Dissention's boy Kerry starts making sense
 

I have to admit I am right behind Kerry on his contention that Democrats don't need the South to win the presidency. This is something I've been saying for a while. Democrats should cut their losses in the South and concentrate on the new Latino voters in a bunch of up-for-grabs states, particularly the Southwest. That and the traditional moderate and liberal base is where the party's future is. Let the Republicans have the South.

Of course, this is strictly pragmatic and is nothing against the South in general.

If Kerry keeps making sense like this, I might have to reconsider him... Not for the primary, mind you. But if he gets the nomination, who konws?

He doesnt seem to...
 

be making sense here in Oklahoma to Democratic voters, He has fallen way back in second to Clark in the Feb.3rd primary predictions...So far back that Dean ("ARGGGGGHHHH") has caught up to him.

Brian "Oklahoma has not voted for a Democratic president since JFK...Kinda odd when Oklahoma has a 3-to-1 Democrat to Republican voter registration" j.

Well, of course, let's not discount that part of my glee is that Kerry has just managed to alienate a bunch of voters who are now going to look to Dean, Edwards and Clark. As much as I agree with Kerry, he really should have waited until after locking up the nomination to make such a comment.

Here is a site that contians the electoral votes by each state.

http://www.fec.gov/pages/elecvote.htm

If you count Texas (34) and Florida (27) as part of the South, it would be hard to win a majority of the electoral votes without one or both of these states. But, Texas will clearly go to W as of now. As for Florida - do we really need to go into that again!!! :] Actually, it could still go either way.

But, I agree, the D's should hope for the best in the South, but the mid and southwest seem more obtainable as of now and if Kerry wins.

I think he's being realistic in the sense that it's unlikely any Democrat will win the South. (Edwards had the best shot there, obviously.) And he's probably being smart in writing them off and courting the midwestern states. Except Illinois, though, I really can't see Kerry appealing to the Midwest. Ohio, Indiana, etc will be tough for Kerry to get. Edwards would have a better shot in those states.

Strand, Texas is not exactly the South. And though Florida is, I was excluding it from my definition of "the South." Now, while you are correct in your assessment, it still is possible to take the election without either of those states.

Or we should just get rid of the Electoral College and let the guy with the most votes take the office.

I, too, say get rid of the electoral college - IMO it is no longer necessary and getting rid of it would force the candidates to care about every single state regardless of their size or electoral votes!! :cool:

Re: Dissention's boy Kerry starts making sense
 

:laugh: :wavey:

He's going to get the nomination; Dean had a stroke weeks ago, Clark committed suicide, and Edwards jumped the shark when that memo got leaked and he gave his response to the Defense of Marriage Act in last weeks debate. The others? Feh.

I think Kerry stands a good chance of winning Holling's state, but that's about it. He doesn't even have ten staffers down there and he has no spots on TV.

I for one am sick of seeing Southerners run the country... (even if the current one is a fake Southerner) ;)

Now, if we elected Strandie on the other hand... As vice president, I could do a lot of damag... er, good.

Y'all have my vote already. :nod: :laugh:

Did anyone watch the Washington Journal on C-SPAN this morning?

They was a very faithful elderly Dean supporter who called in and went off on such a screaming tangent that I thought she'd have a stroke on the phone. The C-SPAN host let her scream for about five minutes, then tried to cut her off, but the old bag just kept screaming.

I need to get a transcript...:laugh:

I think ABC News is trying to fashion itself after Faux recently. Here's the link:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/Polit..._040126-1.html

Forget the South?
Frontrunner Kerry Downplays Importance of Region Many Democrats See as Crucial

http://truthout.org/docs_04/012504J.shtml

The States of Iowa and the Union Agree: Bush Can Be Beaten
By Harvey Wasserman
The Free Press

Thursday 22 January 2004

Is the tide turning?

George W. Bush and his puppetmaster Karl Rove tried to upstage the Democrats with a State of the Union Address full of tricks and gimmicks, martian distractions and rattling sabers.

It backfired. The stunning results from Iowa far overshadowed Bush's lame, malapropic stump speech. Space travel, gay marriage, steriods in baseball, these are the burning issues for a Republican Party smug enough to be certain they can steal any election.

The week's signature GOP moment came from Tom DeLay's Texas, where a woman who sells vibrators was arrested for possessing more than two. In a state that's just been redistricted to prevent any Democrats from going to Congress, we see the GOP as the ultimate Luddites. Are Texas men that insecure? What will they ban next? Massage oil?

Come November, we can expect Osama bin Laden to be miraculously "found" whenever Rove decides the timing is best.

A terrorist attack will explode here or there precisely as the Democrats gather steam. Bush may dump Dick Cheney into a cardiac unit to grab headlines and expand his base.

Remember, please, that Karl Rove, who runs the Bush apparatus, cut his teeth as a "Dirty Trickster" for Richard Nixon. Bush's father was elected in 1988 in the infamous "Willie Horton" campaign, the most racist in modern history.

These amoral assassins will fling the lowest available dirt on whoever got in their way, and nobody has mastered the craft better than Rove. With unlimited money to spend, your worst ethical nightmare is their bottom line.

But we're seeing a pattern here. Every time Bush jumps in the polls, he slumps back down.

From the gigantic rush he got after his "trifecta" on September 11, the polls fell to where they were before the terrorist attacks. From his "Mission Accomplished" flashdance on the decks of the Abraham Lincoln, back down he crashed as the bloodshed continued. From the "miraculous" capture of Saddam Hussein (where is he now?) the polls again plunged as the grassroots Iraqi resistance goes on. From the "booming" economy we see the Bush bounce going flat as no jobs materialize and deficits soar while the dollar slumps.

In short, George W. Bush is still George W. Bush: ruthless, corrupt, untrustworthy, closed-minded, authoritarian, inarticulate, intellectually challenged, programmed, cynical, dishonest, violent, a draft dodger and a religious fanatic who believes he speaks to and for God.

Through the Christian Coalition the GOP has a solid activist base of fanatic puritan fundamentalists unparalleled in US history. They have unlimited money. And they have control of the mainstream media, whose endless gush of right-wing bloviaters has just one mantra: "Bush will win, Bush will win, Bush will win."

But they can be beaten. Here are some of the things that must happen:

1) THE VOTES MUST BE HONESTLY COUNTED: As push comes to shove, there is only one issue in this campaign: will the votes be honestly counted. As Stalin infamously put it: it doesn't matter who casts them, only who counts them. We know that the 2000 election was stolen, and that the GOP would be more than happy to do it again through rigged voting machines without paper trails, the computerized disenfranchisement of "convicted felons" and other suspected Democrats, and whatever else Rove & company can come up with.

2) THE VOTES MUST BE HONESTLY COUNTED: In 2000 Al Gore sat passively and watched as the White House was stolen. This time, all serious candidates must hammer at this issue, over and over. Rep. Rush Holt's bill now in Congress to require a paper trail for computerized voting machines is just a start, but it's a good one. The Democrats must get that passed or let the nation know why it didn't, and what that really means if the GOP claims victory in November.

3) THE VOTES MUST BE HONESTLY COUNTED: But it won't be enough just to raise the issue. In every state there must be campaign committees explicitly charged with fighting pre-election disenfranchisement, as happened in Florida and elsewhere. There must be extensive inspection of all voting machines, ballots and other election procedures. The polls must be monitored. Unless the Democrats take concrete, effective steps to guarantee a fair vote count, there's no reason to bother with this election at all.

4-10) THE VOTES MUST BE HONESTLY COUNTED: It may also not be sufficient for the Democrats alone to do this. Serious petitioning must now be done to the United Nations, the government of Switzerland or whoever else might serve as a honest broker, willing to serve an international watch dog function to help guarantee the coup that began in 2000 is not given four more years to solidify power.

11) THE HOUSE MUST BE RE-REDISTRICTED: Through redistricting the GOP has already guaranteed that the Democrats have virtually no chance of ever re-taking the House of Representatives. In one fell swoop, with typical vicious cynicism, Rove and DeLay have eliminated a dozen Texas Democrats even before the election is held. Nationwide, the system is now so twisted Democrats could carry the composite House vote by a wide margin and still end up vastly outnumbered on the floor. This was not the intent of the nation's Founders and must be changed, by Constitutional Amendment if necessary. Millions of us, especially in urban areas, have been effectively disenfranchised for years. The Democrats must publicize this curse on the Congress, and then do something about it.

12) PREPARE FOR RACISM & HOMOPHOBIA---The stench from George H.W. Bush's racist 1988 Willie Horton campaign still taints the presidency. In 2000 the GOP machine specifically targeted African-American and Jewish voters in Florida, Tennessee, Arkansas and elsewhere with Jim Crow tactics that threw those states---and the election---to Bush. This year we can expect similar racism and the smearing of gays and whoever else might be available to mobilize the extremist "religious" right. Somebody should replay those Willie Horton ads to remind the nation who these people really are.

13) ENOUGH ABOUT RALPH NADER, ALREADY: For four years Democrats have indulged in blaming Ralph Nader and the Greens for "losing" the 2000 election. But Al Gore won by 500,000 votes. Add Nader's 2.7 million and 2000 represented a powerful Dem-green mandate, which Bush aborted. THAT'S what the Dems should have been screaming about for the past four years.

14) BUSH-ROVE WERE GOING TO STEAL THE ELECTION NO MATTER WHAT: Nader's supporters were not the mindless property of the Democratic party that Ralph somehow hijacked. And a GOP capable of stealing 16,000 votes in a single Florida district was more than capable of stealing all they needed, Nader or no.

15) PICK UP THE PHONE: Nader remains the most effective citizen activist in recent US history. He still draws huge (paying) crowds. He has a phone. And an office with a door that opens. So do the activists who chose to support him, and may yet again if the Dems repeat their folly of 2000. A few phone calls, some meaningful conversation, a search for common ground, some POLITICS, and maybe the Dems can mobilize at least part of an activist hard core they absurdly blew off in 2000. There's absolutely no excuse for doing otherwise.

16) FORGET THE CONFEDERACY: Conversely, those folks driving around with Confederate flags are going to vote for Bush. The old Slave South (Bush's REAL taproot) is not going to come around. But as Norman Solomon and others have pointed out, the Hispanic southwest (Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado) is in reach and need to be worked on. If, by miracle, Florida or Texas can be got, it's with Hispanic, not racist white votes. How about New Mexico's Hispanic Gov. Bill Richardson for VP?

17) REMEMBER THE ENVIRONMENT: Not even the bought corporate media can hide that Bush has launched a total kamikaze assault on the natural planet. This is an issue the resonates even with much of the fundamentalist right. Mother Earth is still right up there with apple pie. Forget the Confederate flag. Wave the Green one!!!!!

18) REPEAL THE PATRIOT ACT: Bush's one legitimate applause line was that the Patriot Act is about to expire. Even right wingers like William Safire have been lining up against it. The Dems startled poor Georgie when they clapped for that line in his otherwise pathetic State of the Union. Much of the nation, left and right, feels the same. Use it!

19) REMEMBER WATERGATE AND VALERIE PLAME: Somebody very high up in the White House, probably Karl Rove and/or Dick Cheney, has committed a serious felony (and pissed off the CIA) by outing covert operative Valerie Plame. This cancer is eating away at the junta's core. If there is a single issue to push push push alongside the economy, that may be it. Think dagger to the Constitution. Think Dick Nixon, August 9, 1974, getting on that Plame...er, plane.

20) YOU GOTTA BELIEVE: The mainstream mantra that Bush can't be beaten is only true if we let them steal the vote count again. They've got the money. But they've got Bush. The "inevitability" of his victory is as deep as the headlights in his deer.

21) THE HARDER THEY COME: Our theme song. Buy the Jimmy Cliff album. Dance the dance. "...as sure as the sun will shine.......the harder they come, the harder they fall, one and all....."

BTW, Nader was on Politically Incorrect the other night and IMO, he's going to run.

The biggest truth in this little article is that Old Osama is going to get his tired ass trotted out somewhere between October 1st and November 2nd. If he doesn't "appear" from somewhere, I am happy to eat all or part of any pair of underwear I own.

As I said, although a little more delicately:

As for capturing Osama come fall, I think we need to put this into perspective. Let's face it, he's had plenty of time to hand the reins over to an heir apparent or a group of them. That's what we get from squandering resources and wasting our time in Iraq. The terrorism problem will not begin to go away with a capture of Osama. Capturing him two years ago when we had the chance would have been far more effective. It would have put the terrorists on notice that you mess with us, we're going to come get you swiftly and effectively.

I guess he's going to run as an independent because he's starting to look down on the Green party and it's rules for running as a Greenie.

If I am not mistaken the hunt for OBL and other Al-Q leaders in Afganistan and other places is still going on despite the Iraq stuff. So, while the removal if SH was a bit of a shell game to divert the US public's eye from the failure to get IBL, the hunt does continue even if the press focuses on Iraq.

Albeit I agree we should have gotten him two years ago when we had the chance. But, in all fairness, we did kill or imprison a significant number of the Al-Q in Afganistan and other places. That counts for something :shrug:

My favorite quote was from Al Sharpton on Bill Maher's HBO show, it seems as if every video service in the Middle East can find OBL, but the US can't :laugh:

He broke his ties with the Greens.

If we don't have enough troops in Iraq, who is actually looking for Bin Laden?

I am no military expert, but I am unsure if troops are the appropriate person to look for OBL now. I mean there is no more all out military campaign in Afganistan now - nor apparently is one necessary - the region has been rid of the Taliban for the most part. So, I think we will get OBL by intelligence, much like we got SH. Someone will leak something, hopefully.

I think he's dead.

Strand, I wouldn't be so sure that Afghanistan is Taliban-free. Kabul, yes, but the rest of the country is in as much disarray as ever. In some places tribal lords have taken over again and women are being forced to wear the ghost uniforms. Afghanistan is a very sad situation.

So we've got the Afghanistan and Iraq messes, but John Kerry is still stuck in Vietnamn.

I see a disconnect there.

Based on the intel we had of Iraq and its supposed weapons, one can conclude that capturing OBL with the use of intel would be quite a stretch. ;) :rolleyes:

I agree - but I thought the Taliban was its own entity, distinct from the tribal lords. Didn't we use the tribal lords to overthrow the Taliban? So, I think it is pretty much Taliban free. Time will tell I guess. You know as much as "we" bitch about the lack of accurate info. from Iraq, there is virtually none from Afganistan. Scary as that is.

Interestingly, as you say, some of the the tribal lords are seemingly as oppressive as the Taliban in many ways. As they say "out of the frying pan . . . . " Much less the poppy trade :rolleyes:

I guess I can stomach Afganistan because I really think we are trying to help there and we kind of had no choice but to revoce the Taliban who was hiding OBL. I also think we are trying to help in Iraq, but the facts are just so different there. We had the choice in Iraq, we did not IMO in Afganistan.

But, being the eternal optimist, I think in the end (and that probably will not be in my lifetime) , things will be okay.

I almost put that in my post!! :laugh:

I kind of wish Kerry would stop harping on his Vietnam experiences; it's getting rather old hat. I think by now we all know that he was a Lt. in Vietnam and that he saved lives and so on. One thing I can say, though, is that his Vietnam experiences alone didn't win him votes; it was a combination of things, whereas Clark's status is the only thing he has (or had, depending on how you look at it :laugh: ) going for himself.

However, I don't think his disconnect can compare to Shrub's. He still continues to claim that not one child in Texas is impoverished. :laugh:

...it will be your downfall. :laugh: Dude, you have so much trust in your government and it's motivations that it's scary. :nod: :laugh:

As for thinking we are trying to help the Iraqi's...

I see a disconnect there. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Speaking of non-sequitor disconnect :laugh:


WASHINGTON — President Bush on Tuesday vigorously defended his decision to go to war against Iraq despite chief inspector David Kay's conclusion that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, as the United States had believed.

from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,109599,00.html

I mean I think everyone agrees with the proposition that it is a good thing SH is no longer in power. I think what people like me want to hear is "there was a meltdown in our intelligence" Sorry Iraq. :mad:

But - the facts support my belief that America is trying to help the Iraqis by removing SH and rebuilding Iraq. I get that American companies are making tons of $$$$, but they or some other country's companies were before all of this. Moreover, are trying to give them freedom or s reasonable depiction of it. So, I conclude that how what we are doing there is not a good thing?

Sadly, many people had to die for it.

Since I'm not like you in the way I think when it comes to politics and foreign policy ( :laugh: ), this is what I'd like to hear:

"Good evening ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to begin with a confession. My staff and I lied to you about Iraq and its WMDs. They had none, but we chose to tell you they did. Why? Because they have oil. Because they tried to murder my pop and because I wanted to help out my campaing contributors where it counts: their checkbooks. We came up with a grand scheme that even included duct tape and plastic, but once again, I forgot to mention that the largest manufacturer of duct tape in the US was a major contributor to my campaign. But that's water under the bridge, or, as I like to say in Tex-ass, that's a prairie dog under a horse's ass! (appaulse from the Right) We lied to you and the UN so that we could invade Iraq and colonize there in the hopes that we could, in the near future, take control of their oil and use it to further our fortunes. Dick and I are in Halliburton's pocket and we hold a vested interest in their business, so it was only natural that we do what we can to make them money, therefore making ourselves money. I have used cocaine in the past, yet I'm not quite sure if I've used it in the past year. I may have and if I did, God told me to, folks. I failed to fund every program that I set up, including No Child Left Behind. I didn't give the $3 billion to fight AIDs like I promised. I am a drunk that caters to the far-right and I hope to force God down the throats of every American until they shout "Hallelujah!" from the rooftops. God tells me to do these things. But I am sorry. I am sorry I bastardized this country and you all so embarassed. I am sorry that almost every country hates us, it is all my fault. And hell, while I'm at it, I'll admit that I'm a white man with a small penis. Thanl you ladies and gentlemen, I will now resign and support whichever Democratic candidate you choose to support. Goodnight."

That would be a fab speech.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I don't know, but I still think Dean may be the best man to vote for. I like that he's a little crazy. Frankly, he just strikes me as the kind of guy who is bit shy but has put himself in the spotlight and doesn't quite always know how to handle it. That doesn't mean he's going to push the button.

Kerry has made too many wrong choices for me to vote for him. I'll give him a look-over if he gets the nomination. But he's out in the primary. Of course, I'm in New York, so my vote is null anyway. He's going to take this state easily.

Clark is rather unimpressive. I don't see any real substance there.

Kucinich is the man, but he's got no chance.

Don't forget that the opium crop has soared.

Which brings me back to my original question. Who's looking for OBL?

I think we still have a military presence in Afganistan that is not only keeping the peace, but also trying to get the 411 on OBL's location. There is just no fighting there at the moment like in Iraq. So, the press focuses on Iraq. I think, but have no way of proving, that the US is still looking for OBL by way of spies, etc. I think the military is ready to pounce if he is located. Other than having caught him, which we sadly did not, I can think of no better way to get OBL. :cool:

Kucinich IS the man. :nod: Luv him and his charts!!! :D

It isn't that I dislike Dean. I feel bad for him that he's been treated the way he has by the media and the other candidates. I respect that he stands up for what he believes, but at times, I think he's just telling us liberals what we want to hear. He's got quite a few conservative views that I do not agree with, too. I can not, in all honesty, vote for a man that supports capital punishment; I just can't support it. However, if he by some small miracle does get the nomination, I guess I might have to. I don't know. I think the hurrah over his Iowa speech is ridiculous. Who gives a **** that screamed to his supporters? What does bother me is the way he treated that man at one of his speeches; it wasn't right. Granted, the guy acted like an ass, but it was still wrong. Dean doesn't seem to me to have a whole lot of integrity; he'll do what he has to do to win, no matter how nasty he is.

Kerry, on the other hand, has lots of integrity. He f*cked up by voting for the war and No Child Left Behind, I'll be the first to say it. He's voted with Bush too many times for my liking, too. BUT, he is the man who could beat Bush. He is, after all, one of the most liberal public servant we have right now. And I admire his comments about gay marriage, even though I disagree with him and think it should be allowed. Shrub would die in a debate with Kerry. And they haven't been able to dig up any dirt so far on kerry, either.

Clark can retire for all I care. He has nothing to offer anyone, he doesn't know "**** about crap," ( :laugh: ) he's the worst speaker I've ever seen in my life (next to Bush), and he contradicts himself every time he opens his mouth. This is the guy who said intelligence is a "gray goo" and that marriage is an "art." He's ridiculous.

Like I said though, my mind could change any minute. :laugh:

PS: In MA, one of our state senators ran for mayor in Springfield but lost because she hadn't paid taxes on two properties she owned for almost a decade. So what did Kerry do when he decided to run? He made his taxes available to the press. :laugh:

Yes, you must know your **** from crap to get elected. Unless you're Dubya. Or as I call him, "the weed."

Pull the weed!

Oh he knows how to get elected. Just have some of daddy's friends help you. It's the rest of the **** that he doesn't know crap about.

Kay to testify before the Senate:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/01/28/911....ap/index.html