2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

Yeah, big, heavy sigh. Jeeez ... some folks are high-maintainance.

QUIT POKIN' AT ONE ANOTHER, DAMNIT!

0 Replies

Thanks, Mamajuana -- much appreciated! I remember hearing Al Sharpton in -- what was it? interview on NPR? -- remember "reporting" in Abuzz that he had really grown and was quite terrific. John Edwards doesn't impress me at all -- he's kind of a Terry McAuliffe candidate.

Any discussion of the invasion and outcome (so far)?

0 Replies

Quote:

Democrats Remain Divided on Iraq War
...The candidates intended to lay out their agendas on children's issues at a forum sponsored by the Children's Defense Fund. But with U.S. military advances dominating the news, the first question from a panel of journalists was about the war.
Five of the candidates opposed the war and defended their position despite the U.S. success in Baghdad. The Bush administration's attack on Iraq sets a dangerous precedent of pre-emption, they said, and the money spent on the war and reconstruction could be better spent on problems at home.
``For $200 billion we can insure every child in this country under the age of 18,'' said former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who opposed going to war without U.N. backing. ``It seems to me like that is a better investment.'' ...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-2546638,00.html

0 Replies

I've been trying to get the C-span link, but the server has been busy for the past hour or so. The war did not get primary attention - at least, in my sense of the forum. What was laid out, although necessarily briefly and in summary, were a number of considered and thought-out plans for what to do on several issues. Discussion of the Supreme Court and possible issues facing it, affirmative action, health care, teachers, jobs, Roe v Wade - all these got attention. My personal observations - so far - are Kerry, Dean, Graham, then Lieberman, Sharpton, Gephardt, Kucinich (who is much shorter than I thought), Mosley-braun who sounded quite good, and edwards, whom I thouht came off weakest.

Over all, it was a very up forum, lots of positive thinking, sharp comments -- good field of candidates. The questioners were good, too, with Judy Woodruff making a great host. I wish she had stayed with the Lehrer Show instead of going to CNN.

0 Replies

Let me say this - I didn't direct my comments (heavy sigh) at anyone in particular, and then I was addressed by someone telling me what it would and would not behoove me to limit my comments to.

It does evoke heavy sighs with me, when it seems that certain folk are so damn self-absorbed that they attract contention like a whirlpool, then start trying to correct the "defects" in others' characters that they incorrectly assume cause the dadblamed contention in the first place.

I ask the forum - if you go to , say for instance, your place of work, and there is one person who seems to constantly get into pissing matches with coworkers, doesn't it quickly become obvious that it is not the case that everyone but him has issues? Well, that is, unfortunately how I see the situation here.

I can disagree with Timber and blatham and sophia and craven and... etc., and I think it would be awfully boring if we all thought the same. But it is a real shame that some people can't go a single goddamn day without getting wrapped around the axle because of their overbloated image of themselves, and their relative importance and (excuse me for saying!) value in the scheme of things

0 Replies

Agreed, Snood. I've come back into A2K after a couple of breaks, just read over the posts, and am really surprised the personal pokes and jibes are allowed to continue. Probably no one has a problem with an occasional "ad hominem" if it is done with some humor, but racial and other personal slurs -- one's physical self, one's place of residence, one's color, one's intellectual level -- all of these are fair game for one or two participants, at which point the moderator steps in and berates everyone, broad brush. The result: morale dips, the quality of the discussion frays.

0 Replies

I'm not overly impressed with ANY of these Democrats. Probably Kerry is the best of the bunch, but he has weaknesses too--he is too obviously a politician on the make. Edwards I don't like but he fits the profile of where the Democratic Party post-Clinton probably is at the best of any of them, plus he is Southern which will help him electorally. I loathe Lieberman as a Republican in drag. Howard Dean has no isues except being anti-war, which is now a moot point. The rest of them are not serious candidates with the possible exception of Graham who I do like, but I wonder how far he will get since he had such a late start. Graham is good on the war and is also from Florida, which trumps Edwards' Southern strategy, but his health is not great. What do you others think of the bunch?

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Let me say this - I didn't direct my comments (heavy sigh) at anyone in particular, and then I was addressed by someone telling me what it would and would not behoove me to limit my comments to.

It does evoke heavy sighs with me, when it seems that certain folk are so damn self-absorbed that they attract contention like a whirlpool, then start trying to correct the "defects" in others' characters that they incorrectly assume cause the dadblamed contention in the first place.

I ask the forum - if you go to , say for instance, your place of work, and there is one person who seems to constantly get into pissing matches with coworkers, doesn't it quickly become obvious that it is not the case that everyone but him has issues? Well, that is, unfortunately how I see the situation here.

I can disagree with Timber and blatham and sophia and craven and... etc., and I think it would be awfully boring if we all thought the same. But it is a real shame that some people can't go a single goddamn day without getting wrapped around the axle because of their overbloated image of themselves, and their relative importance and (excuse me for saying!) value in the scheme of things

Well said, snood. Now who the hell are you talking about? Very Happy

I feel the love. Can you?

0 Replies

trespassers, please - do stop kicking a dead horse in order to provoke it. The rest of us are trying to get back to topic here, and it is not helpful when one keeps picking and picking. We do have some later information on the 2004 democratic contenders, so why not talk about that?

I think the potentials looked better than I had hoped. Howard Dean has much more agenda than his anti-war stance. That was very clear when he spoke. He also presents ways in which things have actually worked under his role as governor, and he has specific ideas on how and where to apply budget money. Kerry has been a politician for a long time, and he's good at it. He also still possesses a few ideals, which is a rarer and rarer commodity these days. Graham comes across as the seasoned and experienced pol he is. Edwards does not represent post-party Clinton. If you remember, Clinton came in with some of the smartest people around, and their slogan "it's the economy, stupid," while not elegant, was to the point. Edwards dithers. Sharpton now is somebody to watch. He commands greater respect from several groups than he had (although nobody questioned his intelligence before), and he's worked at it and for it.
Gephardt comes across as being one of the more honest and direct ones.

I am still a kerry fan, although Dean and Graham run close seconds. I think we'll start hearing more from and about them, and it was clear that race, in one way or another, is going to play a larger part in this than before.

0 Replies

larry, Dean has more in his agenda book than just being against this war in Iraq. He disagrees with Bush's tax cuts because it benefits the top 1 one percent while increasing the national debt, and also wants to develop some form of universal health care. Let's give this guy some room to see how he develops between now and the next election. c.i.

0 Replies

mamajuana wrote:

trespassers, please - do stop kicking a dead horse in order to provoke it. The rest of us are trying to get back to topic here, and it is not helpful when one keeps picking and picking. We do have some later information on the 2004 democratic contenders, so why not talk about that?

Yeah, how dare I respond when people choose to discuss me in a public forum? What ever am I thinking?

Hey, mama, I have an idea... PM me if you have a problem with me, and I will reply privately. Address me in public--or worse, talk about me to others--and you will get my reply in that public forum.

Very Happy

0 Replies

trespassers will wrote:

mamajuana wrote:
trespassers, please - do stop kicking a dead horse in order to provoke it. The rest of us are trying to get back to topic here, and it is not helpful when one keeps picking and picking. We do have some later information on the 2004 democratic contenders, so why not talk about that?

Yeah, how dare I respond when people choose to discuss me in a public forum? What ever am I thinking?

Hey, mama, I have an idea... PM me if you have a problem with me, and I will reply privately. Address me in public--or worse, talk about me to others--and you will get my reply in that public forum.

0 Replies

I'm new to this forum, and while I can understand people getting caught up in political arguments, the immaturity displayed by some members as they continuously pick fights is exasperating and uninteresting. (Trying not to anger anyone here, so don't attack me. I won't take the bait) Personally, I'd rather talk about politics...

The more I learn about Dean, the more I like him. He wants to balanced the national budget (something he proved successful at in Vermont) and take on the national debt (reduced Vermont's debt by 23%). His website states: "Rather than discussing new tax cuts, we should be debating a repeal of the first tax cut. We simply cannot afford to continue marching down the path of borrow-and-spend, borrow-and-spend....Ask most Americans if they would rather have a tax cut or better health coverage, a strong Social Security program, improved roads and bridges, and decent schools for their children. They will choose health care, Social Security, education and infrastructure. They also understand - despite hollow Republican promises - that we cannot do both."

He's an MD that wants to do a lot of work on health care, where it is certainly needed. He believes in supporting our children as early as possible, as well as keeping our environment healthy enough to sustain this next generation. Dean doesn't believe that a government should have the power to control personal decisions like abortion.

He supports gun control in the interest of making our country safer and acknowledges the fact that different states need different gun control laws. "I believe we should keep and enforce the federal gun laws we have - including the assault weapons ban and the Brady Bill - and close the gun show loophole using Insta-check and then let the states decide for themselves what, if any, additional gun control laws they want." He's also aware that there are better, defensive methods of keeping our country safe from exterior agression.

Most importantly, he pushes for human rights. "You can always compromise when you are fighting over money, but there can never be a compromise when it comes to basic human rights." "I want to be the president where everyone in America has equal rights under the law." I believe we can count on Dean to repair some of the damage done to Americans' liberty. After all, it was George W. Bush who said "There ought to be limits to freedom."

I'm aware I may have repeated some information that was already stated in this thread, but I felt like I could offer somethign that would get us back on track.

0 Replies

Orophin, Thanks for expanding on my limited knowledge about Dean. He's my favorite, so far, going into the next election. c.i.

0 Replies

Welcome, Orophin. Although we do slide occasionally off into the realm of middle-school level mischief (me included), A2K and the posters thereon are generally head and shoulders above any other similar site in content of knowledgeable and stimulating discussion. Hope you don't let the couple of warts scare you off.

Dean is my man for 2004. I watched an open forum on C-Span with him and the other plethora of Dem hopefuls on a stage being questioned on some issues. Even amid the potential for confusion and blurring of message because of all the voices, to me his ideas and integrity still shined. The things you mentioned are pluses; I am most impressed with the "fire-in-the-belly" with which he seems to deliver his message. He seems to have the courage of his convictions, he is knowledgeable on a variety of topics, both foreign and domestic, and he had a good record of righting the fiscal "ship" in Vermont.

0 Replies

Howdy Orophin, welcome aboard. Sorry if you're a bit put off by some of the less genteel posters.; that's certainly understandable. With any luck at all, one or two of The Usual Suspects will take notice of your observation and feel suitably and sufficiently ashamed to behave better. I sorta doubt that'll happen though. We try to keep a fairly free-flowing, open forum going here, and sometimes folks take advantage of tollerance. Those that persist in doing so do, or who do so particularly egregiously and heinously, get shot. The others are pretty much allowed to embarrass themselves and irritate other folks unless and untill it becomes necessary to shoot them. Just FYI, I'm among the very few suitably armed members. It takes some doin' ta really piss me off, but I'm a helluva shot.

0 Replies

Quote:

Just FYI, I'm among the very few suitably armed members. It takes some doin' ta really piss me off, but I'm a helluva shot.

From what I've seen, everyone here seems very knowledgeable and I look forward to discussions with all of you!

Quote:

I am most impressed with the "fire-in-the-belly" with which he seems to deliver his message. He seems to have the courage of his convictions

Agreed. I think this was what drew me to him in the first place. He's definitely not afraid to say what needs to be said, even if he may be doing his political career harm by doing so.

0 Replies

Dean has so far not articulated any position other than opposition to the war. I'm sorry, c.i., but that is just a fact. His vision on tax cuts and health care is boilerplate Democratic rhetoric, no different from Gephardt or Kerry. I still say that, ideologically, Edwards most closely approximates the position of most Democrats in the post-Clinton Democratic party. Certainly he is occupying the dead center of the political spectrum among the primary candidates with Kucinich and Sharpton at the far left and Lieberman at the far right.

0 Replies

I pretty much agree with that assessment, LR. Dean chose to align himself chiefy with the Anti-War faction, something which even if principled and laudable plays to an uncertain, and even fickle audience. The gamble may well prove an insuperable loss, regardless his position on other issues. For the others you mention, I rather give the nod to Kerry, who I see the leading "CANDIDATE". I just don't see a viable powerbase supporting either Gephardt or Edwards, and the others are sideshow attractions. Kerry's well honed political savvy and his potential to marshal assured financial resources make him a most formidable Intra-Party Politics contender, regardless his suitability for or abilitlity to win Inter-Party Politics.

0 Replies

Larry, Noted. Thanks for your considered opinion. c.i.

0 Replies

2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know