Why the Zell Miller transformation?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 01:59:04 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Why the Zell Miller transformation?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Author Topic: Why the Zell Miller transformation?  (Read 26628 times)
LBJer
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,604
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 17, 2011, 08:12:01 PM »

Zell Miller delivered a ferocious, fire and brimstone speech against John Kerry at the Republican convention in 2004.  Yet only three years earlier, he gave a very warm speech on Kerry's behalf:

http://www.alternet.org/election04/19761/

What happened?  Why did Miller make such a dramatic transformation at the end of his career?
Logged
Snowstalker Mk. II
Snowstalker
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,414
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -4.35

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2011, 05:05:47 PM »

Attention.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2011, 05:18:08 PM »

Zell Miller delivered a ferocious, fire and brimstone speech against John Kerry at the Republican convention in 2004.  Yet only three years earlier, he gave a very warm speech on Kerry's behalf:

http://www.alternet.org/election04/19761/

What happened?  Why did Miller make such a dramatic transformation at the end of his career?

When you're dealing with Palpatine there is no way of knowing what he's planning.


Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,130
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2011, 06:26:15 PM »
« Edited: August 19, 2011, 06:30:43 PM by Scott »

My only guess is, as Georgia became more conservative, so did he.

"Fiscal responsibility is unbelievable in the face of massive new spending promises. A foreign policy based on the strength of 'allies' like France is unacceptable …A strong national defense policy is just not believable coming from a candidate who built a career as an anti-war veteran, an anti-military candidate and an anti-action senator. …When will national Democrats sober up and admit that that dog won't hunt? Secular socialism, heavy taxes, big spending, weak defense, limitless lawsuits and heavy regulation – that pack of beagles hasn't caught a rabbit in the South or Midwest in years."

Haha, Tea Party Democrat.
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,131
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 19, 2011, 10:12:12 PM »

My only guess is, as Georgia became more conservative, so did he.

"Fiscal responsibility is unbelievable in the face of massive new spending promises. A foreign policy based on the strength of 'allies' like France is unacceptable …A strong national defense policy is just not believable coming from a candidate who built a career as an anti-war veteran, an anti-military candidate and an anti-action senator. …When will national Democrats sober up and admit that that dog won't hunt? Secular socialism, heavy taxes, big spending, weak defense, limitless lawsuits and heavy regulation – that pack of beagles hasn't caught a rabbit in the South or Midwest in years."

Haha, Tea Party Democrat.

Miller went from a fairly standard Blue Dog Democrat to Jim Inhofe with a D after his name in the space of about four years. It's very unusual for a man of Miller's age to change his political and social views so drastically. He wasn't running for reelection, so I doubt he was genuinely changing with his state. He did, however, realize that he would get much more attention and sell a lot more books if he became an Iconoclastic Archconservative Democrat, in other words a Democrat who hated Democrats. Had he just switched parties or continued to be a conservative Democrat who didn't actively undermine the party, he would have gotten a lot less attention and made a lot less money.
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,130
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 19, 2011, 10:40:29 PM »

My only guess is, as Georgia became more conservative, so did he.

"Fiscal responsibility is unbelievable in the face of massive new spending promises. A foreign policy based on the strength of 'allies' like France is unacceptable …A strong national defense policy is just not believable coming from a candidate who built a career as an anti-war veteran, an anti-military candidate and an anti-action senator. …When will national Democrats sober up and admit that that dog won't hunt? Secular socialism, heavy taxes, big spending, weak defense, limitless lawsuits and heavy regulation – that pack of beagles hasn't caught a rabbit in the South or Midwest in years."

Haha, Tea Party Democrat.

Miller went from a fairly standard Blue Dog Democrat to Jim Inhofe with a D after his name in the space of about four years. It's very unusual for a man of Miller's age to change his political and social views so drastically. He wasn't running for reelection, so I doubt he was genuinely changing with his state. He did, however, realize that he would get much more attention and sell a lot more books if he became an Iconoclastic Archconservative Democrat, in other words a Democrat who hated Democrats. Had he just switched parties or continued to be a conservative Democrat who didn't actively undermine the party, he would have gotten a lot less attention and made a lot less money.
That's possible.  But who knows?  People change their minds about things all the time.  Maybe he had hung around with Saxby Chambliss for too long.

One thing I never liked about him was how he claimed it's just the Democratic Party that's changed over the years, and not him.  Which is totally incorrect.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 19, 2011, 10:44:50 PM »

I think he changed views because of the War in Iraq. Most of his fire and brimstone speech had that as its subject. Just a guess.
Logged
Tidewater_Wave
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 519
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 02, 2012, 02:26:35 AM »

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,028
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 02, 2012, 02:38:14 AM »

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.

1950's Democrats from Georgia are certainly not to be revered in the 21st century.

Also, I take issue with your first sentence.  Compare Miller's keynote speech at the 1992 Democratic National Convention with his voting record on economic issues during his partial term in the Senate.
Logged
Tidewater_Wave
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 519
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: March 02, 2012, 02:41:15 AM »

The Democrats of that era weren't as conservative on economics as they were on social and foreign issues. His party left him and he did not leave his party. He would be representative of the party until 1980.
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,028
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: March 02, 2012, 02:49:47 AM »

You missed my point.  Read/listen to his 1992 speech - specifically the portions where he praised all the work the previous Democratic presidents had done to build a social safety net - and then look at his series of Senate votes to dismantle it.  Of course he changed.

The social policies of the Dixiecrats are an embarrassment to the modern day party, as they should be, so it's little wonder that they eventually realigned with the Republicans instead.  Miller is simply an anachronism.  But if he had followed everybody else, he wouldn't be notable or have sold so many of his books, so here we are.
Logged
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,597


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: 2.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: March 02, 2012, 03:29:41 AM »

The Democrats of that era weren't as conservative on economics as they were on social and foreign issues.

Southern Democrats allied with Republicans in preventing FDR, Truman, and JFK from fully implementing their economic platforms on a wide variety of subjects.  About the only thing keeping those politicians (and the voters who supported them) from joining the Republicans in the first place was the fact that Lincoln freed the slaves.
Logged
Miles
MilesC56
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,324
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: March 02, 2012, 03:33:03 AM »

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,028
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: March 02, 2012, 10:22:38 AM »

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.

Once again, that is not only inaccurate, but also pretty vile.
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: March 02, 2012, 10:39:55 AM »

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.

Once again, that is not only inaccurate, but also pretty vile.

QFT
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,131
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: March 02, 2012, 10:43:41 AM »

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.

Once again, that is not only inaccurate, but also pretty vile.

QFT

Miller's views changed substantially from the early 90s to the mid-2000s. While he was governor of Georgia, he was pretty much a conservative-leaning typical Blue Dog Democrat. Once he got to the Senate, and particularly after the 2000 election, he became Jim Inhofe with a D after his name. 
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: March 02, 2012, 11:03:07 AM »

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.

Nonsense.

Miller changed after his narrow reelection as Governor in 1994.

Btw, are you saying you're a fan of Jim Crow? Ah, those great 1950s Democrats...
Logged
I'm JewCon in name only.
Klecly
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 917
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.61, S: 6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: March 02, 2012, 02:54:51 PM »

Zell Miller is awesome. My favorite Democrat, hands down. I'd easily vote for him in a presidential election or a senate election.
Logged
Snowstalker Mk. II
Snowstalker
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,414
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -4.35

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: March 02, 2012, 03:03:04 PM »

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.

You're way to the left of him on economic issues.
Logged
Tidewater_Wave
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 519
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: March 02, 2012, 05:15:26 PM »

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.

Nonsense.

Miller changed after his narrow reelection as Governor in 1994.

Btw, are you saying you're a fan of Jim Crow? Ah, those great 1950s Democrats...

Everyone, this ^^ is what liberals do. They take conservatives out of context in order to change the issue to benefit them. This is comparable as well to they way they're trying to change the abortion issue to contraceptives. No one ever said anything about Jim Crow. Stop what you're trying to do because no one on this forum is falling for it.
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: March 02, 2012, 06:58:23 PM »

Zell Miller was more of an early 70s southern Democrat than a 50s one.
Logged
Pingvin
Pingvin99
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,761
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: March 03, 2012, 02:43:19 AM »

Zell Miller is awesome. My favorite Democrat, hands down. I'd easily vote for him in a presidential election or a senate election.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: March 03, 2012, 03:53:25 AM »

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.

Nonsense.

Miller changed after his narrow reelection as Governor in 1994.

Btw, are you saying you're a fan of Jim Crow? Ah, those great 1950s Democrats...

Everyone, this ^^ is what liberals do. They take conservatives out of context in order to change the issue to benefit them. This is comparable as well to they way they're trying to change the abortion issue to contraceptives. No one ever said anything about Jim Crow. Stop what you're trying to do because no one on this forum is falling for it.

You know very well for what the Southern Democrats stood for in 1950s. Maybe you should be little more careful next time by making such declarations.
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: March 03, 2012, 07:57:13 AM »
« Edited: March 03, 2012, 08:00:02 AM by MechaRepublican »

Zell Miller didn't change. His party left him. Miller stands exactly where Democrats did in the 50's as I do myself for the most part.

Nonsense.

Miller changed after his narrow reelection as Governor in 1994.

Btw, are you saying you're a fan of Jim Crow? Ah, those great 1950s Democrats...

Everyone, this ^^ is what liberals do. They take conservatives out of context in order to change the issue to benefit them. This is comparable as well to they way they're trying to change the abortion issue to contraceptives. No one ever said anything about Jim Crow. Stop what you're trying to do because no one on this forum is falling for it.

You know very well for what the Southern Democrats stood for in 1950s. Maybe you should be little more careful next time by making such declarations.

To be fair Kal, he said he stood where the Democrats did in the 50's for the most part.

For the record Zell Miller did in fact campaign in favor of segregation in 1964 and 1966 when he ran for Congress.

But even if we assume he meant he stood exactly where the Democrats did in the 50's..............how the hell would that be possible?  I mean the Democratic Party was exponentially more big tent in the 50's than it is today.  I mean yeah sure, now days you have some blue dogs and moderates but back then the Democratic Party had everybody and their grandmother who for some reason or other didn't like the Republicans.
Logged
Tutankhuman Bakari Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,461
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: May 01, 2012, 05:24:20 PM »
« Edited: May 01, 2012, 05:26:02 PM by OC »

He saw that besides Clinton who was the most moderate prez, he saw the modern day democratic party ( AL Gore's defeat in 2000) moving too far to the left even after 911. He mistook that as a sign of weakest after 911 and became a defacto along with Joseph Lieberman member of GOP Party. Along with the Zell Miller seat LA, NC, SC, and FL went GOP in 2004.  You could say that it was a political realignment or being soft on nat'l security.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.058 seconds with 11 queries.