[B]I don't think he has definitively decided[/i] the outcome of the race. I think his endorsement only exacerbates certain trends (ie. giving Dean more momentum, effectively ruling out Lieberman, and setting up the Dean vs. Clark dynamic that Josh Marshall talks about). Whether or not he should, you know, exert his influence in this democracy is a totally $$$$ing moot point. How the primary is still not left to the voters is an issue that's far beyond my comprehension.
I think that the effects of Gore's endorsement certainly operate through the fundraising aspect. But I think you're being excessively hard on Gore, who despite losing the President race by a handful votes and losing his own conservative state, still remains very popular with Democrats generally speaking and with certain demographics that Dean needs to reach: like African-American voters and even moderates.
exacerbate
\\Ex*ac"er*bate\\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Exacerrated; p. pr. & vb. n. Exacerrating.] [L. exacerbatus, p. p. of exacerbare; ex out (intens.) + acerbare. See Acerbate.] To render more violent or bitter; to irriate; to exasperate; to imbitter, as passions or disease.
I'LL SAY!
if this does set up a dean clark dynamic, and all things being equal except dean has gore in his corner and clark has clinton in his corner, what do you think will happen?
gee, sorry that i don't want al gore deciding what the dynamic of the party is. (as al gore's dynamic seems to be losing)
heh. yup.
BUT. . . I don't think that losing is Dean's dynamic. Gore lost not because his policies were bad, but because he was BORING. Dean doesn't have that problem, and his politics are far better.
if this does set up a dean clark dynamic, and all things being equal except dean has gore in his corner and clark has clinton in his corner, what do you think will happen?
clark will win and beat dean in vermont.
Ha. Wrong word; I meant accelerate. I think Dean's going to win, and I *hope* he chooses Clark as a running mate.
Ha. Wrong word; I meant accelerate. I think Dean's going to win, and I *hope* he chooses Clark as a running mate.
i don't really care who gets the nomination at this point, as i said i'm undecided, i've been most impressed with the reverend al sharpton. (unfortunately he has among other things tawana brawley in his luggage. but i've been impressed with what he has to say and the way he's said it.)
anyway whoever wins the nomination, i want them to win.
this will be my eighth presidential election and i never ever have seen an administration that needs to be removed as much as this one. god have mercy on us if the bush administration gets a second term.
and i will get religion if president bush is reelected.
the problem is that Dean is mining the very active, very large portion of the population that really can't stand George Bush. every interview i've heard of Dean supporters will cite two things. first, they love how Dean is getting people fired up to take theirr country back. second, that they really can't stand George Bush.
except that the people who can't stand bush won't be voting for him no matter who the democratic canidate is. Dean is doing really well, only with a demographic that's already a democratic lock.
Dean wants to repeal the Bush tax cut and balance the budget. The government can have back the measly $300 I got from the last tax cut.
Yeah, thank god Schwarzenegger toed the party line by refusing to "raise" (i.e. restore to pre-cut levels) the car tax in California. Now we have a credit rating just above junk, it looks like he'll have to renege on his promises not to cut education funding and local governments are going to take a bath.
First, the rivals saw him as a McGovernite lefty from the 1960s. When that didn't take, they decided to depict him as a right-wing clone of Newt Gingrich who wants to dismantle Medicare and Social Security. Finally, opponents sold political reporters on the story of Mr. Malaprop, an oddball from tiny, liberal Vermont so insensitive to the nuances of American politics his mouth will destroy him. Howard Dean surged ahead through all this. The other candidates and witting collaborators in the press got him wrong every time.
Howard Dean is an odd duck, certainly, in the milieu of the contemporary Democratic Party. He is, I surmise, a tough and savvy politician of the old school--a shrewd, intuitive pol who develops his own sense of where the people are and where events are likely to take public opinion, then has the guts to act on his perceptions. That approach--leading, it's called--seems dangerously unscientific in this era of high-quality polling and focus groups, the data interpreted for politicians by expensive consultants. The press corps has not had much experience with Democrats of this type, so reporters read Dean's style as emotional, possibly a character flaw. He reminds me of olden days when Democrats were a more contentious bunch, always fighting noisily among themselves and often with creative results...
Do I sense a bit of concern about his chances against Bush?
Fellows
Oh, I think he'll lose against Bush alright, on that one issue alone.
Let's all repeat the Republican line that we're going to hear everyday for months and months if Dean is nominated - he's gonna raise all your taxes yes he is, he's gonna raise all your taxes yes he is. He's gonna raise all your taxes, raise all your taxes, raise all your taxes yes he is.
I disagree strongly with Bush's tax and budget policy. I think we should have continued Clinton's policies of controlling spending and reducing the debt. But now that it's in place, with plenty of Democratic support, BTW, let's just be politically realistic. I think we should do what Lieberman (and Kerry and Clark) are saying: keep the tax cuts that are already in place, and halt the ones that have yet to kick in. That alone will put us into better fiscal health in the long-term.
Bush will of course still make the argument that the Democrat is going to "raise taxes," but at least it won't be true.
BTW, I still think there's a chance that Dean could reverse his position. His platform states that he is going to:
1. Reverse all Bush tax cuts, and
2. initiate tax reform.
I think what he needs to do is basically put back into place some of the tax cuts that he says he is going to reverse, and do that in the context of his as-yet-undetailed tax reform plan.
the problem is that Dean is mining the very active, very large portion of the population that really can't stand George Bush. every interview i've heard of Dean supporters will cite two things. first, they love how Dean is getting people fired up to take theirr country back. second, that they really can't stand George Bush.
except that the people who can't stand bush won't be voting for him no matter who the democratic canidate is. Dean is doing really well, only with a demographic that's already a democratic lock.
1) That's not a problem; it's an advantage. As Gore said, no other candidate inspires more grass roots support than Dean.
2). He will reach out to moderates in the general election. Ruy Teixeira of the Emerging Democratic Majority corroborates some of what you are saying about Dean's appeal to liberals vs. his appeal to moderates and conservatives. He anticipates two things: 1) a "Sister Souljah" moment on the anti-war left (as explained by an article in The New Republic and 2) preserving the middle class tax cuts.
Sorry to be I-told-you-so-ish, but I'm glad that other Democrats are saying that too. Let's hope that if Dean get the nomination, he isn't as stubborn as he seems, and can back off on his current policy.
Oh, I think he'll lose against Bush alright, on that one issue alone.
Let's all repeat the Republican line that we're going to hear everyday for months and months if Dean is nominated - he's gonna raise all your taxes yes he is, he's gonna raise all your taxes yes he is. He's gonna raise all your taxes, raise all your taxes, raise all your taxes yes he is.
I disagree strongly with Bush's tax and budget policy. I think we should have continued Clinton's policies of controlling spending and reducing the debt. But now that it's in place, with plenty of Democratic support, BTW, let's just be politically realistic. I think we should do what Lieberman (and Kerry and Clark) are saying: keep the tax cuts that are already in place, and halt the ones that have yet to kick in. That alone will put us into better fiscal health in the long-term.
Bush will of course still make the argument that the Democrat is going to "raise taxes," but at least it won't be true.
BTW, I still think there's a chance that Dean could reverse his position. His platform states that he is going to:
1. Reverse all Bush tax cuts, and
2. initiate tax reform.
I think what he needs to do is basically put back into place some of the tax cuts that he says he is going to reverse, and do that in the context of his as-yet-undetailed tax reform plan.
Also let us all remember how well the Democrats did the last time they proposed taking over the entire health care industry. (We can all argue to what degree Dean's proposal is universal, etc. but that is the line that will be repeated)
I think they lost the House didn't they...hmmmmm..1994....
Not sure how Bush can criticize him now that Medicare is a 400 billion cash cow for profiteers and big healthcare companies. Government has grown much bigger under Bush that it did under Clinton. It's good when the facts don't back up the rhetoric.
Comments
Originally posted by ShawnJ
[B]I don't think he has definitively decided[/i] the outcome of the race. I think his endorsement only exacerbates certain trends (ie. giving Dean more momentum, effectively ruling out Lieberman, and setting up the Dean vs. Clark dynamic that Josh Marshall talks about). Whether or not he should, you know, exert his influence in this democracy is a totally $$$$ing moot point. How the primary is still not left to the voters is an issue that's far beyond my comprehension.
I think that the effects of Gore's endorsement certainly operate through the fundraising aspect. But I think you're being excessively hard on Gore, who despite losing the President race by a handful votes and losing his own conservative state, still remains very popular with Democrats generally speaking and with certain demographics that Dean needs to reach: like African-American voters and even moderates.
exacerbate
\\Ex*ac"er*bate\\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Exacerrated; p. pr. & vb. n. Exacerrating.] [L. exacerbatus, p. p. of exacerbare; ex out (intens.) + acerbare. See Acerbate.] To render more violent or bitter; to irriate; to exasperate; to imbitter, as passions or disease.
I'LL SAY!
if this does set up a dean clark dynamic, and all things being equal except dean has gore in his corner and clark has clinton in his corner, what do you think will happen?
clark will win and beat dean in vermont.
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
gee, sorry that i don't want al gore deciding what the dynamic of the party is. (as al gore's dynamic seems to be losing)
heh. yup.
BUT. . . I don't think that losing is Dean's dynamic. Gore lost not because his policies were bad, but because he was BORING. Dean doesn't have that problem, and his politics are far better.
Cheers,
Curufinwe
Originally posted by BRussell
Yeah, wonderful politics, raise taxes on everyone. That's going to win him at least as many votes as Mondale.
Are you talking about Dean here BRussell?
Do I sense a bit of concern about his chances against Bush?
Fellows
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
I'LL SAY!
if this does set up a dean clark dynamic, and all things being equal except dean has gore in his corner and clark has clinton in his corner, what do you think will happen?
clark will win and beat dean in vermont.
Ha. Wrong word; I meant accelerate. I think Dean's going to win, and I *hope* he chooses Clark as a running mate.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Ha. Wrong word; I meant accelerate. I think Dean's going to win, and I *hope* he chooses Clark as a running mate.
i don't really care who gets the nomination at this point, as i said i'm undecided, i've been most impressed with the reverend al sharpton. (unfortunately he has among other things tawana brawley in his luggage. but i've been impressed with what he has to say and the way he's said it.)
anyway whoever wins the nomination, i want them to win.
this will be my eighth presidential election and i never ever have seen an administration that needs to be removed as much as this one. god have mercy on us if the bush administration gets a second term.
and i will get religion if president bush is reelected.
god have mercy on us if the bush administration gets a second term.
and i will get religion if president bush is reelected. [/B]
I think that is Bush's secret Christian fundy plan
except that the people who can't stand bush won't be voting for him no matter who the democratic canidate is. Dean is doing really well, only with a demographic that's already a democratic lock.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Dean wants to repeal the Bush tax cut and balance the budget. The government can have back the measly $300 I got from the last tax cut.
Give that measly tax cut to the Dean campaign. That's what a lot of us have been doing,
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Dean wants to repeal the Bush tax cut and balance the budget. The government can have back the measly $300 I got from the last tax cut.
Yeah, thank god Schwarzenegger toed the party line by refusing to "raise" (i.e. restore to pre-cut levels) the car tax in California. Now we have a credit rating just above junk, it looks like he'll have to renege on his promises not to cut education funding and local governments are going to take a bath.
No such thing as a free lunch, ya'll.
by William Greider
First, the rivals saw him as a McGovernite lefty from the 1960s. When that didn't take, they decided to depict him as a right-wing clone of Newt Gingrich who wants to dismantle Medicare and Social Security. Finally, opponents sold political reporters on the story of Mr. Malaprop, an oddball from tiny, liberal Vermont so insensitive to the nuances of American politics his mouth will destroy him. Howard Dean surged ahead through all this. The other candidates and witting collaborators in the press got him wrong every time.
Howard Dean is an odd duck, certainly, in the milieu of the contemporary Democratic Party. He is, I surmise, a tough and savvy politician of the old school--a shrewd, intuitive pol who develops his own sense of where the people are and where events are likely to take public opinion, then has the guts to act on his perceptions. That approach--leading, it's called--seems dangerously unscientific in this era of high-quality polling and focus groups, the data interpreted for politicians by expensive consultants. The press corps has not had much experience with Democrats of this type, so reporters read Dean's style as emotional, possibly a character flaw. He reminds me of olden days when Democrats were a more contentious bunch, always fighting noisily among themselves and often with creative results...
read the rest at:
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20031215&s=greider
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Are you talking about Dean here BRussell?
Do I sense a bit of concern about his chances against Bush?
Fellows
Oh, I think he'll lose against Bush alright, on that one issue alone.
Let's all repeat the Republican line that we're going to hear everyday for months and months if Dean is nominated - he's gonna raise all your taxes yes he is, he's gonna raise all your taxes yes he is. He's gonna raise all your taxes, raise all your taxes, raise all your taxes yes he is.
I disagree strongly with Bush's tax and budget policy. I think we should have continued Clinton's policies of controlling spending and reducing the debt. But now that it's in place, with plenty of Democratic support, BTW, let's just be politically realistic. I think we should do what Lieberman (and Kerry and Clark) are saying: keep the tax cuts that are already in place, and halt the ones that have yet to kick in. That alone will put us into better fiscal health in the long-term.
Bush will of course still make the argument that the Democrat is going to "raise taxes," but at least it won't be true.
BTW, I still think there's a chance that Dean could reverse his position. His platform states that he is going to:
1. Reverse all Bush tax cuts, and
2. initiate tax reform.
I think what he needs to do is basically put back into place some of the tax cuts that he says he is going to reverse, and do that in the context of his as-yet-undetailed tax reform plan.
Originally posted by alcimedes
the problem is that Dean is mining the very active, very large portion of the population that really can't stand George Bush. every interview i've heard of Dean supporters will cite two things. first, they love how Dean is getting people fired up to take theirr country back. second, that they really can't stand George Bush.
except that the people who can't stand bush won't be voting for him no matter who the democratic canidate is. Dean is doing really well, only with a demographic that's already a democratic lock.
1) That's not a problem; it's an advantage. As Gore said, no other candidate inspires more grass roots support than Dean.
2). He will reach out to moderates in the general election. Ruy Teixeira of the Emerging Democratic Majority corroborates some of what you are saying about Dean's appeal to liberals vs. his appeal to moderates and conservatives. He anticipates two things: 1) a "Sister Souljah" moment on the anti-war left (as explained by an article in The New Republic and 2) preserving the middle class tax cuts.
He certainly has room to maneuver.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Dean wants to repeal the Bush tax cut and balance the budget. The government can have back the measly $300 I got from the last tax cut.
that was a rebate, your tax cut will reflect itself when you file for refund in 2004. have babies you get more!
Originally posted by ShawnJ
and 2) preserving the middle class tax cuts.
He certainly has room to maneuver.
Sorry to be I-told-you-so-ish, but I'm glad that other Democrats are saying that too. Let's hope that if Dean get the nomination, he isn't as stubborn as he seems, and can back off on his current policy.
I don't expect to see much of that "middle-class" tax cut.
Actually since Pataki has sold out NYC and Bush continues to dick over NYC... I've paid more in subway fares. Thanks guys.
Originally posted by BRussell
Oh, I think he'll lose against Bush alright, on that one issue alone.
Let's all repeat the Republican line that we're going to hear everyday for months and months if Dean is nominated - he's gonna raise all your taxes yes he is, he's gonna raise all your taxes yes he is. He's gonna raise all your taxes, raise all your taxes, raise all your taxes yes he is.
I disagree strongly with Bush's tax and budget policy. I think we should have continued Clinton's policies of controlling spending and reducing the debt. But now that it's in place, with plenty of Democratic support, BTW, let's just be politically realistic. I think we should do what Lieberman (and Kerry and Clark) are saying: keep the tax cuts that are already in place, and halt the ones that have yet to kick in. That alone will put us into better fiscal health in the long-term.
Bush will of course still make the argument that the Democrat is going to "raise taxes," but at least it won't be true.
BTW, I still think there's a chance that Dean could reverse his position. His platform states that he is going to:
1. Reverse all Bush tax cuts, and
2. initiate tax reform.
I think what he needs to do is basically put back into place some of the tax cuts that he says he is going to reverse, and do that in the context of his as-yet-undetailed tax reform plan.
Also let us all remember how well the Democrats did the last time they proposed taking over the entire health care industry. (We can all argue to what degree Dean's proposal is universal, etc. but that is the line that will be repeated)
I think they lost the House didn't they...hmmmmm..1994....
Yep... Dean for Democratic Nominee!
Nick
Not sure how Bush can criticize him now that Medicare is a 400 billion cash cow for profiteers and big healthcare companies. Government has grown much bigger under Bush that it did under Clinton. It's good when the facts don't back up the rhetoric.