Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 18, 2014, 01:24:08 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
| | |-+  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
| | | |-+  Who Can Beat Him ?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Who Can Beat Him ?  (Read 6903 times)
MSUfan
Jtfdem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6407
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: 4.70

View Profile
« on: November 26, 2003, 12:08:09 pm »
Ignore

Post If You Want Kuchinich
Logged
M
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2496


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 26, 2003, 02:04:05 pm »
Ignore

It's Joe, of course. Under the right circumsatnces he would be the overwhelming victor. With Bush the incumbent, he needs to run a good campaign and Bush a bad one. But it's doable. He realizes the fundamental truth that, my goodness, people, we're in the middle of a war? Am I the on;y one who still remembers those planes flying into the Twin Towers?

But Joe would never get nominated. The Dems don't want a patriot right now. They want someone angry, vindictive, and fundamentally anti-American. Well, they're gonna get him. And then they're gonna have to live with the results.
Logged

Recently moved to Jackson, Mississippi.
emergingDmajority1
Full Member
***
Posts: 245


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 26, 2003, 03:42:23 pm »
Ignore

perpetual war for re-election? How stupid do you think the American people are? Do you think we're all block headed flag waving hypocrites?

take a step back, take a deep breath. There are no patriots left. Try to politicize 9/11 with a fear campaign and it will lead Bush right off a cliff.

The only thing we have to fear is.....fear itself.
Logged

MSUfan
Jtfdem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6407
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: 4.70

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 26, 2003, 05:01:43 pm »
Ignore

Whats The Difference Between Joe And DUBYA

LOL
Logged
M
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2496


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 26, 2003, 09:26:42 pm »
Ignore

And you ask why you can't win the South! "There are no patriots left"- sheesh!

Um, the country thinks we're at war. Joe Lieberman is, in fact, not a conservative. The kind of politics that views Joe and McCain as political conservatives is very radical. Not designed for winning elections. If the republican core castrated Rudi and Arnold as liberals, they would be iin big trouble. But Rudi is accepted by the GOP, and the Dems want to evict Joe and Evan Bayh. (To say nothing of Zell Miller!) Many Dems even see Gephardt and Edwards, even Jofn Forbes Kerry, as too conservative!

So, are you losing cause you're liberal and we're conservative? No! In that case we'd both be unpopular. You're losing because we hold the center, as you did in the 90s.

Did FDR lead a fear campaign? Some of his contemporaries said he did. They didn't do well at the polls. They are remembered as hateful revisionists, or worse.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2003, 09:28:25 pm by M »Logged

Recently moved to Jackson, Mississippi.
Nym90
nym90
Modadmin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15159
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 26, 2003, 11:12:49 pm »
Ignore

Sorry, the Dems don't want someone anti-American. The freedom to disagree with the President and his policy is one of the most fundamentally American freedoms there is. How is Howard Dean anti-American? That kind of hyperbole is just plain false. You can attack his positions on the issues all you want, but to suggest that he is somehow anti-American is disgusting, quite frankly.
Logged
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15634


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: November 26, 2003, 11:25:36 pm »
Ignore

M is right. We need to nominate BOTH a patriot and someone who will provide a real choice; make a substantive difference on the issues than Bush. A Democratic president would have a much easier time pulling together a global alliance against terror, and would have influenced Congress to pass a much different health care bill, and energy will, that have been passed/will be passed, and do a much better job at defending social security. Also he would be an important element in the balance of power in government, which is now decidedly lacking.

The Democratic party is in a sad state when people who claim to be Democrats actually hurt the party by thinking that only a radical who will lose to Bush deserves their vote. I think there would be a big difference between Bush and Lieberman or a moderate Democrat on domestic issues; and if there isn't a big difference on international issues (although the Democrat would come in with tons of credibility that Bush doesn't have), who the hell cares when we are in the war? The most important thing in a war is to unite the civilized world.

The problem with Lieberman frankly is that he is Jewish; I've always found it curious that states that went for Clinton very decisively in 1996, such as Ohio and New Hampshire, ended up going for Bush in 2000, even though the economy was doing great, and basically everything else was doing great. Gore campaigned as an experienced, incumbent moderate who proposed a large tax cut. Why did he lose so many states? I've heard the theory that the reason is anti-semitism, and for that reason Lieberman can never win.

Right now anybody but Dean sounds okay. Unless of course Dean radically alters how he's been projecting himself so far, which is possible.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2003, 11:27:04 pm by Beet »Logged

Brian Schweitzer '16
agcatter
agcat
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3751


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: November 26, 2003, 11:35:58 pm »
Ignore

Gore did not campaign as a moderate.
Logged
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15634


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: November 27, 2003, 12:01:29 am »
Ignore

He proposed an $800 billion tax cut, he supported the death penalty, he supported free trade, and essentially took the positions that Clinton took when he ran in 1992, with the additoin of the massive tax cut.
Logged

Brian Schweitzer '16
emergingDmajority1
Full Member
***
Posts: 245


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: November 27, 2003, 12:18:59 am »
Ignore

Well, what I meant with the "no patriots left" quip was that the media will tear apart anybody trying to be overly patriotic. Look at Bush with the whole banner thing on the aircraft carrier, they'll try to tear apart clark too.

Some of the South is a write off for the dems.....just like some of the north is a complete long shot for the GOP. Do you see repubs taking NJ, Mass, NY, or Conn??? Do you see Dems taking Alabama & Mississippi?

We need to target on states like Louisiana, Missouri, Tennessee, and Arkansas. Sort of quasi-southern states that Gore was at least competitive in in 2000. Anybody suspected of being a stuffy liberal would get butchered there. But some combo of Clark/Gephardt/Edwards (doesn't really matter who's at the top of the ticket) can carry at least 1 of those states, and that might be enough for Dems.

Logged

M
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2496


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: November 27, 2003, 12:39:44 am »
Ignore

I should clarify what I mean when I say Dean and some other Dems come across as anti-American. I see that without explanation it can across as me saying something really horrible. They convey a general idea that the USA is not unique as a nation, even compared to other democracies. This idea of The USA as a "city on a hill" was a key part of the successes of candidates from both parties, including JFK, Ronal Reagan, and George W. Bush, among many others. Dean, however, see,s to view the USA as one among the nations, as in, "if France says its wrong, there word has as much value as ours, since they're just another country like us". Right or wrong, (and I think it's wrong), that just doesn't sell.
Logged

Recently moved to Jackson, Mississippi.
emergingDmajority1
Full Member
***
Posts: 245


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: November 27, 2003, 12:50:26 am »
Ignore

Well, right now they may seem anti american to you. They're fighting tooth and nail against each other, and the anti Bush rhetoric is pretty severe.

But it will die down once the field narrows, we're going to hear more ideas and see more flag waving.

The fact that they don't think the US is unique as a nation....I just don't pick up on it. What they're stressing right now is working with the international community, easing the burden. But then again I don't really pay much attention to dean either.
Logged

CHRISTOPHER MICHAE
Guest
« Reply #12 on: November 27, 2003, 12:59:34 am »

I should clarify what I mean when I say Dean and some other Dems come across as anti-American. I see that without explanation it can across as me saying something really horrible. They convey a general idea that the USA is not unique as a nation, even compared to other democracies. This idea of The USA as a "city on a hill" was a key part of the successes of candidates from both parties, including JFK, Ronal Reagan, and George W. Bush, among many others. Dean, however, see,s to view the USA as one among the nations, as in, "if France says its wrong, there word has as much value as ours, since they're just another country like us". Right or wrong, (and I think it's wrong), that just doesn't sell.
I agree wholheartedly. We have to remain a "shining city upon a Hill." Although turning our backs on our GODLY HERITAGE is not a part of who we are, nor of who we were, or should be. We are a GODLY nation, Blessed with Divine Right. How can we shine when we continually tarnish our Great Foundation?
Logged
agcatter
agcat
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3751


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: November 27, 2003, 09:26:28 am »
Ignore

Gore ran an "us against the powerful" populist campaign which enabled Bush to hang the L word around Gore's neck.  Clinton was critical of that strategy and those in his camp said so after the election.  His "targeted tax cuts" were not across the board and did not include repeal of the marriage penalty.  With the economy doing well he should have walked across the finish line.  He blew it.  Of course, not all of the loss can be attributed to going too far left.  He really turned off people in the first debate.  He came off as arrogant and condescending.
Logged
NorthernDog
Full Member
***
Posts: 167


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: November 27, 2003, 11:27:48 am »
Ignore

I think most voters want a positive, optimistic outlook in their Presidents. Edwards is the only one running an upbeat, positive campaign.  But his resume is too thin to get the nomination (less than 1 full term in Senate).  
Logged
M
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2496


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: November 27, 2003, 11:43:15 am »
Ignore

Yes, my feelings about Edwards are that he lacks substance, otherwise he would be an impressive candidate, although still with weak spots (trial lawyer, position on war not clearly defined). I agree that he would be stronger with another Senate term, but mainly I have found that he has been a bit clueless about the issues and simply wave all that hair around and uses his magnificently Southern accent. I think that has changed recently, although I do not know if he can recover lost ground. He was pretty good in the debate this week. He also seems to be poor at some of the basic campaign mechanics, ie shaking hands, picking up names, etc.
Logged

Recently moved to Jackson, Mississippi.
NorthernDog
Full Member
***
Posts: 167


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: November 27, 2003, 12:01:15 pm »
Ignore

I now remember an earlier news report on Edwards that showed him shaking hands and asking for votes, but didn't say he was running for President.   People thought he was "nice" but were left puzzled.  Not ready for prime time?
Logged
MSUfan
Jtfdem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6407
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: 4.70

View Profile
« Reply #17 on: November 29, 2003, 12:33:24 pm »
Ignore

Nobody voted for dean yet. No surprise dean has about a 40% chance of beating bush
Logged
DarthKosh
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 902


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: November 29, 2003, 01:51:11 pm »
Ignore

I now remember an earlier news report on Edwards that showed him shaking hands and asking for votes, but didn't say he was running for President.   People thought he was "nice" but were left puzzled.  Not ready for prime time?

The major reason for Edwards to run for pres is that he was problely lose his senate seat.
Logged
Comrade Sibboleth
Realpolitik
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 55448
Saint Helena


View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: November 29, 2003, 02:16:00 pm »
Ignore

Not true... he would probably have been re-elected, although it would have been a close call(like all elections in NC for that matter)
Logged



Richard Hoggart 1918-2014
DarthKosh
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 902


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: November 29, 2003, 02:32:15 pm »
Ignore

Not true... he would probably have been re-elected, although it would have been a close call(like all elections in NC for that matter)
Not Really he was unpopular and the people of NC thought he could care less about the state.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines