Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by BenReilly, Nov 11, 2003.
Two topics for the price of one...
Ben gimme your opinion. Is the Confederate BATTLE flag heritage or hate?
Both, I guess. I still would like to know why Democrats favor a pro-Confederate flag, pro-gun candidate over the only Democrat that has a good chance of beating George Bush. The only Dem who can win the swing states. The only Democrat that Republicans fear.
Which candidate are you refering to?
edit: okay, nevermind I saw the thumbs up next Gephart.
Why is Gephardt the only Dem who can win? I know that Beltway Dems fear a Dean candidacy in the same way that Republicans feared a McCain candidacy in 2000 - someone who doesn't follow the party line as orthodox always scares career political hacks -- but there's nothing other than geography that Gephardt brings to the table that, say, Edwards or Kerry doesn't. In fact, when you look at his work on getting a Dem majority in the House, Gephardt is highly indistinguished.
I am not into it. Who do they favor?
Ben, the decisive factor in the 1998 elections was the Dems' ground war. The Dems ran stronger than expected in 2000 because of the ground war. And the Reeps outperformed the polls in 2002 because of the ground war.
So, smart guy, what do you think will be decisive in 2004 (outside of Bush's record, which is irrelevant to whom the Dems nominate)? The ground war. OK, now which candidate is likely to have the strongest ground forces? Dean.
Ben, you're like JoPa. On any given subject, you know one thing very very well. But your mind is very very small.
But proceeds to lose because he'll predictably make numerous blunders.
Geography is HUGE. His committment to the core Democratic issues is also superior.
Gee, he failed to do that all by himself?
I reject your premise.
BZZZ. The ability to win toss-up states, especially in the Midwest. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest Gephardt would be a more appealing candidate to Midwestern (and Southern) voters, even if he doesn't come up with brilliant ideas like Confederate bumber stickers.
It's a damn shame that I'm going to have to leave most of my stockpile in Texas when I move to D.C.
The confed flag thing was not a blunder, and anyone who bothers to think about it beyond the rose-colored glasses of their particular candidate should realize that the Dem nominee does need to appeal to NASCAR dads at least a bit in order to make Bush work in Georgia and the Carolinas.
Geography is overrated. Gore couldn't even carry Tennessee, and Gephardt is unloved by the majority of Missourians who live outside of the 270 loop.
And as far as his Democratic appeal, think of it this way: Gephardt appeals to the Democratic machine, but Clinton '92 appealed to Democrats. There's a huge difference. Party leadership are so concerned about electing the Democrat with the purest adherence to party platform that they have forgotten to think about who can actually win the general election.
He's the Dem Leader in the House, and Dems have steadily lost ground in the House over the past nine years. He has to take a big part of the blame. Leadership is a bitch in times like this.
Don't get me wrong; I don't hate Gephardt. He's infinitely more appealing than Lieberman. But at best he is the fourth most exciting candidate, and Dems need someone who will excite the base enough to work for him. Dean, Clark and Kerry would all be better choices come the general election.
Because he was perceived as a Washingtonian. You really don't think Gephardt would do well in, say, Michigan?
Look, I admit that I'm goofing around a bit because this is the first sliver of good news in the entire f-ing campaign. But I still think Gephardt has a better shot at winning. And he's a damned fine human being.
I for one am happy the stockpile is getting left behind. The last thing we need in DC are Texans with arsenals, we've seen how well that turns out.
These guys are against gun control, too. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Especially Texas ranchers.
PS...everyone bookmark this post, because when Gringo sees it, it's gonna be "fixed," and I'm probably going to be carded.
Obviously I resigned as mod of the politics forum too soon.
And Gephardt wouldn't be? I remember from the mid-90s when I lived in St. Louis that Gephardt was seen as hopelessly out of touch with his southern county constituency. Maybe things have changed.
The Dem nominee will win Michigan next year regardless of who the candidate is -- because once again, this election is going to be all about Bush.
You list exciting Democratic candidates and you don't list Sharpton? What is wrong with you? His hairstyle alone is more exciting than half the field.
I want to see Sharpton nominated because then Bush will have to debate him. It would make Lincoln-Douglas look like a pile of crap in comparison. It would be so powerful that it would have to be shown as an event in the X-Games.