This poll should warm the hearts of many here. - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-16-2003, 06:05 PM   #1
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:03 PM
This poll should warm the hearts of many here.

CNN/TIME POLL of registered voters September 3 and 4.

29% Definitely For Bush

41% Definitely Against Bush

25% Might Vote For or Against Bush


If this poll is in fact accurate, then I'd say Bush has already lost the election. The surprising statistic is the percentage that have already decided to vote definitely against Bush. The winner in 2004 is most likely not going to get a majority (50% or more). As long as the Democrats can prevent a third party candidate from taking away votes, this poll suggest they can coast to victory by picking up as little as 1/3 of the undecideds.

Still once the democrats pick a nominee and depending on if Nadar or other independents decides to run, the picture could look a lot different. Since many factors in the economy are "lagging indicators" with their effects only being felt by the public many months later, how the economy does in the next 6-8 months could decide the election.

Despite the various polls from early primary states here is how the democratic candidates rank among all registered democratic voters:

Kerry 16%

Lieberman 13%

Dean 11%

Gephardt 7%

Edwards 7%

Sharpton 5%

Graham 4%

Braun 4%

Kucinich 3%


I've seen polls that place Clark in 4th place. I'm definitely at this point voting for Bush, but if I had to vote for a democrat I would probably vote for Joe Lieberman. Despite the early excitement and money around Dean and Clark, I think Kerry is going to get to the democratic nomination.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 09-16-2003, 06:18 PM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,296
Local Time: 04:03 PM
Nader (love of my life) is not running. I believe there was (maybe still is) a move among some of the Greens to throw support to the Democratic candidate in an effort to get rid of Bush.

As for the poll: , but I wouldn't get too excited this early on in the game.
__________________

__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 09-16-2003, 06:20 PM   #3
War Child
 
najeena's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: an island paradise
Posts: 995
Local Time: 09:03 PM
That IS heart-warming news! Thanks, I really needed it today.
__________________
najeena is offline  
Old 09-16-2003, 06:49 PM   #4
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 04:03 PM
Re: This poll should warm the hearts of many here.

Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
I've seen polls that place Clark in 4th place. I'm definitely at this point voting for Bush, but if I had to vote for a democrat I would probably vote for Joe Lieberman. Despite the early excitement and money around Dean and Clark, I think Kerry is going to get to the democratic nomination.
If Kerry losed NH and Iowa I believe it will be difficult for him to do this.

If I am not mistaken, Dean is ahead in the Polls in NH and Kerry is currently running adds to combat this. I am not sure that he was thinking he needed to run ads in NH this early on.

I am like you on this issue Sting.

I am still leaning towards Bush. Lieberman has been my second choice. I have been intreagued by Clark.

I am curious because I would have expected you to be excited about the Clark campaign. What makes you place Lieberman over Clark?

In my case, I am like Lieberman's experience. He has shown an ability to cross party lines to get things done. With a General with no political background of working with a legislature I think it is a weakness. Other Generals have done it, but, some have been less successful in the political realm.

Bush is still where I am leaning. WE have months to think about it.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-16-2003, 06:55 PM   #5
New Yorker
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,637
Local Time: 04:03 PM
I feel all gooey inside after seeing this. But I'm not sure if its because of warmth or the mud that will probably be thrown in this election.

I want Bush out but the election is over a year away so let's wait and see.
__________________
sharky is offline  
Old 09-16-2003, 07:03 PM   #6
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 10:03 PM
STING2: everything is still open, don't forget how much p.r. the republicans can make with the money they collect.
More than that they have the possibility to bring "news" in the last week before the elections like "we found the WMD's" etc.

so even if the poll is corect, everything is still open
Klaus
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 09-16-2003, 07:41 PM   #7
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 09:03 PM
I don't give a damn about polls at this point. It's way too early for any predictions. Kerry or Dean may be the front runner at this point but that could change. I like the news, but it's not going to stay this way. The American electorate is capable of being very fickle.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 09-16-2003, 08:27 PM   #8
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:03 PM
Dreadsox,

Clark looks very impressive based on his resume, but he was opposed to the war in Iraq. This suggest that he has a fundamental difference about what US foreign policy should be compared to the Bush administration which in my view has the best foreign policy team in our nations history. I could not vote for a person that, if they had been president the past 3 years, would have left Saddam in power there by risking and hurting US and International Security. Bush took the action to finally enforce the UNs most serious resolutions against Iraq, and that was the correct course in policy although it was a bit late. Iraq is a major undertaking, and I'm suspicious about someones commitment to the operation now and for the future who was opposed to the whole thing to begin with.

In addition, I have read that Clark had many differences with most of the other Generals in the military back in 1999-2000. Clark retired in 2000, and many claim it had to do with many of those "differences".

I have not researched enough on who was primarily responsible for the conduct of the Kosovo war but I think Clark has to be near the top of the list if not the top since he was the NATO commander. Rather than have Clark be the one to independently determine the type and quantity of airstrikes and what to hit and what not to hit, these decisions were submitted to a vote by all 19 NATO nations. I always found it absurd that Clark would have to have a vote to see if NATO could strike a Serb Tank Factory or some other military or industrial/military type target. All this in the middle of a war. All it took was for one NATO country to say "NO" and the strike was off. While that might be good for diplomacy having continuing strong support, it is the most weak and innefficient way to conduct any miltary campaign. NATO should have voted to either go into Kosovo or not and then left the military decisions up to Clark.

While I support strong efforts at diplomacy and coalition building, I do not support it to such a degree that it compromises the US military operations or US National Security. I'm not totally clear about the above Kosovo senerio, but it suggest that Clark may be a little too eager at Coalition building at the expense of US interest.

NATO's 86 day campaign against Serb ethnic cleansing in Kosovo was a success in that it eventually led to the withdrawel of all Serb forces. But the air war was was hampered by the decision making process among a few other things. After 86 days, the air war was only successful in taking out 50 Serb Tanks, Armored Personal Carriers, and Artillery out of a total of over a thousand in Kosovo itself. The Serbs withdrew primarily because of the damage that had been inflicted on Milosovic's various elements of power back in Serbia proper, such as various businesses and many other military related industrial targets.

Still the main goal of the removal of Serb forces from Kosovo was eventually accomplished. But in addition to the problems with the selection of targets, there is the question of the deployment of ground forces. During the Air War, the US and NATO did not have a ground force in place to invade Serbia if the Air War did not change Milosovics mind. By June 1999, the Clinton administration was begining to think about deploying ground forces to Hungary and Albania to prepare for an invasion. But this is something that should have already been done months prior to military action, especially since the movement of Armored forces can take a considerable amount of time. Had NATO had a credible invasion force in place along the borders of Kosovo and Serbia, Milosovic may have withdrawn is forces without the need for an Air War.

I am not completely sure about Clark's role in all of the policy making done during the Kosovo campaign, but it certainly raises a lot of questions. More important though in my opinion is the opposition to the war to finally disarm Saddam. I think the only way I could vote for Clark would be if he and Howard Dean were the only candidates, Republican, Democrat or independent, running for president.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 09-16-2003, 08:37 PM   #9
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,296
Local Time: 04:03 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
The Serbs withdrew primarily because of the damage that had been inflicted on Milosovic's various elements of power back in Serbia proper, such as various businesses and many other military related industrial targets.
That's on the right track. IMO, they withdrew because the Serbs, who supported a number of wars in the Balkans and then sat around in their cafes while people in Vukovar, Sarajevo and Srebrenica were slaughtered by their sons suddenly got a nasty taste of what it's really like to sit inside a cold, damp basement night after night and came to the conclusion it really wasn't all that pleasant.

Frankly, I think Clark was more hampered by the leadership of the Coalition than his own beliefs. That's how it always came across to me.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 09-16-2003, 10:54 PM   #10
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:03 PM
I'm not sure to what degree Clark shaped the entire Kosovo operation, but I definitely saw problems with the tactical movements during the operation. In the end, the goals were achieved though.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 09-17-2003, 08:31 AM   #11
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 05:03 PM
Tactical problems?? Sting, do you have military training or experience? (Not being sarcastic, your comment suggests perhaps you do?)

Here's an interesting article that addresses what you've said--from this morning's Wash Post

Clark Will Announce Run for Presidency
Retired General Joins 9 Democrats in Race

By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 17, 2003; Page A01


LITTLE ROCK, Sept. 16 -- Retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark, a prominent ex-military leader with no national political experience, has told friends and advisers that he will enter the presidential race on Wednesday, shaking up the wide-open fight for the Democratic nomination.

After months of deliberations, Clark, 58, will announce his candidacy here at a boys and girls club and immediately start challenging the nine other Democrats who have been running, with mixed success, for many months.

"I don't feel it would be too late" to enter the race and win, Clark said in a brief interview today. Clark said he has "confidence" he could quickly raise enough money and build a powerful enough political operation to eventually blow by the other candidates.

Clark's candidacy is adding even more unpredictability to what is already one of the most unsettled Democratic presidential contests in history. Clark rained on North Carolina Sen. John Edwards's entrance into the race today, as Clark's friends spread the word he would soon march into the campaign to take on Bush. Former Vermont governor Howard Dean, the frontrunner in key early states, decided to cancel a major economic address planned for Wednesday, concerned that the Clark announcement would drown it out.

"A lot of people underestimate how strong he'll be," said Joe Trippi, Dean's campaign manager.

Clark's entry comes at a point when the race is still taking shape. Despite Dean's success, many Democratic voters are undecided, and many have not yet begun to pay close attention to the race.

While a number of party strategists once considered Bush virtually unbeatable, many now feel that the weak economy and instability in Iraq make him more vulnerable than he was only a few months ago. Those around Clark think his unique résumé and his standing as a non-politician make him an ideal candidate to take on Bush.

Clark was first in his class at West Point, a Rhodes Scholar, a four-star general and commander of NATO forces in Kosovo. He is considered handsome, telegenic, smart and full of self-confidence -- too full of it, according to his critics. He's also from the South, which has produced the past three Democratic presidents.

Yet Clark has never run for political office or offered his views on domestic concerns such as the economy and unemployment, issues that often dominate presidential elections. People who worked with Clark during the Clinton administration said he alienated colleagues by appearing too controlling and ambitious, though even his critics concede those aren't necessarily bad traits for a presidential candidate.

Clark will begin to lay out his domestic agenda Wednesday, including his support for abortion rights, affirmative action, better health care coverage and tax cuts for the middle class, advisers said. In an interview with CNN yesterday, Clark suggested he will break with Dean and Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.), who want to repeal all of Bush's tax cuts, by backing tax cuts for "ordinary people" and reviewing the others.

Clark's associates said he will run as a moderate southern Democrat in the tradition of fellow Arkansan Bill Clinton. Clark is surrounding himself with key operatives from the Clinton-Gore White House and campaigns. Among those expected to play key roles are Eli J. Segal, a former Clinton administration official who was chairman of Clinton's 1992 campaign; Donnie Fowler, former vice president Al Gore's 2000 field director; Ron Klain, a strategist for Gore; and Mark Fabiani, a communications specialist for Clinton and Gore. Bruce Lindsey, a close Clinton friend and a lawyer in the Clinton White House. Mickey Kantor, who played a key role in the Clinton-Gore campaign and was Clinton's commerce secretary, will also be helping Clark.

"There's a lot of talent here,' " Clark said. "And [there] will be a lot in the future."

But it's unclear whether Clark can make the transition from military general to political leader. Even before Clark's official announcement, Jim Jordan, campaign manager for Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), previewed the attacks to come. "It's a strange profile for a Democratic primary: a career military with no domestic policy experience," Jordan said. Moreover, "some Democrats might find it unsettling he just decided in recent weeks to become a Democrat," he said. Clark announced he was a Democrat on Sept. 4.

But Jordan's candidate might have the most to fear from a strong Clark challenge, according to several Democratic strategists. Kerry is running as a war hero candidate, a Democrat who can challenge Bush on foreign policy because he, unlike Bush, served in combat and won several medals for his service.

With his experience in Kosovo and Bosnia and prominent role in the U.S. military, Clark, however, could steal much of Kerry's thunder, strategists said, including Trippi, Dean's campaign manager. "The guy most affected the most will be Kerry," he said.

Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) said Clark's military experience is an enormous asset, saying that Kerry and the other candidates greatly lack Clark's ability to challenge Bush's Iraq policy and "take national security off the table." In speeches and on television, Clark has been one of the most outspoken critics of Bush's Iraq policy. The veteran New York Democrat said every one of the dozen House members he's spoken with recently said they would rally around Clark.

Clark also has the potential to eat into Dean's base of support. Dean is leading in polls in Iowa and New Hampshire, the two key early contests, and raising at least twice as much as his nearest competitor in recent months. Much of Dean's support is coming from the Internet, where activists, many of whom are new to politics, are changing the terms of traditional political campaigns. Clark, too, is taking hold in cyberspace, where a "Draft Clark" movement has won pledges of at least $1.5 million.

Fabiani said three top California party fundraisers called him to pitch in. People close to Clark said he will be able to raise several million dollars right away, but it remains to be seen if he can compete with Kerry, Edwards, Dean and Gephardt, all of whom are expected to raise upwards of $20 million this year. Clark also needs to get on the ballot in key states, no easy task with deadlines fast approaching, although officials from the Draft Clark operations across the country are ready to help with that.

"His liability -- that he isn't a politician -- is his greatest asset with this Democratic electorate," said Donna Brazile, who managed Gore's campaign in 2000. "But the proof is getting on the ballot, and he'll need some old gray beards around him" to make that happen."



© 2003 The Washington Post Company
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 09-17-2003, 11:37 AM   #12
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:03 PM
Quote:
Clark looks very impressive based on his resume, but he was opposed to the war in Iraq. This suggest that he has a fundamental difference about what US foreign policy should be compared to the Bush administration which in my view has the best foreign policy team in our nations history. I could not vote for a person that, if they had been president the past 3 years, would have left Saddam in power there by risking and hurting US and International Security. Bush took the action to finally enforce the UNs most serious resolutions against Iraq, and that was the correct course in policy although it was a bit late. Iraq is a major undertaking, and I'm suspicious about someones commitment to the operation now and for the future who was opposed to the whole thing to begin with.
Best foreign policy in US history? Laughable at best. But let's not forget he has close to no domestic policy.

And I love how those opposed to a unilateral pre-emptive strike against Iraq means one would just sit back and do nothing.

How can you be suspicious about those who commit to an operation now but opposed the war? The war has already happened, there's nothing one can do about that, you expect us to sit back and watch this nation suffer out of principle. Just because one didn't support the means by which it happened doen't mean they don't support the goal. In fact it would be quite the opposite. There are many more colors in this world than black and white.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 09-17-2003, 11:50 AM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,201
Local Time: 09:03 PM
Clark was opposed to the way in which Bush handled the Iraq situation. He never said that NOTHING should be done. Just done differently. And I don't see how anyone can disagree with that. He's a 4 star general. Sorry Sting2, but I'm gonna take his word over yours.

______________________________
General Wesley Clark for President
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 09-17-2003, 12:53 PM   #14
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 09:03 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by womanfish
Clark was opposed to the way in which Bush handled the Iraq situation. He never said that NOTHING should be done. Just done differently. And I don't see how anyone can disagree with that. He's a 4 star general. Sorry Sting2, but I'm gonna take his word over yours.

That's right, there's a difference between agreeing with Bush and thinking that NOTHING should have been done. Generals can and do make mistakes. There are logical critiques about the way Iraq has been handled. I know you don't agree with this but some people think we are in deep in Iraq. Bush's $87 billion request is controversial. Heck, even the Afghans don't like this proposal.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 09-17-2003, 01:11 PM   #15
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 01:03 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by womanfish
Clark was opposed to the way in which Bush handled the Iraq situation. He never said that NOTHING should be done. Just done differently. And I don't see how anyone can disagree with that. He's a 4 star general. Sorry Sting2, but I'm gonna take his word over yours.
Then what was Clark's suggested alternatives???

Criticism is one thing. Constructive criticism is another. If Clark had a better plan, wouldn't you want to hear it?
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com