2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

ican711nm wrote:

Is an actual election also just a

Quote:

snap shot, a still frame

Taken out of context, as a single event, of course an actual election is a snapshot.

I'm not real sure I accept your parameters as particularly valid, Ican, but given them as you have laid out, I'd have to agree with you on the 25% figure, assuming it applied to both business and personal income. It stands to logic that as the cost of making money increases, the incentive to make more money decreases, simply by the law of diminishing return.

cicerone imposter wrote:

A CBS poll shows GWBush's approval rating down to 50 percent, and his disapproval rating up to 45 percent.

c.i. ; a poll by itself is meaningless; what is meaningful is how that poll relates to others, and over time.

Fewer than one in five people said their tax burden had been eased by Mr. Bush, who has made tax cuts the centerpiece of his economic program. [19%, while 32 percent said their taxes had gone up.]

His latest domestic initiatives, unveiled in the run-up to the State of the Union message on Tuesday, got only a lukewarm response, with 58 percent saying that building a permanent space station on the Moon was not worth the risks and costs. [..]

His approval rating is highest among those ages 30 to 44; those younger and older are more divided. Whites approve of his performance by 56 to 41 percent; in contrast, 70 percent of blacks disapprove of the job he is doing, while just 17 percent approve, the poll found.

He also has a big edge among those who say religion is extremely or very important to them; 56 percent of that group say they approve of Mr. Bush and 39 percent say they disapprove.

His approval rating among men and women is about the same, suggesting he is addressing the historic Republican vulnerability of a gender gap. And he has a substantial edge among married women. [..]

For all of Mr. Bush's strengths, the poll shows the potential for a competitive election. When asked whether Mr. Bush had done more to unite the country or divide it, the public was split — 43 percent said he had brought Americans together, 44 percent said he had divided them.

When given a choice between an unnamed Democrat and Mr. Bush, 43 percent of the registered voters polled said they would vote for Mr. Bush, while 45 percent said they would vote for the Democrat.

"We don't want to be the kind of country where grandmothers need to travel to Canada to afford the medicine they need to stay alive. We don't want to be the kind of country where school budgets get cut to pay for tax breaks so millionaires can have more leisure time. And we certainly don't want to be the kind of country where our own President implies that we're unpatriotic if we question the very policies that got us into this mess in the first place."...

The retired four-star general hoping to take the White House is a pro-choice, half-Jewish, Baptist convert to Catholicism, who is a practicing Presbyterian and believes in the separation of church and state. He voted for Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore. And he doesn't mind saying so. He has a dry wit and a sharp mouth. He can ably impersonate the voices of Charlie Rangel, Slobodan Milosevic, George H.W. Bush, and Bill O'Reilly.

The so-called "anti-war general" favors a constitutional ban on desecration of the American flag and is critical of the Patriot Act. He is a Southerner who advocates affirmative action, because it was successfully applied to the military. He opposes the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy for military gays and supports civil unions. He is a champion of human rights and principled dissent, a clean environment and protected fisheries, economic fairness and jobs creation, corporate responsibility and deficit reduction.

He is not afraid to say that the traditional deathbed choice in childbirth belongs to the woman, her family and her physician, and not to any right wing legislative agenda. He says Eisenhower was correct to "beware the military-industrial complex," and would reduce the defense budget by one quarter. He is an internationalist humanitarian who believes diplomacy leveraged with military strength is the best national defense. Like any good commander of force, he views it as the very last resort...

Is Wes Clark, as Howard Dean, Joe Lieberman and the Republican National Committee insist, a Republican? Not according to Democratic icon George McGovern. "There are a lot of good Democrats in this race, but Wes Clark is the best Democrat," said McGovern, who is also a veteran and war hero. "He is a true progressive. He's the Democrat's Democrat. I've been around the political block--and I can tell you, I know a true progressive when I see one. And that's why he has my vote."

The next three years have been like the movie, The Lion King. We went from the benevolent and wise rule of President Clinton to the maniacal rule of President Bush. Like Scar, Bush took over in a coup. Like Scar, Bush invited the hyenas to feed upon the land. Like Scar, Bush has laid waste to our country. What was once a place worthy of pride has become a barren wasteland. What was once a peaceful land devoted to expanding the circle of life has become a militaristic nation devoted to invading the Middle East. Like Pride Rock we are in need of a savior.

Our Democratic party has been like Simba. It has wandered in the wilderness singing Hakuta Mikata while the country has been laid waste to. It has been paralyzed by fear and blame manufactured by the treasonous Bush and silly philosophizing by the Timon's and Pumbaa's of our party. Like Simba, it has been lead astray. And like the denizens of Pride Rock we are in a nightmare without end.

Like Rafiki, Dean is knocking some sense into our party. He is showing us our inner Mufasta and the way to prosperity and power. If we want our party to return like Simba did then we need to follow Rafiki's advice like Simba did. The citizens of our country need us like citizens of Pride Rock needed a resurgent Simba...

Dean treated us like adults. He told us the truth that full gay marriage made him uncomfortable. But then he fought like Hell for us. He took on the forces of darkness that helped bring about the desolation of our country. They tried to take back Vermont and instead Vermont took them out. Even with leftist challenge Dean got half the vote and a 5th term. Dean risked his career to give a people a right so fundamental that it is hard to think of a person without them as a full citizen. Then he beat the forces of darkness and cemented our rights. He was a real friend and deserves our gratitude.

But this isn't a mercy vote. As impressed as I am with his granting those rights I am more impressed with the fact he won. I know about the ruthlessness of gay rights opponents. I know that no lie is too low, no tactic too base, and no act too hypocritical for the alleged Christians these people are. Dean had to campaign in a bullet proof vest. Something he doesn't often tell people but it is true. Dean will beat these base people.

His record is one of fiscal discipline combined with social and governmental liberalism. Fiscal discipline is necessary in our times. We can't return to the prosperity of the Clinton era without a return to the fiscal values of the Clinton era. Dean's record is one of fiscal sanity and creating jobs in Vermont. While the nation was being turned into a barren wasteland by the current administration, Vermont has run like a well oiled machine. Where the current administration created debt, Dean created surplus. Where the current administration has created uninsured Dean has created insured. Where the current administration had created joblessness and despair, Dean has created wealth and prosperity.

Like any governor, Dean has a record to run on. The comparison of that record with Bush's will win this race for us. And, not only that but Dean will fight back and has experience doing so. He, and his supporters, won't let the distorting demagogues of desolation run amok. We won't let these people win the way they did last time. He showed us that in 2000 and will show us that again.

The centerpiece of Edwards' platform is his economic plan, which is a comprehensive proposal to lift up hard-working middle class people. It starts by protecting jobs through fair trade agreements and giving a 10% tax credit to corporations that keep jobs in the United States. He will also raise the minimum wage, extend unemployment benefits, and strengthen labor laws. Most importantly, Edwards will create a tax code that rewards hard work instead of pandering to the rich. He will provide a tax credit to first-time homebuyers and match funds in retirement accounts while cutting corporate subsidies and closing corporate tax loopholes. He will reduce capital gains for 95% of Americans, helping them invest and save for the future while raising capital gains for the richest Americans that are living off their investments. This is not class warfare; this is a new way of thinking about taxes: shifting the burden from work back to wealth. In his own words: "I believe the way a rich nation gets richer is by giving all its citizens the chance to get richer, not by only helping those like me who've already succeeded beyond our wildest dreams."...

But can he win? He faced that question six years ago, and in November of 1998, John Edwards was the only Democrat in the nation to unseat an incumbent Republican Senator. He did it in a state where Bush beat Gore by 13%...

Winning this election is not about firing up the base and it's not about pandering to the middle. It's not about winning the Midwest or the South, although Edwards can do that. The people who will decide this election aren 't single issue voters and they don't listen to the pundits. The votes we need to win this election are in the hands of people who are looking for a message to believe in and a person they can trust. They want someone that can lift this country up and give them hope for the future. They're looking for real solutions to their problems. They're looking for a President that will make them proud to be Americans again. They will find John Edwards.

Growing up in a mid-sized industrial town, where almost 60% of our city's workforce worked in either 1 of 2 industrial plants, I remember well the debate over NAFTA. During that period, I remember the constant voice of Dick Gephardt warning the American people what would happen if this agreement passed. I remember him warning us about the flood of jobs that would be outsourced and moved to Mexico. The people in my town and especially the local UAW feared for their jobs. Now 10 years later, we see that Dick Gephardt was correct. Not only have the jobs in my town by decimated, but the latest study done by the EPI shows that nearly 870,000 American jobs have been lost due to NAFTA. It's a sad commentary. You see the thing about Dick Gephardt is that when he makes a decision in that oval office, he will in this mind those people who have lost their jobs or are scared of the potential of losing their jobs. the fight for working families is in his bones. It's where he is from and who he is. He will not desert the American worker...

Gephardt is a great candidate. I firmly believe his midwestern roots and working family background would pay huge dividends in November. He is that type of candidate that would reasonate well in the industrial heartland, which is the key battleground in this election. He can beat George Bush in those places! And that is where we need to beat him. Also, I don't forsee Reagan Democrats having much trouble pulling the lever for Dick Gephardt! He fights for the working man, has the experience we need in these traumatic times and has put that all together to offer some bold policy intiatives.