Dean to Topple Bush?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 9 2003 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
A lot of people are overlooking the symbolism of Hillary being president. A woman and a liberal and a feminist.


I know where you're coming from Neo, but alot of people see all that as progress not prophecy.




posted on Dec, 9 2003 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Progress always comes at a price.

Those that progress do it at the expense of others especially when there is no 'group hug and pow-wow session to mutually decide on the game plan.'



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by RANT

Originally posted by Bob88
Bush will WIN by a landslide, ha ha! Reagan-style.

I'm shocked that Gore isn't supporting Lieberman though. What gives? And, is having Gore's backing a good thing? Or, can it hurt Dean?



[Edited on 9-12-2003 by Bob88]


"Reagen Style" is definitely how Bush might win. Some secret negotiations with terrorists to make Bush look good last minute. Or holding back WMD's, Saddam or Osma til next Summer.

The Gore thing, though, is the first refreshing thing I've seen from the "Progressive Party". Not undue Liebermann loyalty, not hanging on Hillary's housecoat... but an independent thought. SHOCKING!

Especially Republicans should like this...It's a snub to old Dem guard Bill & Hill (and their boy Clark). And Dems that are more than just Clinton groupies should LOVE the move.


Rant - that observation of "reagn Style" is stellar!


Here's what happened:

- Gore is not the person who won the presidency last election - his views have shifted against the obvious infection of American Democracy brought to us via the Bushies. Hence, he is no more the apologist 'let's make peace through debate of ideas' politician that won the presidency last time & had it stolen - he's gotten ballsy and knows that fire is the the way to combat the Bush disease.

- When the moderate Republicans have an epiphany & actually research Dean beyond the labels, they will find a moderate who worked for a Republican at the start of his political career, a leader who actually cut taxes across the board, balanced his states budget in his first two years and repealed all tax increases that were implemented to get to that balance. Though he's not on their platform, Libertarians will vote Dean, Progressives will vote Dean, the Democratic old guard will vote Dean once they see that they can't derail him, and moderate Republicans will vote Dean, because he's much more fiscally conservative than anything the Bush White House has offered up in 3.5 years.
Add to that that his campaign leading fund raising is coming in from the real people out there, not PACs or corporations, but at an average of about $75, and you have an authentic populace ground swell.
I don't buy the "evil Calculations" theory of Gore/Sen.Clinton throwing the country to hell for another 4 years for their own political ambitions. The political ambitions, after seeing both Gore/Clinton live, are back seat.
Besides, Clinton is a shoe in for a Cabinet post in a Dem White House, and Gore is a level of probability below that for some appointment.
Clinton knows the value of "Academic Credentials". She is extremely ambitious, and know the most expedient route to the White House is through the well worn tracks. By looking at ATS as a demographic sampling, it's also obvious that America is not ready yet for a woman in the White House. Even though Nancy Reagan ran the country for 6 out of 8 years.

[Edited on 10-12-2003 by Bout Time]



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 09:48 AM
link   
That was excellent. Perfectly said, and thank you for pointing that out to everyone.

Incidentally, I've recently begun feeling the exact same about dean's candidacy, and the support of Gore threw me over the edge. I decided to post the article sort of to show my support for dean.

Well, I'm moseying on by now.



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 09:54 AM
link   
: Dean to topple Bush ???
~~++~~

Dean is only there to make Bush look Good !

(just watch as the scenes are played out)

~~xx~~

Edwards [NC] as veep is interesting
but means nada in the long run

~~xx~~



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 11:01 AM
link   
I still think Dean is going to take the fall.
He was by all accounts a heavy drinker when he was younger. Now sober. (like Bush)
His son was arrested for a felony burglery.
He had his records sealed. Which tells me he has something to hide. Once all this starts to come out he will be raked over the coals. This will make the other dems look better and better.
www.realchange.org...
The link has quick run down on Dean, good and bad.
Were it not for him hiding his record,I would consider voting for him. But he has something to hide, IMO all canidates for the presidency should make all there dealings,wrong doings, voting records,etc public. I suspect that if he were elected, people are going to be bashing him just like Bush. His private life is very similar to Bush, drinking,screwed up kid,and secrecy.



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 11:38 AM
link   
A doctorate, a booming medical practice, a fiscal conservative, a balanced budget and cut taxes!
Bush not only sealed his Texas records, but had them hid further outside of state oversight.
I think those warts will endear him to people, the same way it worked for Bush.
I also will stay to my prediction: Wes Clark will be VP on a Dean ticket. If Bob Graham was not ill, he would be a 50/50.



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Make sure you take a look at the flip side of that success. It was in Vermont. And... well... I could run the state of Vermont. Its mostly trees.
A little humour BT. There are a lot of things I do like about him. He is very responsible when it comes to money. And I do not think he is a bull#ter. Just tells it as he sees it. It is what he is hiding that bugs me.



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 12:30 PM
link   
We'll see! I'm sure that there will be more that one sniffer after his butt!



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Thats great and all Rant.....still haven't answered the question posed three times:
Why is Hitlery and Gore not running for Presidency in 2004?



Hitlery can't run in '04 for two main reasons.

1. She is so polarizing, there is no way she could beat Bush. Anyone sitting on the fence, inclined to lean rightward would vote for Bush in a heartbeat over her.

2. She cannot go back on her promise to New York to finish out her first term as Senator. To pull a John Edwards and run for pres. at this stage would be political suicide.

But what if... Wes Clark gets the Democratic nomination and asks her to be his running mate? That would be her in to the presidency. If something drastic happens, some terror event between now and the election, she could pull a "I'm doing this for our country" stunt and get off the hook. Just a thought.

I wouldn't put ANYTHING past that woman!



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 12:44 PM
link   
As to Gore - why he's not running? That's a good one. Who knows, really. Maybe he's honestly enjoying his private life for the first time in his life. Maybe he's content knowing that as a private citizen he can be more outspoken on issues that matter to him.

The questions that should have been put to Gore, Seekerof, have to do with his campaign shenanigans back during the '96 election. He and Klinton should have been impeached and charged with breaking those laws - not for Klinton's sleezeball sexcapades.

Cheers!




posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 12:50 PM
link   
I just saw this regarding what I just mentioned!

Clark says he's not ruled out Hillary Clinton as possible veep
12/9/2003

PORTSMOUTH, N.H. -- On the presidential campaign trail Tuesday, Wesley Clark said he has not ruled out Hillary Clinton as his running mate, if he wins the Democratic presidential nomination.

Clark praised the New York senator as a great person and a great leader and said he's admired her for 20 years.

Clinton has made it that clear she isn't running for the White House in 2004 but.

Copyright 2003 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
http://w ww.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2003/12/09/clark_says_hes_not_ruled_out_hillary_clinton_as_possible_veep?mode=PF



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 02:10 PM
link   
From Bout Time:

Here's what happened:

- Gore is not the person who won the presidency last election - his views have shifted against the obvious infection of American Democracy brought to us via the Bushies. Hence, he is no more the apologist 'let's make peace through debate of ideas' politician that won the presidency last time & had it stolen - he's gotten ballsy and knows that fire is the the way to combat the Bush disease.

- When the moderate Republicans have an epiphany & actually research Dean beyond the labels, they will find a moderate who worked for a Republican at the start of his political career, a leader who actually cut taxes across the board, balanced his states budget in his first two years and repealed all tax increases that were implemented to get to that balance. Though he's not on their platform, Libertarians will vote Dean, Progressives will vote Dean, the Democratic old guard will vote Dean once they see that they can't derail him, and moderate Republicans will vote Dean, because he's much more fiscally conservative than anything the Bush White House has offered up in 3.5 years.
Add to that that his campaign leading fund raising is coming in from the real people out there, not PACs or corporations, but at an average of about $75, and you have an authentic populace ground swell.
I don't buy the "evil Calculations" theory of Gore/Sen.Clinton throwing the country to hell for another 4 years for their own political ambitions. The political ambitions, after seeing both Gore/Clinton live, are back seat.
Besides, Clinton is a shoe in for a Cabinet post in a Dem White House, and Gore is a level of probability below that for some appointment.
Clinton knows the value of "Academic Credentials". She is extremely ambitious, and know the most expedient route to the White House is through the well worn tracks. By looking at ATS as a demographic sampling, it's also obvious that America is not ready yet for a woman in the White House.

Hey Bout Time, you really hit the nail on the head in your analysis of Dean. As for this conservative (former) Republican, at the moment, my money's on Dean taking the nomination. And this will be the first time I have EVER voted for a Democrat. Strange times we're living in.



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Having wes clark as a VP isn't exactly the worst Idea for dean. However, I also don't think that having another clinton in the white house is a bad plan either.


I think that both Clinton and Clark will be good choices, however, it'll be more difficult to get into the house with Clinton, simply because they'll have trouble taking the more conservative areas of the country(moderate or not) It's just too archetypical for us to have a 2 male ticket running for president. In short, the country isn't ready for a female VP, unfortunately.



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 04:47 PM
link   


Bush will WIN by a landslide, ha ha! Reagan-style.

I'm shocked that Gore isn't supporting Lieberman though. What gives? And, is having Gore's backing a good thing? Or, can it hurt Dean?

[Edited on 9-12-2003 by Bob88]



I have to agree with Bob88. Dean will go down in a sink hole. He's hiding too much, but it will come out



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Ummmm...if they continue to pull the "hiding things" crap after he gets the nomination, he'll probably turn around and point at buried docs on Bush.



posted on Dec, 10 2003 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by OXmanK
Ummmm...if they continue to pull the "hiding things" crap after he gets the nomination, he'll probably turn around and point at buried docs on Bush.


no #ing joke, man. people oftentimes forget there is two sides to every story.



posted on Dec, 11 2003 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Loki
Just read this, thought I'd send it out to you, so you could have a gander...

Gore Supports Dean

"Howard Dean really is the only candidate who has been able to inspire at the grass-roots level all over this country the kind of passion and enthusiasm for democracy and change and transformation of America that we need," said Gore, who won the popular vote in 2000 against Bush but lost the all-important electoral votes after a bitter recount in Florida.

Well, I'm going to go ahead and say that 90% of all candidates would be a better choice than bush...sorry to all you right-wingers out there getting p.o'ed at me. heh.

THoughts? Comments?



my opinion is that Bush will win this election...

I also think his is the best man for the job...

out of the line of candites...Bush...is the best...candite



posted on Dec, 11 2003 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Russian

my opinion is that Bush will win this election...

I also think his is the best man for the job...

out of the line of candites...Bush...is the best...candite


I've been thinking about this. He probably will win.

And many feel he's perfectly qualified or even the best for the job of President right now, but I have to ask...

What else would anyone hire him for? I'm not being facetious, but if I look at his career(s) and personal history, I wouldn't let him near a company I owned. Not in accounting, no where near the money, not in human resources, DEFINITELY NOT in public relations, he may have some mad Jedi mind # marketing skills (I give him that), but seriously... would you even let him date your daughter?



posted on Dec, 11 2003 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Bush says he doesn't even read the news. He relies on his people to break it down for him. I don't believe in Carteresque micromanagement or Clinton's desire to know every minute detail of every problem, but the fact that the president of the United States would so insulate himself from what's going on is more than bit frightening. If he doesn't at least keep track of what's going on outside his little White House bubble, then he could very well (which I believe is the case here) and according to and depending the quality of his people (which I think are pretty much on the dark side at this point), he's gonna have a pretty warped view of reality. That should scare the hell outta people. Talk about being susceptible to manipulation! The president of the United States should have a thorough and realistic grasp of what the people across our country are saying and feeling. How aware of the protest movement, for example, is Bush when protesters are shuffled off a mile or so away from his appearances - completely out of his sight? Bush makes a nice figure head; but, as his career in business has shown, he's a failed business man. Even one of the biggies at Carlyle who sat on one of the same boards as Bush said he was simply crude (telling dirty jokes) and quite uninterested in the workings of the business. He suggested to the younger Bush at one point, that he might be better off departing the board. That's a big indictment, coming from someone friendly to the Bush's, generally.

Howard Dean would eat Bush alive in a debate. Bush can barely spit out a correct, complete statement.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join