Wow. The Democrats seem to be eating their own this week.
** "“Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe we are not safer with his capture, don’t have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president,” U.S. Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts said in Des Moines, Iowa, site of the first key 2004 nominating contest on Jan. 19.
“How can anybody say we’re safer with Saddam Hussein in the world?” asked Rep. Richard Gephardt of Missouri, who said Dean’s “wrong-headed” statement was evidence of the difficulty he would have in a general election.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut condemned Dean, a medical doctor, for opposing the war in Iraq, proposing the repeal of Bush’s tax cuts and favoring restrictions on global trade pacts.
“He seems to believe if you are just against everything, that is enough,” Lieberman said in the early primary state of New Hampshire. “Dr. Dean has become Dr. No.”
Lieberman referred to the former Vermont governor’s comments earlier this year that the United States should prepare for the day when it no longer had the strongest military.
In a Bush/Dean election, all Bush would need to do is make commercials of these Democrats commenting about Dean. It’s hard to see how any of these guys could endorse Dean after these comments and present a unified Democratic Party.
The last time I recall this kind of a nasty internal party split on serious issues of US security and foreign policy was during the Democratic primaries leading up to the 1972 McGovern/Nixon election.
Kerry, Lieberman and Gephardt have chosen to make Dean unelectable in the general election. Obviously they did this in the hope that Democrats will realize their front running darling must be replaced by one of them.
I have met with Kerry, and he is about as exciting as watching paint dry. I think Lieberman would do well in the general election, and boy wouldn't he drive all the Guppies crazy!
I agree: it would be Bush 60%, Dean 40%. I think Lieberman is the only one who can beat Bush from this stellar cast of democratic dopefuls. Unfortunately the demo primaries are skewed for the liberal candidate. It's as if the GOP crafted their primary process.
well the Democracts will attack Dean because he is the one who didn't approve war with Iraq - and now with Saddam has been captured - all adds with 'no foreign and military policy experience' will be run against him - truth be told negative adds has not hurt Dean - and the reason is clear he is a front runner in polls however those polls don't mean Dean will be the nominee for Presidential election from the Democracts.
i am stunned Gephardt is attacking him - disappointment - COME ON you can do better than this.
This is not the end of Dean, Gore has already given his full public backing to him so any decrease in support over this issue is short term. As regards to Iraq, some Americans are now skeptical about the background to Sadams capture, with Congressman McDormott questioning the timing of arrest.
**Rep. Jim McDermott of Washington, the Democratic congressman who went to Baghdad last year to say that President Bush would lie to the American people in order to justify war, has now accused the president of timing Saddam Hussein’s capture for political ends. He told a Seattle radio interviewer Monday that American forces could have captured Saddam “a long time ago if they wanted.” **
Asked by interviewer Dave Ross on KIRO-FM whether the capture was timed to help the president, he replied: “Yeah. Oh, yeah. There’s too much by happenstance for it to be just a coincidental thing.” Pressed by Mr. Ross about whether he meant that the timing of the capture was driven by politics, Mr. McDermott said: "I don’t know that it was definitely planned on this weekend, but I know they’ve been in contact with people all along who knew basically where he was. It was just a matter of time till they’d find him. “It’s funny, when they’re having all this trouble, suddenly they have to roll out something.” …
I predict it will be neck to neck fight, just like last time no matter who the democratic leader maybe. Thought lets plan to revisit this thread come November.
It is interesting, people like Kerry and Lieberman played me-2'ism as a way of politicking, believing copying Bush and supporting him would win votes. Realistically that's impractical, the Democrats tried doing that in the recent Congressional elections and took a beating. At least with Dean...I would have thought Americans would have appreciated a distinct alternative to the present incumbent?
George Bush the First popularity hovered in the upper 80 percentile after he won Gulf War I. The following year he was defeated, it seems people forget how quickly things can change. Bush carries some ugly baggage, namely Chaney and Rumsfeld, move Collin Powell to the Vice Presidential spot and that would be a tough team to beat. Until Vice presidential candidates are announced it’s foolish to think that Bush is unbeatable.
do u think dean enjhoys the same type pf political support as Clinton did when he ousted Bush The first?
I do not remember much of the primaries except that I really liked Paul Tsongas who had to back out due to his health, as him and Clinton were 1 and 2 in the primaries. After that, I recall Clinton was really liked by college students, younger generation etc..and was all over talk shows. and then Jerry brown, who was too out left for most people, but was an interesting guy from a speech perspective.
I dont know if dean has that charisma..but again I remember more of clinton after he was nominated as the dem candidate, do not recall how things looked for him the winter before elections. Could you remind me? This was just the time i was getting interested in politics and thus did nto know enough to compare dean's popularity in the primaries vs Clintons popularity during primaries.
If the timing of the capture of Saddam was a decision based upon domestic political strategy, why now?
We're almost a year away from the election. Bush will have no opposition in the Republican primaries. His approval ratings have stabalized and have actually been moving up based upon improvements in the economy. As UTD has pointed out, approval and popularity ratings a year before the election are ephemeral anyway. It would have made more sense from a political standpoint to keep Saddam in a hole until after the conventions and the general election was underway.
Finally, the Democrat that Bush would most like to run against (Dean), is the one who will get hurt the most as the comments of his rivals indicates. GOPers have undoubtedly been crossing their fingers and toes hoping nothing derailed the Dean Express until after the primaries.
The McDermott type of thinking simply makes no sense when you study the political picture with any degree of care.
Good reason you didn't hear much about Clinton early on, he didn't enter the race until October of 1991. Clinton was in the media limelight so much because of Jennifer Flowers accusations and those calling him a draft dodger. Opponents accused Clinton of "waffling" on the First Gulf war which seems similar to what's happening to Dean right now. Clinton didn't have a real opponent, everyone thought Mario Cuomo was going to jump in and that didn't happen and the big names stayed out as well. Dean's not a shoe in, Clarks out there and the other guys aren't throwing the towel in. And while the Economy we're told is recovering will it sustain this recovery as more IT jobs are transferred offshore? What future does Iraq hold as well as any other foreign endeavor the U.S. might become involved in? You can analyze and make predictions but that's all they are. Bush looks strong right now, but right now doesn’t matter.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
Bush looks strong right now, but right now doesn’t matter.
[/QUOTE]
While it does matter, it certainly doesn't matter a lot as things can quickly fall apart. Which is why I think the very idea advanced by McDermott is idiotic. What do you think of McDermott's statement?
MV, One can come up with advantages for withholding Saddam for the public why McDermott decided to make an accusation to me seems political stupid unless he has military information that can back his claim, I'd say he was just running off at the mouth.
As if Saddam’s capture wasn’t enough to put the fork in Dean, now comes good old Ralphy Nader to announce his interest in running again.
** "He criticized Dean’s refusal to back cuts in the military budget and said he was “a pretty conservative governor.”
“He’s at a crossroads now,” he said of Dean. “The Democrats are damaging each other far more than any Green campaign could. What they are saying about Dean … all that will be used by Republicans.” " **