Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 31, 2014, 08:34:13 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
| | |-+  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
| | | |-+  McGovern to endorse Clark!
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: McGovern to endorse Clark!  (Read 22143 times)
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26772


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« on: January 18, 2004, 07:32:50 am »
Ignore

McGovern will endorse Clark and campaign with him, according to the hedgehog report, that site by David Wissing, which is great, btw, thanks to whoever it was who pointed that out.

Will that help Clark, or will it be negative?
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
YRABNNRM
YoungRepub
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10796
United States
Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: -6.09

View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2004, 08:11:30 am »
Ignore

I really don't think it will make a difference. Does McGovern even have a following?
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26772


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2004, 08:13:51 am »
Ignore

I really don't think it will make a difference. Does McGovern even have a following?

I don't know. It might give the impression that Clark is the new McGovern... Wink
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35402
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2004, 09:00:34 am »
Ignore

In the summer, McGovern said that "dean's campaign reminds me of what we did 30 years ago."  So I thought he was going to endorse dean, but it turns out that he wasn't.

As seen with Harkin's endorsement, endorsements don't matter all that much unless the endorser is a major political figure (i.e. Al gore.)
Logged
dazzleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13821
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

View Profile
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2004, 09:01:56 am »
Ignore

I don't think too many people care who McGovern endorses.  A lot of younger voters probably don't even know who he is.

I would have to say that it will hurt him somewhat.  I don't think McGovern really has a following, but there are still some people who will react negatively to a McGovern endorsement of a candidate.

It's funny how many in the loony left have coalesced around Clark, despite his having revealed little of his beliefs, and probably more importantly, despite the fact that most of the little he has said has tured out to be false.

They hate the president, and they've finally caught on that they have a problem with the national security issue, so they're blindly supporting Clark.  People like Madonna, Michael Moore, and now McGovern.  Their support only tells me that he's a bad character.
Logged
YRABNNRM
YoungRepub
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10796
United States
Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: -6.09

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2004, 09:10:31 am »
Ignore

dazzleman, you should come check you the Fantasy Elections at the bottom of the board. Help your fellow Republicans Wink
Logged
Harry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18722
United States


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2004, 10:45:11 am »
Ignore

It couldn't hurt him.  I seriously doubt it'll stop anyone from voting him.  It could give him a slight boost though.
Logged
Michael Z
Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4335
Political Matrix
E: -5.88, S: -4.72

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: January 18, 2004, 11:40:07 am »
Ignore

In the summer, McGovern said that "dean's campaign reminds me of what we did 30 years ago."

I assume he's talking about the grassroots aspect of Dean's campaign, but given McGovern's performance against Nixon that doesn't bode well at all.

Quote
So I thought he was going to endorse dean, but it turns out that he wasn't.

As seen with Harkin's endorsement, endorsements don't matter all that much unless the endorser is a major political figure (i.e. Al gore.)

I'm surprised McGovern has endorsed Clark. Does anybody know the reasons given?
« Last Edit: January 18, 2004, 11:41:01 am by Michael Zeigermann »Logged
StevenNick
StevenNick99
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1912


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 18, 2004, 03:57:33 pm »
Ignore

This is fantastic!  Now there are two McGoverns running for the democratic nomination.  That just doubled our chances of winning a landslide!
Logged



Economic Left/Right: 5.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.00
Nym90
nym90
Modadmin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15181
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: January 18, 2004, 04:01:33 pm »
Ignore

The only way that Clark (or Dean, or anyone) will be another McGovern is if Bush does to the Dem nominee what Nixon did to McGovern. If Bush pulls a Watergate, sure he can win by 20 points.

People always forget that about 1972. Sure McGovern was made out to be a far leftist, but it didn't hurt that Nixon stole his campaign plans and bugged the DNC!
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26772


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #10 on: January 18, 2004, 04:02:14 pm »
Ignore

This is fantastic!  Now there are two McGoverns running for the democratic nomination.  That just doubled our chances of winning a landslide!

I don't think Clark will get nominated, he is not in Iowa, he will not do good in NH, and then there is nothing left. It's all decided in IA and NH, and with no breakthrough there of any kind you don't win. Clark is toast.
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35402
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: January 18, 2004, 05:32:45 pm »
Ignore

The only way that Clark (or Dean, or anyone) will be another McGovern is if Bush does to the Dem nominee what Nixon did to McGovern. If Bush pulls a Watergate, sure he can win by 20 points.

People always forget that about 1972. Sure McGovern was made out to be a far leftist, but it didn't hurt that Nixon stole his campaign plans and bugged the DNC!
Nixon would have won even if Nixon didn't cheat.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26772


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #12 on: January 18, 2004, 05:36:32 pm »
Ignore

The only way that Clark (or Dean, or anyone) will be another McGovern is if Bush does to the Dem nominee what Nixon did to McGovern. If Bush pulls a Watergate, sure he can win by 20 points.

People always forget that about 1972. Sure McGovern was made out to be a far leftist, but it didn't hurt that Nixon stole his campaign plans and bugged the DNC!
Nixon would have won even if Nixon didn't cheat.

Yep, that's what makes Watergate so weird. It was completely unneccesary! Smiley
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35402
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: January 18, 2004, 05:38:01 pm »
Ignore

Nixon had a big ego, he couldn't handle the thought of a second presidential defeat.  So he cheated.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26772


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #14 on: January 18, 2004, 05:38:30 pm »
Ignore

Nixon had a big ego, he couldn't handle the thought of a second presidential defeat.  So he cheated.

The man wsa a lunatic, as far as I understand.
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35402
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #15 on: January 18, 2004, 05:39:24 pm »
Ignore

He wasn't all that bad of a president however.  I mean, he wasn't good, but there are worse.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26772


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #16 on: January 18, 2004, 06:08:01 pm »
Ignore

He wasn't all that bad of a president however.  I mean, he wasn't good, but there are worse.

He did some good things, and some bad things. Overall, I think he was pretty bad, but I agree that there have been worse.
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35402
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #17 on: January 18, 2004, 06:34:27 pm »
Ignore

He wasn't all that bad of a president however.  I mean, he wasn't good, but there are worse.

He did some good things, and some bad things. Overall, I think he was pretty bad, but I agree that there have been worse.
I think he was the first president to fight for universal health care.  Not sure though.
Logged
dazzleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13821
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

View Profile
« Reply #18 on: January 18, 2004, 08:22:03 pm »
Ignore

I think he was the first president to fight for universal health care.  Not sure though.

I think you're right.  Nixon put through a proposal at the beginning of his second term for some type of universal health care.  I don't remember the details, but Congress never passed it.

Nixon also sponsored a welfare reform plan in 1971 called FAP (Family Assistance Program) that would have provided an income floor to all Americans through significantly increased welfare payments.  Conservatives opposed it for obvious reasons, but many liberals didn't like it because it required the program's intended beneficiaries to perform some type of work in exchange for their assistance, and I guess the liberals thought that was demeaning (although I guess it's not demeaning for everybody I know to work).

Nixon was also very liberal on foreign policy in some ways.  He completed what amounted to a unilateral withdrawal from Vietnam without credible security guaranties for South Vietnam, initiated detente with the Soviet Union, and opened a relationship with Red China, as it was called at the time.  Liberals had talked about doing all these things, but it was Nixon who actually did it.  Some people call Nixon the last liberal president.

Interestingly enough, Nixon was hated by liberals most of all, just as Clinton was hated by conservatives despite the fact that he approved the first repeal of a federal entitlement (welfare reform) ever.

Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35402
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #19 on: January 18, 2004, 08:57:12 pm »
Ignore

I remember when Clinton was fighting for Universial health care in 1993/4, Nixon came to the white house and said something to the effect of "we tried to do this 20 years ago."

I don't understand my conservatives hate Clinton, his policies hardly were far left and he helped them win huge gain in 1994.
Logged
dazzleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13821
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

View Profile
« Reply #20 on: January 18, 2004, 09:03:10 pm »
Ignore

I remember when Clinton was fighting for Universial health care in 1993/4, Nixon came to the white house and said something to the effect of "we tried to do this 20 years ago."

I don't understand my conservatives hate Clinton, his policies hardly were far left and he helped them win huge gain in 1994.

I guess conservatives hated Clinton for the same reason that liberals hated Nixon.  Both men became so deeply associated with a certain way of thinking that nothing they actually did really mattered.  Nixon retained his conservative following despite his liberal moves, just as Clinton retained his liberal following.

Both men were judged by who the WERE rather than anything they did.  To conservatives, Clinton was a shifty, draft-dodging 1960s hippy whose first move in office was to try to lift the ban on gays in the military.  To liberals, Nixon was the person who helped convict Alger Hiss (although why they would so resent the conviction of a man who spied for a mortal enemy tells me a lot about liberals and where their loyalties lie).  Both men were indelibly alienated from large portions of the population, and nothing they could possibly have done would ever have changed that.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35402
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #21 on: January 18, 2004, 09:10:17 pm »
Ignore

And both men won twice.
I did not hate Nixon.
Logged
dazzleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13821
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

View Profile
« Reply #22 on: January 18, 2004, 09:16:16 pm »
Ignore

Yes, they won twice, but the nature of their victories was different than, say, an Eisenhower victory, or even a Reagan victory.  Neither of them ever elicted the sort of person vituperation that Clinton and Nixon did.

And attempts were made, one successful, to use scandals to force both men from office.

They were both deeply polarizing figures, but presidents who do big things usually are polarizing.  That holds true about Nixon  -- he revolutionized US foreign policy for a generation.  Clinton really didn't do any big things, other than the conservative repeal of the welfare entitlement.  So it's pretty unusual that a president who didn't really take aggressive policy positions would be so hated.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35402
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #23 on: January 18, 2004, 09:20:19 pm »
Ignore

Clinton really didn't do any big things, other than the conservative repeal of the welfare entitlement.  
NAFTA?  Most conservatives do agree with NAFTA and the left is dead set against it.  Although the only issue I am truly a conservative on is free trade.
Logged
dazzleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13821
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

View Profile
« Reply #24 on: January 18, 2004, 09:34:07 pm »
Ignore

Yes, you're right, I forgot about that.  That was started by Bush and continued by Clinton, and as I recall, there was more Republican than Democratic support for NAFTA.

I think it will be a long time before people can assess the effects of the Clinton presidency without looking throught the prism of their personal political views.  

I do think that that the issues that people voted on, either for or against Clinton, will not be the issues that determine his place in history.  
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines