Kerry narrows VP to two
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 18, 2024, 10:09:37 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  Kerry narrows VP to two
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: Kerry narrows VP to two  (Read 28571 times)
karlosthejackal
Newbie
*
Posts: 5


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: April 19, 2004, 03:22:12 PM »

alright DAKOTAS, cant a man have a spliff
Logged
ShapeShifter
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,711


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: April 19, 2004, 03:22:34 PM »
« Edited: April 19, 2004, 03:28:57 PM by ShapeShifter »

i didnt know what  to call myself, but i thought since the neo-cons hate terrorists. i have just portrayed what i have been told, but i can assure you that bushs populariy is dwindling in the dekotas. Tues 6 April, Bismarck Tribune (north dekota) has Bush 54 Kerry 47, and on Thur 15, the Rapid City Journal (south dekota) Bush 51 Kerry 46. If i caused offense for taking up your time in what you think is lies then i am sorry. i just read the threads about possible vp, and i thought id give some of the info that  i know.

Then I apologize for my skepticism. I was not offended by your name. But, I do agree on that Kerry will pick someone who is a moderate.

Welcome to the Forum. Maybe you can contribute more insight in the future.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: April 19, 2004, 03:23:26 PM »

alright DAKOTAS, cant a man have a spliff

fire it up, hoss.  Smiley
Logged
elcorazon
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,402


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: April 19, 2004, 03:25:36 PM »

I don't get why everyone's flaming on Karlos.  I have no idea whether he knows anything or not, but his selections are viable and reasoning is decent.  I don't think Kerry's going to announce his whole cabinet during the campaign so I'm not sure if some of the reasoning on that stuff is a bit off, but it's possible that some or most of those predictions could be correct.

Anyway, welcome Karlos.  Who's going to win Wisconsin, anyway?
Logged
karlosthejackal
Newbie
*
Posts: 5


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: April 19, 2004, 03:29:06 PM »

because i like smoking pot, doesnt mean im crazy. most people would smoke, after spending time in the DAKOTAS. Cant even get a decent beer, its all weak. the girls are even scared of saying the word pussy.
Logged
classical liberal
RightWingNut
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,758


Political Matrix
E: 9.35, S: -8.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: April 19, 2004, 03:31:08 PM »

Bush-Kerry 54-47?  54+47=101.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: April 19, 2004, 03:31:14 PM »

yeah, baby.  that's my kind of irreverence.  watch it, you'll get a nasty warning from Liep if you're not careful.

Believe me, I know.


Tell 'em Feingold will win wisconsin by about 20 points.  Feingold has no coattails, though.  And sure enough none long enough to carry Kerry.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: April 19, 2004, 03:37:47 PM »

because i like smoking pot, doesnt mean im crazy. most people would smoke, after spending time in the DAKOTAS. Cant even get a decent beer, its all weak. the girls are even scared of saying the word pussy.

troll
Logged
classical liberal
RightWingNut
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,758


Political Matrix
E: 9.35, S: -8.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: April 19, 2004, 03:39:14 PM »

Feingold will be elected by like 15%.  The winner of Wisco9nsin will be determined by what time it starts snowing on Nov 2.
Logged
ElectionAtlas
Atlas Proginator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,628
United States


P P P
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: April 19, 2004, 04:48:03 PM »

I'm sorry to see that the quality of discussion has gone so far downhill.  A new forum member puts up a thoughtful, in-depth, lucid post and all you guys do is attack him because you don't like the contents of the post?  Please discuss the merits of the argument he presents.  If you are concerned with a new poster just creating havoc, please report the post to me via the link at the bottom of the post. Thanks,
Dave.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: April 19, 2004, 04:49:02 PM »

Feingold will be elected by like 15%.  The winner of Wisco9nsin will be determined by what time it starts snowing on Nov 2.
That's good.  That's what the talking heads on CNN and Fox say too.  Bad weather seems to be a greater distraction for democrats.
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,448


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: April 19, 2004, 04:50:27 PM »

oops, forgot to say, welcome to the forums karlos.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: April 19, 2004, 04:54:59 PM »

The choice will be made in weeks privately depending on how kerry fairs in missouri, iowa, wisconsin, ohio and pennslyvannia.

and I forgot to make a relevant comment, so here goes:

This isn't news.  A fourth-grader with cable TV knows this.

The Hillary bit was intriguing.  I'll assume you trust your sources, but can you elaborate?  How does she 'neutralize' the New York GOP?
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,767


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: April 19, 2004, 04:56:30 PM »

I'm sorry to see that the quality of discussion has gone so far downhill.  A new forum member puts up a thoughtful, in-depth, lucid post and all you guys do is attack him because you don't like the contents of the post?  Please discuss the merits of the argument he presents.  If you are concerned with a new poster just creating havoc, please report the post to me via the link at the bottom of the post. Thanks,
Dave.

Well, I have to say that it didn't look at all lucid to me. Many of the people who criticized it are Democrats, who would be very happy about winning the Dakotas...and someone who posts about using pot, chooses a terorrist as his username and have no capital letters isn't very convincing...

But I apologize if I have behaved wrongly. Sad
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: April 19, 2004, 04:58:06 PM »

I still think it's a fantastic name!
Logged
dunn
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,053


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: April 19, 2004, 04:59:00 PM »

I'm sorry to see that the quality of discussion has gone so far downhill.  A new forum member puts up a thoughtful, in-depth, lucid post and all you guys do is attack him because you don't like the contents of the post?  Please discuss the merits of the argument he presents.  If you are concerned with a new poster just creating havoc, please report the post to me via the link at the bottom of the post. Thanks,
Dave.

Well, I have to say that it didn't look at all lucid to me. Many of the people who criticized it are Democrats, who would be very happy about winning the Dakotas...and someone who posts about using pot, chooses a terorrist as his username and have no capital letters isn't very convincing...

But I apologize if I have behaved wrongly. Sad
I second that
Logged
California Dreamer
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 445


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: April 19, 2004, 05:04:09 PM »
« Edited: April 19, 2004, 05:21:09 PM by California Dreamer »

I'm sorry to see that the quality of discussion has gone so far downhill.  A new forum member puts up a thoughtful, in-depth, lucid post and all you guys do is attack him because you don't like the contents of the post?  

I agree that attacking someone if you disagree with their opinion is wrong. but for this thread I think people are questioning the credibility of his 'claims'. It is one thing to put up an opinion...everyone has one of those. But this guy is claiming to have 'inside info' and is writing a book. Therefore it is only appropriate to be skeptical and to question sources.

From what I have seen, I find it hard to believe that someone who doesnt know the sex of Eli Pariser and has so many misspellings and grammatical errors could be a professional writer, so I file his claims under 'opinions put forward as inside information'. so I attack Carlos, not for his opinions, but for being a liar (or an incredibly bad judge of sex)

...the person was Eli Pariser...She told me...


Eli Pariser
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: April 19, 2004, 05:08:50 PM »

Old MacHeath could sure tell the boys from the girls.  Wink
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,448


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: April 19, 2004, 05:11:11 PM »

I'm sorry to see that the quality of discussion has gone so far downhill.  A new forum member puts up a thoughtful, in-depth, lucid post and all you guys do is attack him because you don't like the contents of the post?  

I agree that attacking someone if you disagree with their opinion is wrong. but for this thread I think people are questioning the credibility of his 'claims'. It is one thing to put up an opinion...everyone has one of those. But this guy is claiming to have 'inside info' and is writing a book. Therefore it is only appropriate to be skeptical and to question sources.

From what I have seen, I find it hard to believe that someone who doesnt know the sex of Eli Pariser and has so many misspellings and grammatical errors could be a professional writer, so I file his claims under 'opinions put forward as inside information'. so I attack Carlos, not for his opinions, but for being a liar (or an incredibly bad judge of sex)


Eli Pariser

Maybe she is wearing a fake beard?
Logged
Ben.
Ben
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: April 19, 2004, 06:12:18 PM »

Bob Shrum told Gore in 2000 to pick Edwards (who Shrum’s firm had worked for in 1998), Shrum is now Kerry Campaign Chief with the calls from leading Democratic figures and many at the grassroots level for a Kerry/ Edwards ticket and with Edwards’ appeal to moderates and independents proven at the national level I find it highly likely that Kerry will be advised by Shrum to pick Edwards or alternatively there is another client of Shrum’s who might well be considered (and rightly so) Bill Nelson of Florida… it should also be noted that Shrum is a close friend of the chair of Kerry’s committee which is looking for a VP running mate…if the race to be Kerry’s VP has been narrowed to any group of people then odds are that Edwards is in that group as Nelson may well be as well… also I feel that Bayh is a stronger candidate than I initially gave him credit for, far less wooden than I remembered, so on that Carlos might be right, but I do not give credence to his “contacts” or his “claims”… Vilsack will not be a shortlist finalist if he is I think that Kerry will be proven to have made a mistake come November…          
Logged
zachman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: April 19, 2004, 06:28:56 PM »

I read about Shrum in the Atlantic. He has an unmatched level of power over the Democratic Party. Shrum will have the final weigh-in on the pick.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: April 19, 2004, 06:30:41 PM »

Ben,
As I recall, Mr. and Mrs. Vilsack made different endorsements in the Iowa caucus.  The Governor endorsed Dean, originally, and she endorsed Kerry.  Senator Harkin endorsed Kerry too.  Turns out Mrs. Vilsack's endorsement won.  Of course old Tom came off that endorsement pretty quickly after Howard Dean's post-caucus 'speech'

I can't decide what hurt dean more, the scream or the Al Gore endorsement.  Both seemed pretty damning.  Wink

Stick with John Edwards.  He has such beautiful hair.
Logged
California Dreamer
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 445


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: April 19, 2004, 06:30:58 PM »

Regardless, Kerry was pissed off at how Gore made the VP selection a public thing with lots of leaks. He doesnt want to make anyone look like he wasnt chosen. If the NYT, WP, CNN, CQ, etc dont have a short list....this guy doesnt have the short list.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: April 19, 2004, 06:31:59 PM »

I think Senator Lieberman was really peeved, and rightfully so.

But that's all water under the bridge now, I think.  
Logged
Ben.
Ben
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: April 19, 2004, 06:57:53 PM »

Ben,
As I recall, Mr. and Mrs. Vilsack made different endorsements in the Iowa caucus.  The Governor endorsed Dean, originally, and she endorsed Kerry.  Senator Harkin endorsed Kerry too.  Turns out Mrs. Vilsack's endorsement won.  Of course old Tom came off that endorsement pretty quickly after Howard Dean's post-caucus 'speech'

I can't decide what hurt dean more, the scream or the Al Gore endorsement.  Both seemed pretty damning.  Wink

Stick with John Edwards.  He has such beautiful hair.

Governor Vilsack did not endorse until after the caucus, just before Missouri’s primary if memory serves (ah… memories when John Edwards winning was a real possibility Smiley ) but he endorsed Kerry and never endorsed Dean, Vilsack never even touched Dean…

While Mrs Vilscak publicly endorsed Kerry not long before the primary and campaigned hard up and down the state for the Senator.  

Tom Harkin (who I confess to having a soft spot for, though he can be a little too liberal on some issues and dame irresponsible at times, not meaning to equate the two in anyway), he publicly endorsed Dean (after a very long deliberation and having had a lot of pressure put upon him to back Gephardt) and together with Martin Sheen (remember that) campaigned hard for the former Governor. However ultimately having been the warm up speaker before the “Dean Screech” he didn’t come out of the caucus looking all that good, however I doubt he suffered any lasting damage except perhaps to his ego…

An interesting thing I have heard is that Harkin was tempted to go with a Kerry endorsement and was also rumoured to have considered Edwards, however at the time Edwards was considered by him to be too far back in the polls and he could not believe that Kerry would manage the Lazarus like exercise he in the end accomplished so he picked Dean who ideologically he was fairly close to and who he believed would in the end win the primary…        

Don’t mean to contradict you Angus…. If it was a typo or (god forbid Wink ) sarcasm, I must apologise…  
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 0.055 seconds with 12 queries.