Scratch two Dem candidates off the list

vsp · 07-25-2003, 08:09 AM

Democrat failure #1: Dick Gephardt.

As if there weren't already <a href="http://www.cellar.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3571">enough good reasons</a> to remove Mr. Gephardt from serious Presidential consideration, Dick outdid himself yesterday.

The School Readiness Act of 2003 had its House vote yesterday. This bill hammers a large wooden stake into the future of the Head Start program.

The bill passed, 217-216. There were two non-voters.

<a href="http://clerkweb.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2003&rollnumber=444">Guess who one of them was?</a>

If you can't show up to do your goddamn job now, Dick, don't ask me to recommend you for a promotion next year.

Democratic failure #2: Joe Lieberman.

Okay, most of us have known that Lieberman is actually a Republican for years. But it's always entertaining when he comes right out and <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92771,00.html">declares it</a>:

<i>"The anti-tax-cut, soft-on-defense, big-spending Democrats will take the Democratic Party to the edge and maybe over," Lieberman told Fox News.</i>

Dear Holy Joe: Here's a free tip. You are (nominally, at least) a prominent Democrat. If you really think that reciting your opponents' own talking points, attacking your own party's members and principles and endorsing much of Dubya's platform is a good idea, why don't you pull a Jeffords, change the letter after your name to an "R" and get the fucking suspense over with?

Also, please feel free to consume feces and cease to metabolize.

Undertoad · 07-25-2003, 08:55 AM

Lieberman is the candidate who can actually win, is all -- but if the election is already a guaranteed loss, might as well pull a Goldwater (not my concept, Vodkapundit's) and run Dean.

A recent Gephardt speech tried to have it both ways on Iraq, which he can't really do because he voted for it in Congress. He brought up the "16 words", which he can't really do because he voted for it two months before those words were spoken. He wants a big powerful military, which he can't really do because he's already spending big money in his candidacy. This is mediocrity in action. I will not vote for a guy who decides foreign policy on the flip of a coin.

vsp · 07-25-2003, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Undertoad
Lieberman is the candidate who can actually win, is all -- but if the election is already a guaranteed loss, might as well pull a Goldwater (not my concept, Vodkapundit's) and run Dean.

With all due respect, no way in hell. Lieberman was an unmitigated disaster as a Veep candidate. His prayer eruptions on the campaign trail turned off significant chunks of the Democratic base, and his censor-America-for-the-children campaigns reminded many of why they _used to_ loathe the Gores. He had a pathetic debate against Cheney. When Gore stepped back from Lieberman's vote-for-the-Republicans-who-are-running-as-Democrats rhetoric and started veering in a more populist direction, his poll numbers started improving immediately.

Tom Eagleton was a better Veep choice.

Just as many in the Democratic "center" are prepared to mount an anyone-but-Dean primary campaign, lots of progressives are looking at the chaos Bush & Co. have inflicted and are STILL saying "I'll vote for any Democrat BUT Lieberman." That damage is done. Dean may or may not end up being viable, but Lieberman will drop out after a handful of primaries.

07-25-2003, 09:22 AM

Heh. You're finding out what I've known for many years now: most Democrat politicians are pathetic sacks of shit.

That's why Dean is interesting; he looks less sack o' shit-like.

vsp · 07-25-2003, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dave
Heh. You're finding out what I've known for many years now: most Democrat politicians are pathetic sacks of shit.

That's why Dean is interesting; he looks less sack o' shit-like.

Remove the word "Democrat" from your statement and I've known that all along.

The deal with Dean is that he has a few things coming together at once. As a non-Congresscritter, he has that "outsider" vibe that's often treasured. He was openly anti-war when many of his primary opponents were voting to give Bush the go-ahead (a vote he didn't have to take part in, obviously). He's far and away the leader in using the Internet as a communication tool; that won't win him the election by itself, but it sure doesn't hurt, and it's given him a massive boost in both money and volunteers in these early stages. He's mobilizing a lot of Dems, Nader defectors and usually-stay-at-homes through his attitude as much as anything else, while his actual issue stances aren't nearly as liberal as some make them out to be.

One thing that moved him up in my esteem is that he was the first prominent politician to step up and say "Senator Santorum, you're full of shit" in so many words when the man-on-dog interview came out. Another one of those things that most of us knew all along, but few in power would say aloud...

Dean, Kerry, and perhaps Edwards have a shot at dethroning Bush, though much will depend on what Bush does between now and then (i.e. how bad Iraq looks, how the economy's doing). Lieberman has no chance. He has zero personality, he'd make progressives stay home in droves, and his platform's not far off of pointing to Bush and saying "I'm just like him, but vote for me." Gephardt will do fine in Iowa, then will drop like a rock.

Undertoad · 07-25-2003, 09:42 AM

His prayer eruptions on the campaign trail turned off significant chunks of the Democratic base,

...which is exactly how you get elected in general elections, since the vast majority of voters are way outside that particular group.

vsp · 07-25-2003, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Undertoad
His prayer eruptions on the campaign trail turned off significant chunks of the Democratic base,

...which is exactly how you get elected in general elections, since the vast majority of voters are way outside that particular group.

Nah, I won't follow you there. A significant percentage of HIS OWN PARTY won't vote for him, and I'm not talking about just the far left fringe. I won't accept the notion that he'll pull more votes from the Republicans and "swing voters" than he'll lose among the Democrats, especially when he spends more time agreeing with Bush and the Republicans than arguing against them. He didn't help Gore reach 50% in 2000; he dragged Gore _down_ to 50%, to where the mirth and merriment of Florida could kick in.

This isn't a Rizzo kind of guy, where 45% turned out to vote for him and 45% turned out to vote against him no matter who the opponent was. Lieberman has the personal magnetism and charisma of a dishrag. Exactly what does he bring to the table that will inspire the typical Republican-leaning swing voter to say "Hey, he's something DIFFERENT, I should vote for him" in any numbers?

When a wanna-be runs against the real deal, the real deal usually wins. If he can find a way to distinguish himself FROM Bush, he may have a chance; if he continues to tout how much he and Bush think alike, he's toast on a stick.

Undertoad · 07-25-2003, 12:46 PM

OK. But if you think you hate Bush now, wait'll you see what kind of Bush you get after a 60-40 election and coat-tails guaranteeing 2-3 votes of wiggle room in the Senate.

vsp · 07-25-2003, 12:51 PM

All right, then. If you were a campaign manager, how would _you_ go about getting Democrats to come out and vote?

(Note that I didn't say "getting Republicans to vote for Democrats." I strongly believe that the former task is more important than the latter.)

elSicomoro · 07-25-2003, 03:37 PM

You get a Democrat that isn't afraid to speak out. Someone that will say, "You know what? This shit is just crazy right now...we have to chill out a bit." Or..."You know, I realize that things have been nuts for 2 years now, but I think I can do better than what we have now...and here's how I want to try and do it."

Dean seems like he wants to do this, but hasn't quite done it yet. I just want to see someone take a stand and not be afraid of taking on Bush and the GOP.

Of course, getting rid of McAuliffe could do the Dems wonders.

elSicomoro · 07-25-2003, 04:14 PM

BTW, Wesley Clark is still out there, pondering. From his interview with Diane Rehm on NPR this week, he seems like he really wants to pull the trigger on this. He could be what the Dems really need...or he could inspire the other candidates to do better.

Undertoad · 07-25-2003, 04:15 PM

I *was* a campaign manager, and I have back issues of Campaigns and Elections. Not that this qualifies me or anything... my record as a manager is 0-2.

I believe the simplest, proven, effective way to get Democrats OR Republicans out to vote is to call them on election day and ask them to.

Most people do not operate the way you do. They would like to have opinions and principles and stuff, and CARE and stuff, but it's too hard and there is too much more to be interested in.

Now you may really vote hard, you may really press that button down hard or pull that lever until it almost falls off, but that still only counts as one vote. Dean's "Bush lied!" gambit excites 5% of the population to a frenzy -- the people who operate by principle, share his biases, and care about politics. Now that he's gotten ALL of those people and is still not a front-runner, what next?

Look at it from my old perspective. I've had this very same debate many times with Libertarian Party True Believers. I wanted to run somewhat populist candidates with moderate views, and teach them how to appeal to the common person, in order to build a big-tent party. Most everyone else felt it would be much more effective to run hardline 100% highly-principled philosophers who believe in things like shutting down the public schools.

I consistently lost that debate, and not only are there precious few elected LPers, but the party has now reduced itself through this purification to a small number of committed, highly-principled people like Radar who will never, ever win one election, and shouldn't anyway.

Leave the purists to the Green Party, the big parties are for politics.

elSicomoro · 07-25-2003, 04:22 PM

Let's not go calling the Green Party purists now...their own politics are far from pure, IMO.

I understand where you're coming from UT, and the lack of principles, caring, etc. is what is so scary right now. Everything is so knee-jerk, so automated...moreso than normal. Our government right now doesn't feel like Big Brother to me...it feels like my father.

UT, you realize you're going to be my campaign manager when I run for office, right?

xoxoxoBruce · 07-25-2003, 04:36 PM

Does Dean have a brother named Billy, that likes beer, a lot?

Tobiasly · 07-26-2003, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Undertoad
Not that this qualifies me or anything

This would be a good new tagline for you UT... "not qualified or anything"

07-25-2003, 04:36 PM	#14
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	Does Dean have a brother named Billy, that likes beer, a lot? __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

07-25-2003, 08:09 AM	#1
vsp Syndrome of a Down Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: West Chester Posts: 1,367	Scratch two Dem candidates off the list Democrat failure #1: Dick Gephardt. As if there weren't already <a href="http://www.cellar.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3571">enough good reasons</a> to remove Mr. Gephardt from serious Presidential consideration, Dick outdid himself yesterday. The School Readiness Act of 2003 had its House vote yesterday. This bill hammers a large wooden stake into the future of the Head Start program. The bill passed, 217-216. There were two non-voters. <a href="http://clerkweb.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2003&rollnumber=444">Guess who one of them was?</a> If you can't show up to do your goddamn job now, Dick, don't ask me to recommend you for a promotion next year. Democratic failure #2: Joe Lieberman. Okay, most of us have known that Lieberman is actually a Republican for years. But it's always entertaining when he comes right out and <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92771,00.html">declares it</a>: <i>"The anti-tax-cut, soft-on-defense, big-spending Democrats will take the Democratic Party to the edge and maybe over," Lieberman told Fox News.</i> Dear Holy Joe: Here's a free tip. You are (nominally, at least) a prominent Democrat. If you really think that reciting your opponents' own talking points, attacking your own party's members and principles and endorsing much of Dubya's platform is a good idea, why don't you pull a Jeffords, change the letter after your name to an "R" and get the fucking suspense over with? Also, please feel free to consume feces and cease to metabolize.

07-25-2003, 08:55 AM	#2
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Lieberman is the candidate who can actually win, is all -- but if the election is already a guaranteed loss, might as well pull a Goldwater (not my concept, Vodkapundit's) and run Dean. A recent Gephardt speech tried to have it both ways on Iraq, which he can't really do because he voted for it in Congress. He brought up the "16 words", which he can't really do because he voted for it two months before those words were spoken. He wants a big powerful military, which he can't really do because he's already spending big money in his candidacy. This is mediocrity in action. I will not vote for a guy who decides foreign policy on the flip of a coin.

07-25-2003, 09:22 AM	#4
dave Guest Posts: n/a	Heh. You're finding out what I've known for many years now: most Democrat politicians are pathetic sacks of shit. That's why Dean is interesting; he looks less sack o' shit-like.

07-25-2003, 09:42 AM	#6
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	His prayer eruptions on the campaign trail turned off significant chunks of the Democratic base, ...which is exactly how you get elected in general elections, since the vast majority of voters are way outside that particular group.

07-25-2003, 12:46 PM	#8
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	OK. But if you think you hate Bush now, wait'll you see what kind of Bush you get after a 60-40 election and coat-tails guaranteeing 2-3 votes of wiggle room in the Senate.

07-25-2003, 12:51 PM	#9
vsp Syndrome of a Down Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: West Chester Posts: 1,367	All right, then. If you were a campaign manager, how would _you_ go about getting Democrats to come out and vote? (Note that I didn't say "getting Republicans to vote for Democrats." I strongly believe that the former task is more important than the latter.)

07-25-2003, 03:37 PM	#10
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	You get a Democrat that isn't afraid to speak out. Someone that will say, "You know what? This shit is just crazy right now...we have to chill out a bit." Or..."You know, I realize that things have been nuts for 2 years now, but I think I can do better than what we have now...and here's how I want to try and do it." Dean seems like he wants to do this, but hasn't quite done it yet. I just want to see someone take a stand and not be afraid of taking on Bush and the GOP. Of course, getting rid of McAuliffe could do the Dems wonders.

07-25-2003, 04:14 PM	#11
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	BTW, Wesley Clark is still out there, pondering. From his interview with Diane Rehm on NPR this week, he seems like he really wants to pull the trigger on this. He could be what the Dems really need...or he could inspire the other candidates to do better.

07-25-2003, 04:15 PM	#12
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	I was a campaign manager, and I have back issues of Campaigns and Elections. Not that this qualifies me or anything... my record as a manager is 0-2. I believe the simplest, proven, effective way to get Democrats OR Republicans out to vote is to call them on election day and ask them to. Most people do not operate the way you do. They would like to have opinions and principles and stuff, and CARE and stuff, but it's too hard and there is too much more to be interested in. Now you may really vote hard, you may really press that button down hard or pull that lever until it almost falls off, but that still only counts as one vote. Dean's "Bush lied!" gambit excites 5% of the population to a frenzy -- the people who operate by principle, share his biases, and care about politics. Now that he's gotten ALL of those people and is still not a front-runner, what next? Look at it from my old perspective. I've had this very same debate many times with Libertarian Party True Believers. I wanted to run somewhat populist candidates with moderate views, and teach them how to appeal to the common person, in order to build a big-tent party. Most everyone else felt it would be much more effective to run hardline 100% highly-principled philosophers who believe in things like shutting down the public schools. I consistently lost that debate, and not only are there precious few elected LPers, but the party has now reduced itself through this purification to a small number of committed, highly-principled people like Radar who will never, ever win one election, and shouldn't anyway. Leave the purists to the Green Party, the big parties are for politics.

07-25-2003, 04:22 PM	#13
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	Let's not go calling the Green Party purists now...their own politics are far from pure, IMO. I understand where you're coming from UT, and the lack of principles, caring, etc. is what is so scary right now. Everything is so knee-jerk, so automated...moreso than normal. Our government right now doesn't feel like Big Brother to me...it feels like my father. UT, you realize you're going to be my campaign manager when I run for office, right?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)