I will take this opportunity to say "I told yout so". Actually, not you cl_h but a few others on this board. Here are a few quotes from my favorite thread these past few weeks, link I was amazed at the responses I got in that thread both for the lack of self-awareness and for the hatred for voters who vote based upon their religious beliefs.
Yep. The Swifties inflicted mortal dmanage that he was never able to really recover from. And the fact that the Democratic party didn't think something like that was coming and the fact that they were completely unprepared for it shows how incompetent they are. I can't believe McAuliffe hasn't resigned yet.
Ditto. As far as I'm concerned, the US gov't works best when there's a moderate president, a slightly liberal House, and a slightly conservative Senate.
This is where I point out that of the 3 major networks, CBS news was #1 in misleading its viewers in a pro-Bush direction on Iraq, and #2 (behind Fox) of all major TV outlets. IOW, you're wrong on the facts. One thing that's driving me nuts is the number of conservatives going Goebbels on us. Studies show Bush voters more ignorant on the issues important to them than Kerry voters, and we cite them, yet they keep saying we're being arrogant for pointing to the truth. Studies show CBS News to be in the tank, but for whatever reason, Dan Rather, and not, say, Peter Jennings, is their poster boy for media bias. Judith Miller has as much impact on us getting into the Stupid Pointless War as anyone up to and including Bush or Cheney, and the NYT is a liberal news organ. It's psychotic behavior.
I agree with 90% of that. Lieberman would have kicked GWB's tail. Even I would have voted for Lieberman. No wait, I did vote for Lieberman (in the primaries). Any "values" charge against Lieberman would have failed. Any soft on terrorism charge would have failed. He was the only one who stood up against Dean. Yet the Dems couldn't bring themselves to take him seriously. The voters didn't leave the Democratic party. The Democratic party left the voters.
Polling data shows a different story. Sorry, Mike, the Swifties was at worst a wash, probably a slight boost for Kerry. IMO, even as if it was a wash, it helped, because the media stopped being in the tank for Bush because of it.
What? This makes no sense. You didn't have to answer an Iraq-9/11 question correctly to get to vote. If they had, Kerry would have gotten over 2/3 of the vote.
Who was it that swallowed the phony Bush memo hook, line and sinker? You are using flimsy factoids to deny the obvious - CBS news wanted like crazy for those memos to be true. And Dan Rather is a solid liberal - his commentaries leave no doubt. He's also a pompous egomaniac. And he's probably one of the big reasons that CBS was so gullible on the forgery.
Lieberman is not a Democrat. If you are suggesting that the Dems redefine thmeselves to accomodate and celebrate Joe, I actually think that you are in part correct; they need to move one way or the other from where they are; I still think that moving "right" will leave them in a position of being Republican-lite, but hey, 55,949,407 voters voted against Bush/for the Dems for a whole spectrum of reasons, among them, probably, a desire for more political space for the party that houses Lieberman's POV.
PLEASE GOD NO HILLARY! I think Kerry should have had either Clark or Bob Graham from FL run as VP. I really like Edwards, but the only difference between him and Kerry was geography. There needed to be more balance.
I agree. I voted for Dole and W-the first time around. But his administration has just jumped WAY to far to the right for me.
You're now making the same mistake most secular Leftists make. Getting religion doesn't mean moving to the right. One can confuse it as such because it would be imposible to really get religion without giving up on some Leftist issues but most issues the Dems care about could be worked on from a religious point of view. However, the antipathy that most on the Left have for religion not only prevents them from accepting religious voters but causes them to be openly antagonistic towards them.
The early release of both Time and Newsweek stories on the behind-the-scenes goingson in both camps was very interesting. The key points were these: Karl Rove was able to keep the entire Bush team on point the entire time. In contrast, the Kerry camp bounced from Cahill to Carville to McAuliffe to Lockhart and back again. The lack of a unified voice in the Kerry camp was a major problem that ranged from "I voted for it/against it" to the non-response to the Swift vets. Kerry supporters spent far too much time hating Bush and not enough time developing a clear message. By comparison, the Bush message, love it or hate it, was clear all along. Dem strategists "missed all the cues" according to former Gore adviser Doug Hattaway, about the "values voters" becoming a significant factor. Though the "values voter" was only 22% of the the total, it was enough to make a difference. Sounds like what many here have been saying. As a soccer coach, for the Democrats, it is like having been beaten by a team with better players who executed their tactics better. So who do you blame for that? Get better players and execute better. Bill Clinton said it yesterday, "It is time for Democrats to quit whining and move on."
It's like a game of Risk where the Democrats have given up on North America and South America, fight over Europe, Asia and Africa and can't understand why the Republicans get 10 armies every turn to their 2 for holding Indonesia.
I know it's been said before, but Jesus, you guys are arrogant because 60,000 people in Ohio voted for Bush instead of Kerry.
Make that 60,000+ next time if you continue to use the Lord's name in vane. Where do you live again? Do you get out of the house?
Is this the well-known exit polls to which you are referring? Great stuff. Post election comments from political observers from 4 different networks, including CNN, said the lack of response from Kerry on the Swift Boat vets hurt him. That view was confirmed last night by Evan Thomas of Newsweek who related Kerry's rant against his advisers when he finally realized he was getting killed over Swift boat vets.
No really. I did. People actually change their minds once in a while. Please, don't everyone throw all the flip flops at me at once.
No, I refer to polls taken at the time. That's objective evidence, not someone's bullsh** opinion. It's been pretty thoroughly covered, but the media are stupid, and I don't expect them to remember something from 2 months ago.
Yeah, but they're counting provisionals and absentees and military votes in other states as well. MI/MN/WI/PA all just barely tipped in Kerry's direction, otherwise this would've been a historical landslide.
So, your response to Evan Thomas' report that the Swift vets DID hurt Kerry is that Thomas is too stupid to remember something that happened 2 months ago? That his recollection that Kerry was storming around the room ranting at aids about the poor advice he received about trying to ignore the vets, is just the ramblings of a stupid journalist, who happens to be a senior editor of 1 on the nations oldest and most widely read news magazine?