MANCHESTER, N.H. – Former Vice President Al Gore intends to endorse Howard Dean for the Democratic presidential nomination, a dramatic move that could cement Dean’s position in the fight for the party’s nod.
Gore, who lost to President Bush in the disputed 2000 election, has agreed to endorse Dean in Harlem in New York City on Tuesday and then travel with the former Vermont governor to Iowa, sight of the Jan. 19 caucuses which kickoff the nominating process, said a Democratic source close to Gore.
The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Dean will return from Iowa in time for Tuesday night’s Democratic debate in New Hampshire.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Democrats have no choice but to go McGovern in this election. I don;t think Clark would accept.
[/QUOTE]
With the economy seemingly rebounding nicely, I agree. Turn to the left and accept a McGoverness defeat. Dump the Pelosis and Daschles from leadership posts following the election day carnage and plug in more centrist leadership who will pine for the good old days of Clinton. This 2004 election is all about clearing a path for Hillary in 2008.
So how would one go about applying for a Dutch passport?
Dean is a friggin loser. Damn.. is that really the best these idiots can muster? sigh
Anyway, I think if Cheney gracefully bows out citing his health or some other happy face-saver Bush will be totally unbeatable. I don't think that's too far fetched an idea either since Cheney knows he can maintain his grasp on power even out of office.
Spoon bhaijaan, that is why MV bhaijaan is correct in his assessment of paving the way. 2008 is not too far away. I only have two requests from whomever is in the whitehouse. Cleanup the mutual funds (trade side) and don't unnecessarily prop up the dollar. Daddy's hedging hard in Q1 2004.
To early to speculate on any VP's. It was leaked that Dean approached Clark for the VP position but that was before he (Clark) had entered the race. A Clinton would sure be nice though.
Let's see how the primaries go. Clark is still out there and he’s not planning on throwing in the hat tomorrow.
The Right sees Bush as Captain EJ Smith saw the Titanic,
"I cannot imagine any condition which could cause this ship to flounder.
Cannot conceive of any vital disaster happening to this vessel."
The Right sees Bush as Captain EJ Smith saw the Titanic,
"I cannot imagine any condition which could cause this ship to flounder.
Cannot conceive of any vital disaster happening to this vessel."
[/QUOTE]
There is more than 1 iceberg for the right to worry about. They need to double plank the hull, strengthen cross members inside the ship, wrap bands of iron around the outside at the bows, stern and along the keel to keep this ship from hitting the icebergs they are responsible for.
Do any of you guys seriously believe Dean can better lead America, and the World than Bush has? To me he's looking like just another flavor of stupid.
Now, I've always said Clinton's benign neglect was a helluva lot better than Bush's proactive chaos.. but Clinton didn't have to deal with a world as it is now.. whoever replaces Bush damned well better know what he's doing because this time around benign neglect is gonna kick our asses.
If by benign neglect means gaining cooperation and respect from allies then that's fine by me. Winning the (short) war on terror is by conquering those before they can enact their plan(s), which is done through intelligence. Dean isn't planning on crippling these intuitions that gather such nor would he perverse the intelligence as has been done for political gain.
Once you reach the top and are alone you are neither seen as good nor evil but a mixture of both and depending how you present yourself, one side is often seen more than the other. Roosevelt said 'Speak softly and carry a big stick' I tend to agree with that as loud rhetoric filled voices often just wake up the children and rile up others who'd otherwise fall in line.
I don’t think George W. Bush is so bad, it’s those that whisper into his ear that concern me.
The problem with the Captains Courageous analysis is that the "right" is not the segment of the voting population that will re-elect Bush. Nor is it the "left" that has the strength to elect a guy like Dean. You all are ignoring the center which is where elections are won or lost. And that center is not going to veer leftward under circumstances where they are reasonably secure in their jobs, see a healthy and growing economy, and are optimistic about near term economic trends.
Dean is not a centrist. He can't make himself into a centrist. He can win the Democratic primaries because he appeals to the left leaning party activists.
In a general election against Bush, he can win big majorities in districts like San Francisco and Greenwich Village. But what part of the South or Mid-West do you think this guy can carry? How many centrist Democrats in these regions place high importance on civil unions for homosexual couples?
UTD, while I think Clinton screwed up in many regards, I also think that he would be savvy enough to manage the current situations. The biggest problem is terror. Bush's handling of it has been like giving attention to a raving toddler. Though I'm sure 9/11 and all the rest would've happened even if Clinton had a third term, so terror is an issue regardless. The economy really isnt that hard to handle.. problem is Bush & Co are actively working to screw it up. As long as you're not doing that you wont have a problem there.
But with terror a Democrat would have to take an active stance because of how Bush accelerated the problem. I'm not sure any of these guys are really capable of doing that properly. They'd all do well at the benign neglect (by which I mean passive action, all good on its own but certain problems just aren't solved that way). That's the problem. I don't think anyone is really capable of handling that. Bush f***ed up (as Kerry would say) and now we're just going to have to wait for it to die out on its own. But until then we will have to stop what's coming at us and happy tea parties with Kofi and the gang aren't going to do that.
And I agree with you.. it's not Bush that scares me but the lunatics that have his ear. Though I'm sure he wouldn't even be there if it weren't for those same lunatics.
But, yeah, the rest of it I agree with. Dean doesn’t have the coverage he needs, never will. He can only win if Afghanistan and Iraq erupt in civil war after next summer’s elections. Even then I’m not so sure.
Me? I just don’t like the guy.. gives me the creeps.
While the stupid primary process caters to the fringes and does not favor a centrist candidate, it's not like there is a great pool to pick from in the democratic field. What a bunch of losers. But I think democrats are more concerned with the lies that lead to Iraq, erosion of civil liberties, lack of progress in the 'war on terror', etc than they are with homosexual unions. As far as the economy is concerned, it remains to be seen what the status will be in Fall 2004.
You edited out the important part of the sentence. I think you’d agree 100% (well…maybe 90%) with the statement I made as a general rule. * ** “And that center is not going to veer leftward under circumstances where they are reasonably secure in their jobs, see a healthy and growing economy, and are optimistic about near term economic trends.” ** *
I am not suggesting that we are currently in that position. But, the historical economic boom and bust cycles we go through suggest that this recovery will steam along at least through the election. If we go back into recession by then, Bush will, IMO, lose … maybe even to a guy like Dean. With a healthy economy though and Dean as an opponent, it’s landslide time.
I think Seminole is right that the majority of centrist democrats are “more concerned with the lies that lead to Iraq, erosion of civil liberties, lack of progress in the ‘war on terror’, etc than they are with homosexual unions.” But, IMO, their 401Ks, the size of their savings account, their ability to pay interest off on their credit card debt, their job being stable enough to buy a new SUV, their mutual funds appreciating etc. trump all these other things. Especially when the candidate from the left can’t present a credible plan to win the war on terror and the “erosion of civil liberties” affects other people not them and their immediate families.
I heard Michael Moore say: “the French are doing the Democrats job.” What do they really want? Clark, who comes from the South, I heard, was getting the Clintons’ endorsement.
All this Bush-hating (by the rest of the world) could play out like reverse psychology, I’m afraid, giving him a second term (with some ’00 tactics of course). As Jack Germond of the Baltimore Sun once said, Americans have an attention-span of a four year old. A year is a long time in political terms, a lot could happen.
The question is, if its W in the white house, will the world be safe place in 05, 06 & 07.
oh crap, man you almost may me spit up my drink!! 