It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Democratic Sen. Joseph Lieberman plans to run for president in 2004

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 8 2003 @ 11:46 AM
I think that this is horrible. I am afraid that Lieberman will get the Democratic nomination which will assure another 4 years of G. Dubbya in the white house. I don't think that America is ready to endorse a Orthadox Jew for president yet, particuarly with all of the turmoil in the middle east.

posted on Jan, 8 2003 @ 11:56 AM
I agree. Though the Dean/Kerry/Edwards group will far outshine him...remember the fact that Liberman has converted to Republican-lite will be effectively pinned on him. His early buzz is that he has national name recognition from being on the last presidential ticket. I abhor him just slightly less than Gephardt.
Plus, he has even less personality than Bush!

posted on Jan, 8 2003 @ 11:57 AM
isn't running for president?

posted on Jan, 8 2003 @ 12:05 PM
Gore! I guess that he has decided to make a career out of being a not ready for primetime player!

The democratic presidential field is scary. I am afraid that unless McCain switches parties we will have to suffer 4 more years of economic decline and big business politics. Then again, if Dean wins people will be able to marry whomever or whatever they want!

posted on Jan, 8 2003 @ 12:16 PM
Aiborne you can blame Clinton for these 4 years of economic decline...Bush has done everything to halt it as much as he has and he's done a good job.

Give credit where it is due.

no signature

posted on Jan, 8 2003 @ 12:28 PM
The dems have no leader. They all suck. Edwards is a millionaire trial lawyer w/ no experience. Kerry just looks weird to me - Lieberman hasn't an ounce of charisma. Daschle dropped out, pity. Dean is too liberal for a country that appearantly moved a little towards the 'right' - based at the last election.

Republican-lite, BT? Landrieu:
"I voted with the president 75% of the time." Being 'republican-lite' was a campaign tactic this past election, BT. Many dems who won acted like republicans during the campaign.

Sharpton is in a decent position!

I bet we'll see another crushing republican landslide reelection - Reagan-style!

posted on Jan, 9 2003 @ 09:50 AM
You've avoided the obvious: a strong sitting president poised for a second term brings out a sacrifical lamb opponent ( see Mondale/Ferraro, Dole and geez, who did the GOP sacrafice as VP with Dole?).
A weak and very beatable sitting president brings out a strong and large field as was the one Reagan came out of, as was the one Clinton came out of.

Edwards would take the South over Bush - notice how the Corporate/Complicit Media is spinning 'millionare trial lawyer' - when idiot GW had him on the millionaire front ten times over.....did anyone remember him mentioned as a multi-millionaire Corpratist against McCain in the primaries?

Being, I mean saying, they were for social issues like a middle class tax rebate, extended unemployment, small business investment, no more corporate welfare is the wolf in sheeps clothing tactic employed by winning Republicans in order to make them look like moderate Democrats.
In truth, the Dems hold more Moderates in their ranks than the Republicans; there is a larger percentage of Ultra Conservatives in the GOP than there are Ultra Liberals in the Democrats. You can't be Bleeding heart Liberal in the areas they represent: NY/CT/CA/MA are all national epicenters of business and industry in the US; the dividing point is business people are less prone to want goverment in their personal lives in those areas.

On Kerry, geez Bob, you sound like 'Tiger Beat' magazine!

Landrieu pulled her fat out of the fire by attacking Bush: she was in jeapody of losing BECAUSE she was touting that Bush connection. Once she highlighted his moron-ness and showed how he was behind a global sugar supplier running the show over Louisiana sugar companies, then she won.

What you will see, unfourtunately, is more terror attacks and war movements the closer we get to th '04 election.

[Edited on 9-1-2003 by Bout Time]

posted on Jan, 9 2003 @ 10:41 AM
Sacrificial lamp? If these are all lambs where's their fox? Hillary, Kennedy? Since Daschle dropped out does that mean he's their heavy hitter? The dems are dying for McCain to switch sides, I just know it. Dole had Kemp (if you were asking - I can't think about Dole without thinking about Norm Macdonald and laughing) Plus Dole did better against Clinton that dems did against Reagan - not for Perot ( I still think he's a dem 'invention') we might not have had Clinton.

and yes, Kerry is an odd looking fellow. Perhaps it's the hair - there's just something about him.

Terror attacks? Didn't someone here say we'd see them before the '02 elections??? Put your foil hat back on BT

Moderate Dems? Who? McCain and Leiberman? Otherwise it's a party hijacked by whackos, Clintonites, socialists, and (name your special interest group here) - not your fathers democrats.

posted on Jan, 9 2003 @ 11:05 AM
Yeah, I think of Norm McDonald re: Dole as well!!
That's my point: there is a weak & defeatable president and a bunch of Democrats jumping up to take him on. You always have the ego runs on both sides, which I think Gephart/Liberman/Sharpton are.
What's your opinion of Kerry, besides the cosmetics? I know it's a big hang up, I can't get passed Bush looking like a chimp receiving an anal probe everytime he trys to talk without a teleprompter!
Don't Blame Perot.....he had allot better ideas economically than Bush did. Blame that albatross...Dan Qualye ( who I think is smarter than GW!) That, and Poppy Bush being EVIL and all!
Terror action: you forgot that 'unmanned drone' sending some to Christ and others to Allah? What was the date of that, hmmmmm?
If you don't see the moderate Dems, your eyes are closed! That, or you don't look at the across the board vote history: people can still be for a womans right to choose AND be pro-business.
You also don't see the GOP overrun by corporate mouthpieces, ex 'C' company executives, religious fundamentalists, whacos, neo fascists, and DixieCrats in elephant suits?

posted on Jan, 9 2003 @ 01:03 PM
Norm as Dole talking 3rd person - thats the best!

How 'bout Zell Miller? With Kerry - I just can't get passed the mans hair. my bad. And those Bush/chimp comparisons are priceless.

I did forgot about the UAV kill. That was great! I love it - terrorize the terrorists.

About your point: It's moot because, like it or not, he isn't weak and defeatable. Being purely objective: He's had the highest approval rating EVER. Plus, you yourself mentioned sacrificial lamb. So which is it? Is Bush weak or will the dems just throw a lamb out there? Is Mondale available (i crack myself up). They should give it to Sharpton if Walt won't step up. (I sort of like his spunk).

Here's my take: Since capturing the UBL is what the dems consider to be a barometer for the war on terror - if he's caught in the next two years that will favor GW.

If the economy stops improving this will favor the Dems.

If Kerry changes his hair style I will look 'into the mans soul' and may like the guy (after all: he did a number on Charlie in nam)

If McCain goes indy, then by god Karl Rove - we've got a problem!

posted on Jan, 9 2003 @ 03:25 PM
The poll numbers are getting back in line and vectoring with Sept. 10, 2001; which were right around the popular vote percentage he lost by.
Not moot: his numbers were about what Clinton's were the day after he got impeached. The super spike, well come on, what American doesn't want to approve of their leader at a time like that? A kid might hate his father, but if there is a bear at the door, who is he gonna run for?
They have shown and done everything in an overreaching fashion since a GOP majority took hold....and they'll only get worse, which will be major blowback. I predicted a number of GOPers jumping ship; he's gonna force them off by making them unwinable in '04 if they follow his line.
Our economy 'improving' was completely bouyed by consumer spending....that's drying up.
They don't consider it a barometer re: Bin Laden. It's holding the Shrub to his "Dead or Alive" credo and trying to keep his A.D.D. eye on the prize, that being Al qeda.
Even if he doesn't run, he will ride that illigitimate pony boy for all he's worth.....thanks Sen. McCain!

posted on Jan, 10 2003 @ 11:55 AM
BT, Poll numbers? You democrats and your poll numbers

Like it or not, Bush has tons of political capital from 9/11 that will give him an easy win over anyone they put up against him. People will remember his eloquent axis of evil speech after 9/11 the scene of him with a the rescue workers at WTC on the bull horn and people will remember thanking God Gore wasnt elected. Americans stood by their leader then and they will come Election Day. Hes gotten too much good press that Rove is going to shove down everyones throats. Heck Guiliani could have been elected God if that were up for a vote.

All this emotion that will come out (for better or for worse), with Bush being the incumbent, and no strong opposition will result in a reelection by huge numbers, la Reagan mark my word.

posted on Jan, 10 2003 @ 01:51 PM
I can picture you on your knees, saying that prayer to the patron saint of hopeless causes!

- Eloquent Speech!?!?! You think Red Skelton's a poet laureate, so I can understand that statement.

- Ground Zero!?!? He was, in his child of privelege snippyness, yelling " I hear you!" to a worker that was trying to get his attention, I watched it live.

- Republicans thanked God it wasn't Gore - it's a modern Urban Legend propigated by the Right Wing Media

- Gulliani - yup, 100% the leader that 'let-me-find-a-hole-to-hide-in' Bush will ever be.

It doesn't take much to whip the retarded into an emotional frenzy!
People vote their pocketbooks first, party second. Add to that the 9/11 investigation coming due, the energy corporate cronyism coming to light, and he's gone. Common sense will prevail and another Bush will never be in the White House. Mark my Words.

posted on Jan, 10 2003 @ 02:43 PM
yes, that speech was great BT. And the axis of evil phrase is proving itself more so each day. Just admit it.

Even better was the post 9/11 speech before congress, excellent delivery, especially since it was Bush we're talking about, it wouldn't hurt him to go to a toastmaster meeting or two. Then again, 'props' to the speech writer -only Reagan could write and deliver.

posted on Jan, 10 2003 @ 03:15 PM
I've said it repeatedly: the facet of the Commander in Chief's job that is to focus and inspire the nation through his words and oratory style - Reagan did a tremendous job in. If he knew what was going on, or at least had half a clue, he would have been a real good president.
He's still way below functional minimums, but Bush has improved re: speech'n.

new topics

top topics


log in