|
Grex > Agora56 > #128: Will we become a police state if there's another attack? | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 92 responses total. |
mcnally
|
|
response 25 of 92:
| 
Feb 27 17:34 UTC 2006 |
re #24:
> re: "if you'd wanted a moderate government you should've voted for
> Kerry."
>
> Really?? Isn't John Kerry's voting record more liberal that the senior
> bloviator from MA?
Let me know when you *finish* reading #6 and we can discuss
it then if you like. Be sure to write down any words you didn't
understand and I'll explain them to you.
|
scholar
|
|
response 26 of 92:
|
Feb 27 22:56 UTC 2006 |
:(
|
richard
|
|
response 27 of 92:
|
Feb 28 01:07 UTC 2006 |
In #5, rcurl said, "No offense taken - Kerry was a poor candidate. He
was just better than the alternative."
I disagree, I don't think John Kerry was a poor candidate at all, he's
a quality statesman with a long distinguished career of public service,
and a war hero. Central casting couldn't have come up with someone
with a better resume. Kerry got undone by three things:
1.Mainly that it is almost impossible for any candidate to defeat an
incumbent election while there is a war going on. It was going to be
exceedingly difficult, no matter who the democrats nominated, to defeat
Bush in 2004.
2.The second thing is that there were some bitter feelings among
democrats stemming from the primary season. I knew some party
activists who were Dean supporters whose support of Kerry was lukewarm
at best because they were bitter about negative ads.
3. Those appalling swift boat ads where a few republican swift boat
veterans lied through their teeth and disgraced their own military
service by saying Kerry didn't deserve his medals, when he clearly did.
None of those things were personally the fault of Kerry as a
candidate. Kerry was a terrific speaker who got better as the campaign
went along and in other years could probably have won. In fact Kerry
has all but made it clear that he intends to run again in 2008 against
Hillary Clinton and he could make it a contest.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 28 of 92:
|
Feb 28 01:32 UTC 2006 |
Actually, a year before the election, polls asking voters to choose
between George W. Bush and "an unnamed Democrat" were showing pretty
reliably in favor of the unnamed Democrat, though when the same
question was posed as being George W. Bush versus any of the likely
nominees the results shifted pretty noticably in Bush's favor. I
interpret that as indicating that people *wanted* to vote against
the incumbent but disliked the Democrats' nominees.
Your reasoning also totally omits Kerry's serious charisma deficit.
Perhaps he's charming and energizing in person, but on television,
at least, he came across as passionless and phony.
|
klg
|
|
response 29 of 92:
|
Feb 28 03:42 UTC 2006 |
Richard shows promise for a career in comedy. (Got any more jokes??)
|
nharmon
|
|
response 30 of 92:
|
Feb 28 04:01 UTC 2006 |
So what lessons will the Democrats have learned from the 2004 election
that they will attempt to not repeat in 2008?
|
klg
|
|
response 31 of 92:
|
Feb 28 11:44 UTC 2006 |
Vote Republican??
|
nharmon
|
|
response 32 of 92:
|
Feb 28 13:19 UTC 2006 |
You mean vote republican in the primaries so they can get a lesser-
qualified GOP candidate nominated?
|
johnnie
|
|
response 33 of 92:
|
Feb 28 15:06 UTC 2006 |
Or more-qualified, depending on how you look at it. Dems aren't
organized enough to make that work, though.
|
richard
|
|
response 34 of 92:
|
Feb 28 15:43 UTC 2006 |
mcnally in what way did kerry come across as phony on tv? I don't think you
listened to him very much, in fact given your stated political views, I'm
certain you didn't. Don't say things you don't even know are true.
|
richard
|
|
response 35 of 92:
|
Feb 28 15:46 UTC 2006 |
kerry certainly came across as LESS PHONY than Bush, although McNally would
never tell you that. Bush was the one who had the no show national guard gig
not Kerry. Kerry was over on the ground in 'Nam getting shot at while Bush
was out drinking with his rich buddies in Alabama. Who was more phony
McNally?
|
jadecat
|
|
response 36 of 92:
|
Feb 28 15:49 UTC 2006 |
resp:35 it all depends on who you are. There are many that saw Bush's
'down home' kind of attitude as much more real than Kerry's stiffer
demeanor. The facts don't always matter to some people- merely the way
things appear.
|
johnnie
|
|
response 37 of 92:
|
Feb 28 16:09 UTC 2006 |
I voted for Kerry, but I'll happily agree that he came across as a bit
of a phony, trying to be a regular joe when he wasn't (which isn't to
say that I didn't believe that he'd do as he promised). I'll also agree
that Bush came across as much more "real"--a dope, but indeed a real
dope, not faking dopeyness to come across as a regular guy.
|
twenex
|
|
response 38 of 92:
|
Feb 28 16:14 UTC 2006 |
Bush doesn't fake dopeyness (sp?), but he does fake sincerity. badly.
Kerry didn't fake dopeyness because he believed there was a hard core of
intelligent, discriminating voters he could reach out to, and they would be
numerous enough to get him elected. He was wrong.
Let's face it, at least Kerry could probably spell sincerity.
|
klg
|
|
response 39 of 92:
|
Feb 28 17:10 UTC 2006 |
It was 100% certain that Kerry would do as he promised, mainly due to
the fact that one day he said one thing and the next he said the exact
opposite. ("I voted for the $87M before I voted against it.") Talk
about covering your bets. A phony from day 1.
|
richard
|
|
response 40 of 92:
|
Feb 28 17:18 UTC 2006 |
kerry was from new england, and had that new england demeanor that doesnt
always play well down in the midwest and south. does everyone have to be a
cowboy and like nascar and country music? bush isnt even FROM the south, he's
from new england too, but unlike kerry, he fakes a southern demeanor and
because of that people in some parts of the country THOUGHT he was more real,
when he in fact was not.
|
jep
|
|
response 41 of 92:
|
Feb 28 17:26 UTC 2006 |
If you can fake sincerity, you've got it made.
|
twenex
|
|
response 42 of 92:
|
Feb 28 17:57 UTC 2006 |
Re: #39. That's called "being a politician," klingon.
|
klg
|
|
response 43 of 92:
|
Feb 28 18:02 UTC 2006 |
RW - You mean, he's not as real as Sen. Hillary?
|
bru
|
|
response 44 of 92:
|
Feb 28 18:30 UTC 2006 |
Hilary is real?
|
edina
|
|
response 45 of 92:
|
Feb 28 18:30 UTC 2006 |
As real as you are, kemo sabe.
|
klg
|
|
response 46 of 92:
|
Feb 28 20:39 UTC 2006 |
Kemo sabe is a good restaurant in San Diego (Hillside area?). I
recommend you try it if you ever get there.
On the other hand, Chemo is something I hope you can avoid.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 47 of 92:
|
Feb 28 20:44 UTC 2006 |
KLG Lies! KLG Lies! KLG Lies! KLG Lies! KLG Lies! KLG Lies!
There were two bills one which would fund the $87 billion by rescinding a
portion of the presidents tax cut, another which would fund it by going
$87 billion in to debt. Kerry voted for the first, and against the latter.
The latter passed.
The Republicans are really fond of twisting the facts and strewing lies in
any controversy.
Unfortunately, Kerry never seemed very adroit at countering these
distortions. He didn't seem to be as "sharp" as he was as when younger and
an anti-Vietnam activist. This bothered me.
|
richard
|
|
response 48 of 92:
|
Feb 28 21:19 UTC 2006 |
consider this. when ronald reagan was re-elected in 1984, the biggest
landslide in history, he got 54,455,075 votes. John Kerry in 2004 got
59,027,478 votes. Thats a weak candidate?
|
tod
|
|
response 49 of 92:
|
Feb 28 21:48 UTC 2006 |
You're sending mixed messages
|