Why Kerry is winning NH

[CFLarsen]

Dear fellow non-Americans,

What you observe here is a typical American political "debate".

Not a single reference to actual political programs that the candidates intend to instigate. Not a word about what policies the candidates intend to work for.

Everything is decided from previous records, personal appearances and "who can do the best one-liners".

In other words, nobody gives a frick about what these guys will actually do, if they are elected. All that matters is how well they look on TV, during their 30-seconds commercials.

Amazing. And downright scary.

 

[Ion]

Not me:

...
However, from an absolute point of view I think that Dean is the best U.S. brain, better than Kerry, because of his successful record when governing Vermont -including balanced budgets for 11 years and universal healthcare for the under 21- and because of his steadfast (not flip-flop) anti-war and anti-tax-cuts campaign.

I am not into how "...standing tall, but a little disheveled..." Kerry looked in a war commercial so that his "...wannabe appearance and goofy substance..." can work on Americans -like I put it earlier in this thread-.

That got firefighters voting for him in Iowa.

 

[Grammatron]

Dear fellow non-Americans,

What you observe here is a typical American political "debate".

Not a single reference to actual political programs that the candidates intend to instigate. Not a word about what policies the candidates intend to work for.

Everything is decided from previous records, personal appearances and "who can do the best one-liners".

In other words, nobody gives a frick about what these guys will actually do, if they are elected. All that matters is how well they look on TV, during their 30-seconds commercials.

Amazing. And downright scary.

Isn't it? Not only that but I got actually "yelled" at on this forum when I wanted the debate to be on policies and not on personalities. As it stands I -- one of those swing voters -- have no idea what the policies of the Democrats are. Sure they all oppose the war, yes they all want to do something with healthcare for everyone. I hope that it's not it. It's easy to promise something they can't deliver -- universal healthcare -- and to show they dislike something everyone hates -- war.

 

[Luke T.]

The Dean supporters in this topic seem to be rather laconic.

Let's have some depth, people! "Dean is good."

Good for what? Why?

Clark struck me as a looney with his statements about abortion. And he particularly struck me as a dishonorable man when he didn't slap Michael Moore for calling the Commander in Chief a deserter. I can't believe a man who prides himself, and constantly reminds people, on being a General that he let that slide. He should be ashamed. Even when pressed by Peter Jennings during the recent debate, he said it didn't matter to him that Moore called Bush a deserter.

No honor. None. Zip. I could never trust a man like that.

 

[Ion]

The Dean supporters in this topic seem to be rather laconic.

Let's have some depth, people! "Dean is good."

Good for what? Why?
...

I post this for the third time:

...
However, from an absolute point of view I think that Dean is the best U.S. brain, better than Kerry, because of his successful record when governing Vermont -including balanced budgets for 11 years and universal healthcare for the under 21- and because of his steadfast (not flip-flop) anti-war and anti-tax-cuts campaign.

It was not addressed once, but my introductory "Dean is good." came up instead in order to diagnose 'laconic' for everything I posted.

That's selective reading.

How many posts does it take before seeing the follow up on "Dean id good.", i.e.: the "...However, from an absolute point of view,..."?

 

[Luke T.]

It took you a while to get around to some substance, Ion. That's laconic.

So "Dean is good" for taxes. And he is hell-bent on them. Who'd have guessed?

 

[Solitaire]

This image just so stands in contrast to Bush in the
flight suit, that you get the feeling Kerry could win.

Oh, I definitely think he could win the nomination.
Last night on CBS he was really good and personable.
He said he was against everything Bush did, passionately.
I didn’t catch a single thing he was for, but it doesn’t matter.
Candidates practically never do in office what they promise.
I picked him and Dean as being the winners of the nomination
largely based upon how much money the economic elites pumped in.
The good news is for them that Kerry like Bush is a Skull & Crossbones man.
I have a feeling that Clark will be his running mate more than Edwards.

He can’t win the election becuase the Republicans remain solidly
behind their candidate. They’ve added a quite a few more voters
and disqualifications for minorities. I wish I could bet on the election.
It’s easy money.

 

[Ion]

It took you a while to get around to some substance, Ion. That's laconic.

So "Dean is good" for taxes. And he is hell-bent on them. Who'd have guessed?

But it was there before you posted wasn't it?

And you posted 'laconic' nonetheless, even though it was there.

Dean is good for balanced budgets.

11 years in Vermont.

In another thread I linked the IMF concern about Bush's debts.

 

[Landis]

The Dean supporters in this topic seem to be rather laconic.

And he particularly struck me as a dishonorable man when he didn't slap Michael Moore for calling the Commander in Chief a deserter.

So you think a citizen has no right to speak the truth? Why is it whenever anyone ask the question "why was Bush AWOL during his National Guard service" the Bushies start jumping up and down and screaming treason. After all, Bush, himself brought the subject up by donning a military flight uniform and parading around before the cameras.

I just don't get why people think Bush was a military hero when he can't even seem to remember what he was doing for a whole year of his life during the Viet Nam war.

 

[CFLarsen]

Re: Re: Why Kerry is winning NH

Oh, I definitely think he could win the nomination.
Last night on CBS he was really good and personable.
He said he was against everything Bush did, passionately.
I didn’t catch a single thing he was for, but it doesn’t matter.
Candidates practically never do in office what they promise.
I picked him and Dean as being the winners of the nomination
largely based upon how much money the economic elites pumped in.
The good news is for them that Kerry like Bush is a Skull & Crossbones man.
I have a feeling that Clark will be his running mate more than Edwards.

He can’t win thou, the Republicans remain solidly behind their candidate.
They’ve added a quite a few more voters and disqualifications for minorities.
I wish I could bet on the election. It’s easy money.

Are you out of your mind?? Do you really decide on who should lead your country based on something else than their policies??

 

[Athena]

But, if Dean can't win in NH then it's going to be very hard for him elsewhere.

I am a Republican living in VT, have lived here 12 years. In fact I live about 40 minutes from the Dixville Notch where the first results will come in from. I'll be voting for Bush when election time roles around.

However, let me tell you about Dr. Dean. He ruined this state for business, we all shop in NH where they are business friendly and don't tax them to death. In my mind he's a "slick willy" clone just about, changes his stance on the issues. What's in those boxes locked up in MontPeculiar that he doesn't want you all to see? Only his "records" for his term of service. I've seen him LIE to the press before about his knowledge of events that were about to occur regarding businesses laying off workers (IBM), I could tell by his body language he was not being truthful and sure enough, I was right.

Kerry is winning because people think he can beat Bush and he does have that slick ad of him in his uniform touting his role as leader of men. He also has run a fairly positive campaign compared to Dean, and Dean did lose ground after Iowa speech, he scared some people away. Our local news is full of Dean stories every night. Maybe someday he'll have the experience and the timing will be right for him to move up the political food chain, but I don't think that time is now. No matter what Senator Leahy says.

Now having said all that, here's a pic of myself and then Gov. Dean taken in 1998 at a promotional ceremony for my spouse. Just thought I'd share

 

[Luke T.]

So you think a citizen has no right to speak the truth? Why is it whenever anyone ask the question "why was Bush AWOL during his National Guard service" the Bushies start jumping up and down and screaming treason. After all, Bush, himself brought the subject up by donning a military flight uniform and parading around before the cameras.

I just don't get why people think Bush was a military hero when he can't even seem to remember what he was doing for a whole year of his life during the Viet Nam war.

Did Michael Moore ever call Clinton a deserter? I doubt it.

I don't know who thinks Bush was a military hero. Never heard anyone say that.

 

[Athena]

Dean is good for balanced budgets.
11 years in Vermont.

Do you mean this sarcastically or do you have proof of this claim?

Yes, tax tax tax and you have all the money you need. Maybe a balanced budget, but at what expense? Our current Governor is the financial whiz and he's straightening up all that Dean made a mess of. Balanced budget and businesses leaving the state en masse. It happens every day here.

 

[Grammatron]

So you think a citizen has no right to speak the truth? Why is it whenever anyone ask the question "why was Bush AWOL during his National Guard service" the Bushies start jumping up and down and screaming treason. After all, Bush, himself brought the subject up by donning a military flight uniform and parading around before the cameras.

I just don't get why people think Bush was a military hero when he can't even seem to remember what he was doing for a whole year of his life during the Viet Nam war.

As far as I know Bush was honorably discharged from the National Guard which would imply that he was probably never AWOL. Also, there's no real AWOL charge on Bush's record, of course when this is brought up the anti-Bushies always scream "He bought his way out!" or "His father pulled strings!" Which I guess is a more reasonable, mature response, despite the absence of evidence.

 

[Clancie]

CFLarsen reposted by Grammatron

What you observe here is a typical American political "debate".

Not a single reference to actual political programs that the candidates intend to instigate. Not a word about what policies the candidates intend to work for.

Everything is decided from previous records, personal appearances and "who can do the best one-liners".

In other words, nobody gives a frick about what these guys will actually do, if they are elected. All that matters is how well they look on TV, during their 30-seconds commercials.

Amazing. And downright scary.

Talk about making a silly over-generalization and trying to state it as a fact! ("Evidence", anyone? ) Do you actually agree with this, Grammatron? Personally, I think Claus is just trolling again--maybe not having learned the lesson of his earlier "If I see someone with a gun on a plane I'm going to kill him, no questions asked" thread.

Surprise! People can both know and care about policies and discuss "image" and presentation issues that -do- affect a candidate's electability. It's not an "either/or" situation.

Posted by Grammatron

As it stands I -- one of those swing voters -- have no idea what the policies of the Democrats are.

Well, its probably too hard to get enough comparative details across through short posts on a message board anyway. But maybe you'll find this site of interest (also has links to candidates' bios and positions, websites and quotes)

issues and candidates

There's also a quiz where you can get a little idea of how some of your views correspond with theirs.

short quiz

And, re: AWOL. Bush technically wasn't a deserter, that's true. But he's never accounted for the documented year that he did not show up for his duties in the Guard when he was required to.

 

[Aoidoi]

Re: Re: Re: Why Kerry is winning NH

Are you out of your mind?? Do you really decide on who should lead your country based on something else than their policies??

It comes down to the old problem of voting for the candidate you prefer or the platform you prefer. It's up to the individual voter, but in American politics you aren't voting for a platform, you're voting for individuals. They are free to deviate from their election promises as much as they want to. It's not a parliamentary system, the two major parties each contain people who disagree with significant parts of their platform. You're not voting for the policies, you're voting for the person.

My father has mentioned to me on several occassions that it's difficult when the choice comes down to an impressive candidate who you may disagree with or a stuffed shirt who will follow a party line that you agree with. Personally, I tend to vote for individuals because my view on policy is rather fluid, but your mileage may vary

It is noticeably different from most European models, as is rather strongly implied by the responses of the Europeans on the board. Whether it's better or worse is certainly debateable.


(I wrote this but liked the non DA part better, but I figured I'd leave it in cause I kind of liked it )

[Devil's Advocate]

You would chose based solely on campaign promises? You would select the person who has policies that agree with you regardless of any other factors?? So if Charlie Manson ran on a platform you agreed with you'd vote for him over someone who disagrees with you on a single issue? What about the policies he doesn't elaborate on? What about his ability to handle crises? What about his ability as a diplomat, his ability to establish relationships with foreign leaders? You don't care about the candidates ability to react to unexpected situations, or deal with what is out of the ordinary? That strikes me as terrribly short-sighted.

[/Devil's Advocate]

 

[Ion]

Do you mean this sarcastically or do you have proof of this claim?
...

I mean that you should search before speaking.

After you search, you have the proof.

The proof is in the public domain since Dean appeared nationally in the spring of 2003.

...
Yes, tax tax tax and you have all the money you need. Maybe a balanced budget, but at what expense?
...

Who do you think is going to pay for Bush's 'fun and games' adventures?

Halliburton?

Halliburton when under CEO Cheney who is vice-President now, has fifty something subsidiaries in a tax heaven.

So no, is people like me who pay for Bush lunacies that kill.

 

[Landis]

Did Michael Moore ever call Clinton a deserter? I doubt it.

That's because he was not a deserter. To be a deserter you have to be in the military (or at least called up through the draft).
Bush failed to report for active duty. This is a military offense punishable by court martial and possible time in the brink. He started his military service but somewhere along the line he decided he wasn't obligated to fulfill his duties.

Clinton and most of our current governing officials (Cheney et al) did what they could to stay out of the military. They did it within the law so they were not deserters. If Bush did not have an important daddy, the military might have been more interested in his where abouts.

Clark and Kerry both have experienced War first hand. They both won the Silver Star in Viet Nam.

 

[Athena]

Oh cool, on our local news we saw actor Martin Sheen - the President - introducing Dr(s). Dean in NH. Then we see Lyndon Larouche (sp?) supporters physically getting thrown out of Deans speach because they were so unruly. Very neat. And Judy is there too!

Yes Howard Dean, we know all about your record here. I'm living it thank you very much. Lots of stuff in the public domain for sure, but what about the 1000 boxes of stuff locked up that isn't? And again I ask, why doesn't he just say - here you go folks, I've got nothing to hide? The answer is because he has a lot to hide - much of it from when the civil unions debate was hot and heavy.

200 voters in Dixville notch, no registered Democrats, they'll probably vote for Clark. It will be interesting for sure.

 

[CFLarsen]

CFLarsen reposted by Grammatron

You just had to make sure that you were addressing Grammatron and not me, eh?

Talk about making a silly over-generalization and trying to state it as a fact! ("Evidence", anyone? )

No, you dimwit. I clearly stated it as an opinion. Where did I state it as a fact??

Do you actually agree with this, Grammatron?

I'm right here, Clancie. Talk to me, don't just talk about me. It would be the honest thing to do, but then, we have learned that honesty and Clancie do not go well together...

Personally, I think Claus is just trolling again--maybe not having learned the lesson of his earlier "If I see someone with a gun on a plane I'm going to kill him, no questions asked" thread.

I am not "trolling", Clancie. I wasn't either then. Please stop telling other people what they do, and stop forcing motives on people they do not have.

Surprise! People can both know and care about policies and discuss "image" and presentation issues that -do- affect a candidate's electability. It's not an "either/or" situation.

Not according to this thread, which I made perfectly clear. In case you hadn't noticed....(which we all know that you had)

Well, its probably too hard to get enough comparative details across through short posts on a message board anyway. But maybe you'll find this site of interest (also has links to candidates' bios and positions, websites and quotes)

Why should it be "too hard"? Nobody is limiting the length of people's posts here. What's so "hard" about it?

issues and candidates

There's also a quiz where you can get a little idea of how some of your views correspond with theirs.

short quiz

Outside this thread, yes. Therefore, you are building a strawman.

You are simply incapable of arguing in an honest manner.