 |
|
randomturn
|
|
NYC US
Aug 1999
time: 05:33
|
|
"random, where you been?" --campaigning for Kerry!
"McCain has recently been in New Hampshire to Campign for President Bush." -- He's just a good soldier doing his duty. He sure doesn't seem happy about it though. I saw him on Fox and C-Span. I think he might go for it.
As for Quayle, seems irrelevant to me. Yes, the VP used to be inconsequential (except for LBJ), but we've now had two extremely activist VPS, Gore and Cheney, and it matters a lot more now than it did then.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
Right now the only possibility for a Democratic victory this year is Edwards. Of course a lot could happen that could hurt Bush between now and November but barring some watershed event he can't lose to the rest.
Just research out the last 3 Democratic victories and their last three defeats.
Edwards is the only one that can catch lightning in a bottle. Clark is out of his depth and he is the only other non-New Englander.
Edwards is no Dan Quayle. This guy has charisma and he is sharp as a tack. Inexperienced, yes, but he is learning fast and closing the gaps quicker than an ice cream cone melts in high summer.
If Kerry beats Dean tonight, Dean is done, and Kerry probably will. Even if Dean wins it only means Kerry deflates faster, Dean still can't win. If Edwards beats Clark and Liberman tonight, they are finished. Kerry, Dean, and Edward are likely to move on with Dean leaking like a sieve and in a two man race Edwards will only gain strenght versus Kerry. It will be close, too close to call right now.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
Al Sharpton is polling 15% in South Carolina. Gives one pause.
The VP choice is really about safety. Liberman wouldn't hurt at all. But it will probably be someone that did not run in the primaries.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
[Kerry is the best bet to beat Bush. He's smarter, is a veteran, and knows his stuff cold. |
Rove is going to wrap Bush in an American flag and wave him all over the place. No one is going to hurt him on foreign policy unless things go really bad in Iraq. Which they could.
Kerry has no sizzle. He has no down home attractiveness. He doesn't inspire. He is a liberal from New England. Rove will tied Ted Kennedy around his neck and drive them off a bridge.
He will sleep with the fishes. Dukacarp, McGuppy, Kerryfish. You might as well resurrect Cumocrappy.
If you want to win with someone from New England you got to have someone who has some personality. Might as well go with DeanoMarlin. Arrrgghhh!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Edwards was a trail lawyer, one of the favorite groups for the GOP to smear. That and his experience will be the key subjects the republicans will attack.
If Dean, who served 12 years a a governor is to be dismissed for lack of the "right" experience to be president, a 1 term senator? |
Well, the point is that the election is never really settled by either end of the political spectrum or by turnout. It is who is going to be most attractive to the swing vote. Gore had some sort of slick, geek, can't trust him, phony quality and that is what killed him. Bush was the warm and fuzzy compassionate conservative.
Networks have to run disclaimers before Kerry ads. The following ads contains footage that may not be suitable for younger audiences. He is a scary looking guy. He polls 39% versus Bush in November, tops.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Last newsweek poll out there had him beating bush 49-47%. |
Okay, let us say you are right GePap. Lets assume Kerry gets a narrow win in the popular vote.
Find me a historical example of a close race won by a democrat who did not do well in the South.
The democratic party has to have a good run in the South or, you have to have a landslide.
Does anyone around here really think John Kerry can beat George Bush in a landslide?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Last newsweek poll out there had him beating bush 49-47%. |
Okay, let us say you are right GePap. Lets assume Kerry gets a narrow win in the popular vote.
Find me a historical example of a close race won by a democrat who did not do well in the South.
The democratic party has to have a good run in the South or, you have to have a landslide.
Does anyone around here really think John Kerry can beat George Bush in a landslide?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by jimmytrick
Okay, let us say you are right GePap. Lets assume Kerry gets a narrow win in the popular vote.
Find me a historical example of a close race won by a democrat who did not do well in the South.
The democratic party has to have a good run in the South or, you have to have a landslide.
Does anyone around here really think John Kerry can beat George Bush in a landslide? |
Who needs a landslide? The only people who claim landslides are those that say Dean is unilectable and that bush would sweep him, so forth...
Everyone knows this election will be tight. As for your example- well, GORE. and before you get ina huffy, he lost Florida by under 1000 votes, and on year were about 20,000 voted for tohers, including Nader.
So, as has been said already, if all states remains as they were in 2000 with the exception of 1 large one, like Tennessee, or more importantly, Florida, dems win, even wit a weak Southern finish. For the umptenthe time, the Dems do NOT need the south- they need the mIdwest, west and southwest, NOT the south. Dems would be better of trying to switch NH, Ohio and Florida.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
You can't give me an example of a time when the Democrats won a close election without doing well in the South so you point to Gore who lost.
That of course proves my point. You almost won with Gore. A Southerner. Who almost had enough support in the south. Either way you don't beat Bush without Edward atop this ticket.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
The Democrats don't have a shot at winning the South (excluding Florida). If a Edwards is running for President, Tenessee, Arkansas, Georgia, North Carolina, and Louisiana would be more competitive, but are ultimately wastes of time (Gore couldn't even carry his own state), and aren't in the least needed. If more effort were placed in midwestern states like Ohio, the Dems would've won in 2000.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
Some of you folks better go look at the electoral maps for past northern democratic contenders. You need to get sobered up.
John Kerry ain't John Kennedy and even if he was, today's South ain't the South Kennedy won in 1960. A northern Democrat can't win this election.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
The last northern Democrat to win Ohio was Roosevelt. Sixty four years ago. Good luck.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
27-01-2004 22:09
. Although I do like some of the stuff I heard about his economic policies in Vermont. I heard he hasn't raised taxes, and has kept spending down. That's what I'm looking for in a president. Not some spend happy democrat or even worse. A spend happy republican like Bush. 
. I also seem to remember people saying a Catholic couldn't be elected President as well.
|