I hope everyone give an honest listen to Dean. He's got some worthwhile things to say, I think.
Lieberman may have the most name recognition but he is definitely not the front runner. My opinion of the top three: Kerry, Dean, and Edwards. Lieberman will not make it.
1. Dean
2. Edwards
3. Kerry
Snood:
Dean intrigues me. I am watching him carefully. Kerry, I like too. As a Vietnam veteran with his experiences, I think Bush fears him. He would much rather face Lieberman or even Edwards.
Interesting, the last two replys are have Kerry in reversed order. I wonder why?
dys, Ya got me curious. Puzzled, in fact ... care to elaborate your ranking criteria?
timber
what i posted was my own preferences, not how well i think they will do. actually i would put Gary Hart at the top of my list.
Oh, OK.
In that case, I'd go for
1. Mosely-Braun
2. Sharpton
3. HIllary
Of course, I'm not a Democrat
timber
"Of course, I'm not a Democrat"
thats ok Timberlandko we all have a cross to bear
LOL ... touche!
Seriously, I see Kerry as the most formidable Dem. Its a long way to Iowa, but Kerry isn't going to travel tourist-class when he goes. Platform and Position will be critical, and The Dems need to write a speech folks want to hear before they pick someone to deliver it.
If Kerry is wise, he will watch carefully the scramble, picking from it nuggets from which he might smelt a fine assay. I suspect him to be wise, whatever else I may think of him.
timber
i am not so sure that "issues" will matter this time around i see the senses of the people to be more based in emotions of discomfort, people are afraid and they are going to be looking for someone, anyone who gives them a sense of safety and security, both domestically and internationally. they dont fear Iraq, they fear terrorism. but what the hey i am a liberal.
Well, dys, you may be in luck.
A few of the contenders met in ....Iowa to sort of celebrate the anniversary of the Year Before the Iowa Caucus.
Kerry and Dean made a point to say the Democrat party looked like a bunch of Republican wannabes. Kerry said they should be more liberal.
Gephardt said his first week in office, he would rescind all of Bush's tax cuts.
Leiberman didn't show.
Would Kerry and Dean be too much NE for a ticket?
What people fear most of all is not being able to feed, clothe and shelter their famelies. If the economy continues to falter it won't much matter who the democratic nominee is Bush will lose the election.
dyslexia wrote:i am not so sure that "issues" will matter this time around i see the senses of the people to be more based in emotions of discomfort, people are afraid and they are going to be looking for someone, anyone who gives them a sense of safety and security, both domestically and internationally. they dont fear Iraq, they fear terrorism. but what the hey i am a liberal.
Good point, and it reminds me of a song lyric that has stuck with me for years:
"...as long as you're comfortable, it feels like freedom."
North Sea Bubble, by Billy Bragg
A comment Kerry made in 1996 to the effect that he hated having to go to places like Dubuque (Iowa) has been getting some play this week since Drudge dredged it up. :wink:
Now, it seems clear to me that he was complaining about having to run around raising money, rather than complaining about Dubuque, but knowing how these things get spun I wonder if he will now have a negative to overcome in Iowa.
Google News Search: Kerry + Iowa + Hate
Many finanacial pundits and "probably" most Americans have confidence that our economy will survive this downturn. I disagree with most people on our economies ability to survive without more bloodshed. That's the reason I believe in implementing a payroll tax exemption immediately, then reducing the tax rates for the remainder of this year. We need a "stimulus" package that benefits everybody. Not a pick and choose - who gets the benefit, political football. Money in the hands of worker/consumers will stimulate our economy, increase the tax base, and get people back to work where they belong. c.i.
Quote:c.i says
I disagree with most people on our economies ability to survive without more bloodshed
.
You seem to have gone off topic, but I will bite. Bloodshed, what bloodshed?
Consumerism will stimulate the economy, c.i., and putting the money into the pocket of the typical middle class consumer will do that. How many big screen TV's can the very wealthy buy, for instance? Number one, they've already bought theirs and it would barely make the tiniest bump in the total retail sales charts. But get several million people to buy a new big screen TV (or a new refridgerator, new sofa, etc.) and it will make a hell of a difference.
Putting it in the hands of the very wealthy in hopes they'll invest it in employees, research and development, stocks, etc. is back to the trickle down economics which has not been proven to work. A brisk consumer market has been proven to work.
cicerone imposter wrote: That's the reason I believe in implementing a payroll tax exemption immediately, then reducing the tax rates for the remainder of this year. We need a "stimulus" package that benefits everybody.
How would a payroll tax exemption benefit everybody? It certianly wouldn't benefit anyone that relies on any federally funded social program, Medicare/Medicaid or Social Security.
If you cut tax revenue to the bone then those programs (which have already been taking hits) get cut further. At the same time the Federal government would have to take on HUGE debt to keep any social programs running at all. There is no free lunch. Someone has to pay that debt back. Unemployement rates aren't anywhere near the historical highs that would be needed to justify a payroll tax exepmtion.
