2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

Here's a list of UN Resolutions against Israel: Maybe the US needs to bomb them to enforce the many UN Resolutions they failed to comply with, and the many charges made.
http://www.mideastfacts.com/resolutions.html

And if WMDs are never found? Or if they don't exist? It is common knowledge that there was definitely a weapons program before, but quite a few investigating teams have not only reported not finding anything; many of them think there was nothing to find. And, of course, the original team which was dismissed by the Bush people, held the same opinion.

In today's New York Times, it is reported that the attention of the latest group, under David Kay, has shifted from inspecting sites to interrogating former weapons scientists. Rumsfeld said, "because there isn't any way in a country this size to go out and find items that small." ??????

Dunno, Timber, looks like you've got a rosy hope, there. Found or not, we have a major problem because of this PR blunder. We have invaded a country, destroyed it, and found that we have to do the repair work. We cannot get up and walk out. So, while the WMDs issue may fade from some peoples' minds as the reason we're there, the ways in which we will be taxed in order to pay for this will loom large, and be a reminder.

And now Abbad's resignation. Another Bush fall-guy.

From the Zogby Report, 6 September 2003. An interesting look at an over-all picture, and how the numbers are changing.

Released: September 06, 2003
Bush Numbers Hit New Low; Dean Tops List of Democratic Presidential Contenders, New Zogby America Poll Reveals

President George W. Bush’s job performance ratings have reached the lowest point since his pre-Inauguration days, continuing a steady decline since a post-9/11 peak, according to a new Zogby America poll of 1,013 likely voters conducted September 3-5.

Less than half (45%) of the respondents said they rated his job performance good or excellent, while a majority (54%) said it was fair or poor. In August Zogby International polling, his rating was 52% positive, 48% negative. Today’s results mark the first time a majority of likely voters have given the president an unfavorable job performance rating since he took office.

Bush Job Performance
Positive %
Negative %

September 2003
45
54

August 2003
52
48

July 2003
53
46

March 2003
54
45

September 2002
64
36

September 2001
82
17

August 2001
50
49

January 2001
42
36


A majority (52%) said it’s time for someone new in the White House, while just two in five (40%) said the president deserves to be re-elected. Last month, 45% said re-election was in order, and 48% said it was time for someone new.

A like number (52%) said the country is heading in the wrong direction, while 40% said it is the right direction.

Overall opinion of President Bush has also slipped to 54% favorable – 45% unfavorable, compared to August polling which indicated 58% favorable, 40% unfavorable.

Just two in five (40%) said they would choose Bush if the election were held today, while 47% said they would elect a Democratic candidate. In August polling, respondents were split (43% each) over President Bush or any Democratic challenger.

In the same poll, likely Democratic primary voters give a plurality of their support to former Vermont Governor Dr. Howard Dean (16%), whose campaign has been gathering support in recent polling. He is followed by Massachusetts Senator John Kerry (13%), Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman (12%), and Missouri Congressman Richard Gephardt (8%). No other candidate polled more than 3%.

On Sunday night Showtime is presenting a special on George Bush and 9/11. (The other threads on this are interesting.) I wonder how this will play regarding lifting up Bush's popularity.

A year or two ago (and I may be the only one who saw this) there was a special called "The Real West Wing," idea by Karen Hughes (who is no longer with them), and hosted by Tom Brokaw. It ran for the hour preceding the regular "West Wing" (same channel). and was truly one of the most embarrassing things ever. At the end, Brokaw picked up a picture of the Bush twins from a table, and said to Bush, "I guess you must keep in more contact with them now." Bush looked blank, took a minute, and then said yes. The hour was heavy on everybody keeping regular hours (Karen Hughes walked out last, at about 8pm). They never mentioned it again, and apparently banned all memory or mention of it. So - I wonder how this will play to the public.

Thinking about this bit about names of democratic candidates - I'd have to see more than those numbers they show. The candidates now are going after a democratic base, not the general public.

As we get closer to the election, people will be more focussed on alternatives.

Actually, as an addendum to the above, I think the Dems would be smart to play, quietly, to their own party, find the points of consensus and power, nominate, and have a candidate fully familiar to supporters and with a good base for the final campaign.

I also think we really really should pay some attention to Congressional elections and who's vulnerable.

It is looking more and more like a repeat of Bush I, isn't it? I think the wave Bush II was riding has crested and he's about to wipe out. He may even drown. These are just observations and not purely my own -- even right wing commentators are beginning to admit it does not look good. Providence in a substantially rebounded market, no slack in the housing industry and durable goods sold (especially automobiles), and a decline of unemployment statistics could give him a little wavelet. If he's willing to gamble on another war getting it back up on top, I think only a complete fool would even consider starting one and I don't believe it would have the support of the Legislature or the public. His speech is already being predicted to be a saving face speech. "There's got to be some WMD under the next bush we dig up..."

Apples to oranges, c.i. - The resolutions pertaining to Israel are Chapter VI resolutions, while those pertaining to Iraq are Chapter VII resolutions; the two are very different things. First, there are a number of UN resolution types. There are General Assembly resolutions, which are non-binding commentary and recomendation, indicative of political currents and opinions, and declaring things like "International Children's Education Day" and the like. Then there are the Security Council Resolutions, structured in a tiered hierarchy. Chapters VI and VII of the UN Charter spell out the differences pertaining to Security Council Resolutions. Chapter VI resolutions deal with the "Pacific Resolution of Disputes" and are to be implemented through "negotiation, conciliation, or arbitration among or between the parties to a dispute", under UN oversight. Chapter VI resolutions are not unilateral; all parties to a dispute have obligations under Chapter VI resolutions. Chapter VII resolutions however, unilaterally deal with "Threats to Peace, Breaches of Peace, and Acts of Agression", neither call for nor provide for negotiation, and are self-enforcing demands for action, requiring the sanctioned state to comply with the terms of the resolution, subject to enforcement, under Article 42, up to and including "Special military measures to be taken should a sanctioned state defy or ignore a Chapter VII resolution". All of the resolutions pertaining to Israel are Chapter VI resolutions. No UN resolution deeming Israel an agressor state or otherwise a threat to peace exists, or ever has existed. Israel has never been subject to a Chapter VII resolution. Iraq on the other hand defied a growing list of Chapter VII resolutions for over a decade, making a mockery of the UN and the entire concept of Security Council Resolutions. The argument that "Israel gets away with it" has no foundation.

A while ago, Timber wrote : "Two thirds of Americans still can't name a Democratic candidate."

Hmmm. Sadly, I'm not surprised. Ever watch Leno's "Jay Walking" bits ?

Of course, they wouldn't be fun unless they purposefully select the really ignorant (and the really ignorant who don't mind being exposed on national TV -- good sports and all that). Just about two thirds of Americans might not even vote, so that they cannot name a Democratic candidate is moot.

Who remembers clearly what the Dems were up to 14 months before the 1992 election? Were we as focused, as angry, and as together as we are now?

My view may be rosy, mj, but it is my view ... formed with my assessments of the facts and events of which I am aware. It appears to me the economy is growing, terrorism is on the wane, reconstruction in Iraq, while not magical, is proceeding well (electrical production capacity is at 80% of pre-war level, and within a month should exceed pre-war capacity, oil production will exceed 1,000,000 BPD this month, and surpass pre-war levels before the end of the year, all hospitals and most clinics and schools now are open, staffed, and functioning, there are scores of thousands of indigenous police on duty, with a stream of more yet to come, 3/4 of the courts are functioning, the jails and prisons - emptied by Saddam just prior to the war - are being repopulated with many of their recently freed criminal inhabitants, attacks against Coalition Forces are declining, and the beginnings of a civilian government are well along). There remain problems and issues, of course, and surprises, both pleasant and unpleasant, are to be expected. It is not unreasonable that undoing a couple generations of despotic, savage, dictatorial rule and repairing not only a war-ravaged but long neglected and abused infrastructure will take more than a few months. People froze and starved in Berlin over the winter of 1945, folks starved in Tokyo and Yokahama and Warsaw and other conquered or liberated cities that winter too.

I don't expect much from Bush the Younger's speech tomorrow, beyond a recap of achievements and an appeal to remain focused on the task at hand. I do expect the coming weeks will provide considerable evidence regarding both Iraqi WMD programs and Iraqi ties to various terrorist groups including but not limited to both Al Queda and Hamas, and confirmation that foreign nationals, Iranian and others, are responsible for the bulk of the current Iraqi violence. I fully expect both the domestic and global states of affairs, political and economic, will continue to improve. I expect also that as things improve, the polls will be kinder to Bush and his policies, particularly those actually meaningful polls to be conducted that certain tuesday in early November next year.

Isn't it ironic that some people feel there's a different standard between Iraq and Israel.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2002/09/42123.html

Yes, CI, and our official adherence to that double standard has bred a monster with big teeth which is dedicated to biting us in the butt -- and getting closer to the "family jewels".

Just who is applying a double standard here? There simply is no equivalence between Iraq and Israel. The UN Charter and the pertinent resolutions are quite clear regarding the issue. Those who argue the point disregard the facts. Are facts only germaine if they adhere to a particular agenda?

You must read the 'whole' article.

timber wrote "It appears to me the economy is growing, terrorism is on the wane, reconstruction in Iraq, while not magical, is proceeding well"

huh ?

unemployment in the US remains a serious and persistent issue

terrorism continues to rear its ugly head on a regular basis around the world

reconstruction in Iraq ? There's still no stable government and probably won't be until the US gets out, as the Iraqis remain resistent to any government we endorse. The Iraqis also seriously mistrust US attempts to control and use oil money for reconstruction, and given the non-competitive awarding of the initial rebuilding contracts, their suspicions seem justified. And from all international reports, day-to-day life in Iraq is at best chaotic and at worst extremely dangerous.


It's going to be difficult for Bush to make this scenario look good

angie, I'm not sure about Bush not being able to white-wash Iraq to the American People. Why else would half of the American People still think he's doing a good job? I'll think things are improving when GWBush's approval rating drops to 35 percent - or there abouts.

angie, c.i., when and where was the last terrorist attack outside Iraq or Israel? Employment cannot be expected to increase untill business increases sufficiently to require additional employees ... it is always the last to recover, that's just the way it works. The indigenous Iraqi Government is being built one logical, necessary step at a time. There as yet is no government for Iraqls to trust or mistrust, and the initial government will be an interim affair, responsible for the construction of a constution and the establishment and implementation of a fully democratic electoral system, which may or may not choose a final democratic government according to the will of the people. That process will take a while, but it will proceed. Chaos lessens and civilian security increases day by day, apart from hotspots primarilly inside the "Sunni Triangle" and a few heavilly Ba'athist neighborhoods in the major cities, primarilly Baghdad, Tikrit, and the An Najaff-Karbala area. The general populace in no way resists Coalition Forces, and in fact cooperates more willingly day by day. There are no riots, no massive demonstrations, no widespread outrage ... not even at the hugely attended funeral last week of the cleric killed in the Najaf mosque bombing. The "Horrors of the occupation" are no more real than were the much-hyped, media-anticipated, wholly unrealized "Horrors of the war". The naysayers are still well off the mark, and still saying "Nay", despite the reality facing them. When WMD program evidence and inyernational terrorist ties are documented publically, and when Iraqis rule themselves according to their own wishes, and Iraq's economy benefits from the sale of Iraqi oil to customers of Iraq's choosing, the naysayers will still be there.

Oh, and I read the whole article, and the comments. I say again, those who argue the point do so from ignorance of the facts.

Yeah, I guess those terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Morocco, and the Philippines don't count. Also, what has the Iraqi's done in the past 12 years that the Israeli's hasn't? It seems to most of us that Saddam was pretty well contained with our flyovers and the UN weapon's inspectors. But, what the hay, we could be wrong.