a monolithic, white Christian party."

Dean, speaking in a roundtable discussion Monday, downplayed the controversy over his rhetoric.

"This is one of those flaps that comes up once in awhile when I get tough," Dean said. "We have to be rough on the Republicans. Republicans don't represent ordinary Americans and they don't have any understanding of what it is to go out and try and make ends meet."

Dean said that he had been addressing the matter of Americans standing in long lines to vote.

"What I said was the Republican leadership didn't seem to care much about working people," he said. "That's essentially the gist of the quote."

Still, the words brought sharp rebukes from fellow Democrats such as Biden, who Sunday said Dean "doesn't speak for me ... and I don't think he speaks for the majority of Democrats."

Other Democrats, including Richardson, said such comme

 

I'd call Dean's comments truthful. And why is the GOP the only party that can get away with saying crazy ****?

 

FID: If a Republican said the opposite, would you call him a racist? Or if the Chair of tha National Republican Party said the Democrats we full of homosexuals (a more coloful term), minorities, and individuals without a sense of values and character, what would you say?

The point is, neither party should be spouting stuff like Dean did. Certain Republicans do it, but definitely not the RNC chair.

Republicans don't generally get cut media slack when they make vocal assertions like Dean did.

I certainly would distance myself from the GOP chair if he did that, much like many prominent Democrats have with Howard Dean.

Either way, Dean isn't raising the money he was said to be able to procure. He's also damaging the Democratic Party.

I think the Democrats will end up probably having to get rid of him.

 

Well let's see, if the GOP deals primarily with the church thus blurring the line between church and state. And their primary membership is white people. So yes, the observation is apt.

Also, I wouldn't call the Republican that spouted something such as that racist. It all depends on how it's phrased and in what context it's put in. How Dean said that shouldn't offend anyone since he's not saying anything we don't already know.

If the GOP wants to play dirty (which they have numerous times) I don't see why the Democrats can't either. That's what cost Kerry the election.

 

Trust me, FID, if Dean would have been the nominee, it wouldn't have even been close.

 

I still can't believe Dean dropped out of the 2004 race. I would've voted for him. Damn caucases.

Kerry was one of the lamest candidates ever, and really stretched the limits of "anybody but Bush."

I understand the drive to regain some control in the government, but I feel like the Democratic party is pandering to the moderates to such an extent that the base is losing its conviction. Right now the Dems are basically Republican-lite.

 

FID: If a Republican said the opposite, would you call him a racist?

Or if the Chair of tha National Republican Party said the Democrats we full of homosexuals (a more coloful term), minorities, and individuals without a sense of values and character, what would you say?

The point is, neither party should be spouting stuff like Dean did. Certain Republicans do it, but definitely not the RNC chair.

Republicans don't generally get cut media slack when they make vocal assertions like Dean did.

They get cut slack all the time.

I certainly would distance myself from the GOP chair if he did that,

I doubt it.

much like many prominent Democrats have with Howard Dean.

Because they're determined to make nice with the Republicans, who reward them by slinging mud all over them and calling them "weak." (Which they are.)

Either way, Dean isn't raising the money he was said to be able to procure.

Wrong. He's raised more money than any DNC chair has at this point.

He's also damaging the Democratic Party.

No he isn't. The weak-willed, "The nastier the Republicans are, the more I want to be friends with them" Democrats are doing that. Dean is exactly what the DNC needs -- someone who isn't afraid to talk tough or to (gasp!) CRITICIZE Bush, and not back down from it when the right-wing noise machine that controls the so-called "liberal media" starts demanding an apology.

I think the Democrats will end up probably having to get rid of him.

If they do, then it's all over for them except the formal assimilation into the Republican party.

I understand the drive to regain some control in the government, but I feel like the Democratic party is pandering to the moderates

Not to the moderates. To the rightists.

to such an extent that the base is losing its conviction. Right now the Dems are basically Republican-lite.

So true. It's absolutely disgusting.

Dean just keeps digging himself deeper and deeper....

He hasn't dug himself at all. He made an observation that is no stronger than the divisive rhetoric that Republicans regularly engage in.

This crap reminds me of the phony, laden-with-hypocrisy "scandal" that the Republicans and the so-called "liberal media" tried to make out of John Kerry mentioning that Dick Cheney's daughter is gay. Let's just ignore how Cheney himself had publicly mentioned it. Let's just ignore how she'd been "out" for a decade, and had been shown on TV with her girlfriend at no less than the RNC.

Even Joe Biden is distancing himself from Dean.

"Even Joe Biden"? Joe Biden is a Republican in Democrat clothing. He kisses up to the Republicans so much he probably has permanently chapped lips.

I am sick to death of Democrats trying to prove how "fair" they are by hastening to criticize their own but not to criticize Republicans no matter what they say or do. If they think they're going to get some quid pro quo from the Republicans, they aren't. They never will. The Republicans are still going to sling mud at them, and the Republicans are never going to criticize or distance themselves from even the most extreme rhetoric on their own side.

Have the Republicans distanced themselves from Rush Limbaugh? No, they rely on him. Have the Republicans distanced themselves from that shrill hatemonger Ann "A Baseball Bat Is The Best Way To Talk To Liberals," "Liberals Should Be Dragged Out Into The Street And Shot" Coulter? No way. Did the Republicans distance themselves from Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson when they blamed 9/11 on liberals, feminists, gays, atheists, and abortion doctors? No, they offered an anemic, token criticism, then continued to cozy up to them. Did the Republicans distance themselves from extreme anti-abortionists when they started murdering doctors and clinic workers? Nope.

Please, Dean, don't back down. Don't let the wafflers and weak-kneed wannabe Republicans in your own party undermine you, or the so-called "liberal media" to smear you. Again.

 

Um, Shelly...

Rush Limbaugh is a private citizen and media personality.

Dean is the DNC chairman..

Regardless of what they are saying, I hope you recognize the difference..

 

Dean's comments aren't really offensive, just kind of in poor taste I suppose. Yet, isn't that really what many people think, including Republicans AND Democrats? I mean, aren't the peopel who criticize Dean for this the same people that get all upset that people have to be PC all the time and that Politicians have talk in doublespeak?

I mean, Dean is a personality. ANd if what Shelly says is true, then I think so long as he keeps his mouth shut during the elections and rallys the party faithful, he'll be just fine.

 

Well let's see, if the GOP deals primarily with the church thus blurring the line between church and state. And their primary membership is white people. So yes, the observation is apt.

That is irresponsible steriotyping. Got any numbers to support this incorrect statement?

 

The only number that could remotely back this up is the percentage of americans who identify themselves as "evangelicals" that voted for Bush and republicans in general.

However, this still does not excuse Dean's remark. It was in poor taste.

Peace,

V-03

 

That is irresponsible steriotyping. Got any numbers to support this incorrect statement?

Well I dunno...Bill Frist going on television for a church isn't exactly keeping church and state separate. It's not that he went on a religious program, but why he went on it. He went to get support for judges calling what the democrats are doing as an attack on faith. That's really the only proof I need. Not to mention that the fattest white Christian of them all, Jerry Falwell was a prominent figure in the 80's for Republicans despite being bat **** crazy.

Dean's remarks weren't out of line. It's just that no one until now in the Democratic party has had the balls to say it. And we all know it's the truth.

 

The only number that could remotely back this up is the percentage of americans who identify themselves as "evangelicals" that voted for Bush and republicans in general.

However that is far from the majority within the Rep party, thus not making it a primary source of votes.