Al GoreGASMS over Dean NEWS at 11:00
- Thread starter Dreadsox
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Scarletwine
New Yorker
News at 7:00.
Several other Dems have come out in support of him. Truly other than his anti-Iraq stance he is much more moderate than anyone but Lieberman.
I was very impressed in his handling of Chris Matthews on Hardball. If he can laugh off that, he may really have a chance. Course Wes as VP wouldn't hurt either.
Several other Dems have come out in support of him. Truly other than his anti-Iraq stance he is much more moderate than anyone but Lieberman.
I was very impressed in his handling of Chris Matthews on Hardball. If he can laugh off that, he may really have a chance. Course Wes as VP wouldn't hurt either.
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
I'm a little surprised at this considering that Lieberman was his running mate. But that's politics. Dean is a moderate; look at that NRA score of his. I do wonder if the Republicans want to try to fry him as an Eastern liberal a la Dukakis.
Last edited:
Scarletwine
New Yorker
I doubt he'll let them do that. That is one reason the feisty Molly Irvins is backing him. He won't lay there like the latest Dems. but will fight back.
Can we hear a Hallelujah.
Can we hear a Hallelujah.
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
I feel sorry for Joe, I'm sure he feels betrayed
I don't know how much a Gore endorsement will help Dean though
I don't know how much a Gore endorsement will help Dean though
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
MrsSpringsteen said:I feel sorry for Joe, I'm sure he feels betrayed
I don't know how much a Gore endorsement will help Dean though
good observation..
Dean is considered a Liberal rather than a moderate because of his stance on the Iraq war. The majority of the American people, the majority of the US congress, supported the overthrow of Saddam. If Dean had been president the past 3 years, Saddam would still be in power in Iraq right now. If one thinks a situation like that would be better for the world at this time, vote for Dean. Only the liberal wing of the Democratic Party was solidly against the war, and Dean's position on it is really what defines him more than any other single issue. That is why he is a liberal rather than a moderate. I hope he wins the Democratic nomination, because he will be one of the easier candidates to defeat.
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
We'll just see what happens. I don't think anyone has a crystal ball. I don't think Gore is in a position to play king-maker. I voted for him, but he lost his own home state. I think he's a good guy but a lousy politician.
STING2 said:
It's a statement like this that makes the GOP agitprop worthy of Machiavellian admiration, because they are most threatened by Dean. When stacked up against a Republican and a Republican, people will vote, well...Republican. When stacked up against a Republican and a Democrat, well...the decision is less clear. By planting this statement into the collective consciousness, the GOP hopes to get the leg up--by making it appear that, no matter the candidate, they have the advantage.
And you quote them like they are second-nature. Good job!
Melon
Gore was always more liberal than what he put on, but, taking a page from the book of Clinton, he hugged tightly to the center. The belief was that hugging tightly to the center was what the nation's voters wanted. But, again, when forced to choose between a Republican and a Republican...
Melon
Melon
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
STING2 said:
The majority of Congress may have voted that way, but I feel many did so not because they honestly believed in the war. Many who voted for have spoken against Bush's actions since then. Congress was asleep at the wheel and Bush took advantage of the state of America at that point.
I love how you are the only one I know that has a crystal ball and for certain can predict that Saddam would still be in power now if Dean had been president. You're the only one that knows for certain that he wouldn't have been able to convince the UN or had found a way to take Saddam out of power and still known where he is. I think with more and more reports that this war was not a neccesity and that WMDs have not been found, I think your predictions may not be as sound as you believe.
But I guess we'll see. For this nation and the world's sake, I hope your crystal ball is faulty.
MrsSpringsteen said:I feel sorry for Joe, I'm sure he feels betrayed
I don't know how much a Gore endorsement will help Dean though
I am pretty much disgusted with Mr. Gore.
Joe held back on announcing early....possibly hurting his chances...out of respect for Gore possibly deciding he wanted to run.
Way to treat your former running mate.
I don't understand why Gore owes anything to Lieberman. If he feels Dean is the best chance to win, then what's the problem here? Gore/Lieberman never struck me as friends anyway, more like strategic partners.
Is Dick Cheney still alive? Seriously.
Is Dick Cheney still alive? Seriously.
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
I was just watching "Inside Politics" on CNN while I was doing my laundry. They were interviewing someone from the Lieberman campaign. They are *mad* as hell at the endorsement. I didn't see the whole interview. Although I'm not a Lieberman supporter, the guy's way too conservative for me, I did think the Senator tried to be loyal to Gore by not deciding on his candidacy until he was sure Gore was not going to run. Shouldn't have Gore just let the votes be cast? Maybe it's because I'm from a part of the country where Lieberman has some support because we Southerners tend to be conservative (even though I'm a liberal myself). This could be a screw-up. I can just hear the conversations over at the local Jewish community center. If you're a Democrat anywhere you *do* not want to screw up with the Jewish vote. That's crucial anywhere. For many of them Lieberman's their man.
Last edited:
anitram said:
The fact is Lieberman did not announce his candidacy when he wanted to because he did not know if Gore wanted to run. he waited, and waited and waited, for Gore to make up his mind. It was out of respect for Mr. Gore.
The other issue is, according to Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Dean does not stand for the same issues as the Gore/Lieberman ticket did four years ago. It is hard for him to understand how and why Gore would endorse someone who stands for something completely different.
Dick Cheney will emerge when the WMD announcement is made right about the month before the Democratic Convention.
melon,
When I first heard a while back that Dean was against the war, I knew that he would be the easier candidate to beat since most people supported the war. Kerry or Lieberman would have a better chance because they supported the war and therefor take away the Presidents #1 issue. Because they have a more liberal domestic agenda, but supported the war, they are potentially closer to the center than Bush. Its all about casting the other side as the conservative or the Liberal while your the reasonable moderate that everyone can relate to. The Democrats best strategy is to nominate a moderate candidate, not someone that is considered a liberal. Deans stand on the war puts him in the liberal camp.
When I first heard a while back that Dean was against the war, I knew that he would be the easier candidate to beat since most people supported the war. Kerry or Lieberman would have a better chance because they supported the war and therefor take away the Presidents #1 issue. Because they have a more liberal domestic agenda, but supported the war, they are potentially closer to the center than Bush. Its all about casting the other side as the conservative or the Liberal while your the reasonable moderate that everyone can relate to. The Democrats best strategy is to nominate a moderate candidate, not someone that is considered a liberal. Deans stand on the war puts him in the liberal camp.
BonoVoxSupastar,
"The majority of Congress may have voted that way, but I feel many did so not because they honestly believed in the war. Many who voted for have spoken against Bush's actions since then. Congress was asleep at the wheel and Bush took advantage of the state of America at that point."
Everyone of these congressman new long before 9/11 that the most serious act they would vote on as Congressman would be whether or not to take the country to war. They all studied the situation and voted based on the conclusions each of them arrived at and what they thought the best course of action for the country to take at that time was.
Its true some on the left have spoken out against Bush since then, but that does not change their voting record on this.
"I love how you are the only one I know that has a crystal ball and for certain can predict that Saddam would still be in power now if Dean had been president. You're the only one that knows for certain that he wouldn't have been able to convince the UN or had found a way to take Saddam out of power and still known where he is. I think with more and more reports that this war was not a neccesity and that WMDs have not been found, I think your predictions may not be as sound as you believe."
Hey, I'm just going by what Dean himself has said. Dean would not have gone to war to bring about compliance with the resolutions. He has said this. But Nothing short of a large scale military invasion would be able to remove Saddam from power. Any study of Saddam's personal security arrangments in addition to his 400,000 man military will show this.
Multiple attempts were made to bring about compliance and or remove Saddam that did not involve a full scale military invasion, over the past 12 years and they all failed. The only way to remove Saddam was through a full scale military invasion and Howard Dean was unwilling to do that.
There is no crystal ball, only the action necessary to remove Saddam, and Deans disapproval of such action. At no time has Dean ever articulated a military strategy or any option for removing Saddam. Instead he has only been outspoken in his criticism's of such action.
"The majority of Congress may have voted that way, but I feel many did so not because they honestly believed in the war. Many who voted for have spoken against Bush's actions since then. Congress was asleep at the wheel and Bush took advantage of the state of America at that point."
Everyone of these congressman new long before 9/11 that the most serious act they would vote on as Congressman would be whether or not to take the country to war. They all studied the situation and voted based on the conclusions each of them arrived at and what they thought the best course of action for the country to take at that time was.
Its true some on the left have spoken out against Bush since then, but that does not change their voting record on this.
"I love how you are the only one I know that has a crystal ball and for certain can predict that Saddam would still be in power now if Dean had been president. You're the only one that knows for certain that he wouldn't have been able to convince the UN or had found a way to take Saddam out of power and still known where he is. I think with more and more reports that this war was not a neccesity and that WMDs have not been found, I think your predictions may not be as sound as you believe."
Hey, I'm just going by what Dean himself has said. Dean would not have gone to war to bring about compliance with the resolutions. He has said this. But Nothing short of a large scale military invasion would be able to remove Saddam from power. Any study of Saddam's personal security arrangments in addition to his 400,000 man military will show this.
Multiple attempts were made to bring about compliance and or remove Saddam that did not involve a full scale military invasion, over the past 12 years and they all failed. The only way to remove Saddam was through a full scale military invasion and Howard Dean was unwilling to do that.
There is no crystal ball, only the action necessary to remove Saddam, and Deans disapproval of such action. At no time has Dean ever articulated a military strategy or any option for removing Saddam. Instead he has only been outspoken in his criticism's of such action.
najeena
War Child
In light of the millions who found the results of 2000 a crushing disappointment (if not disgraceful sham), Gore went with the guy who has the best chance of getting the nomination. A no-brainer.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
This is left, right?
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
Who would you vote for if the presidential election were today?
President Bush 56%
Howard Dean 36%
I need another option 8%
What impact will Gore's backing have on Dean?
Positive 41%
No impact 37%
Negative 22%
Do endorsements influence your vote?
No, I decide on my own 64%
Sometimes, it depends on who's doing the endorsing 32%
Yes, I pay close attention to them 4%
Total Votes: 586, 887
President Bush 56%
Howard Dean 36%
I need another option 8%
What impact will Gore's backing have on Dean?
Positive 41%
No impact 37%
Negative 22%
Do endorsements influence your vote?
No, I decide on my own 64%
Sometimes, it depends on who's doing the endorsing 32%
Yes, I pay close attention to them 4%
Total Votes: 586, 887
BAW
The Flower
"NOTE: Poll results are not scientific and reflect the opinions of only those users who chose to participate. Poll results are not reflected in real time."
Internet users are typically more disproportionately affluent, compared to the rest of the United States, not to mention that I have a feeling that if I deleted my cookie, I could vote on that poll again.
Melon
Internet users are typically more disproportionately affluent, compared to the rest of the United States, not to mention that I have a feeling that if I deleted my cookie, I could vote on that poll again.
Melon
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
sour grapes
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
diamond, I never pay attention to Internet polls. They don't have the social-scientific analytical work in them that others polls do. For "scientific" polls they collect demographic data on the people they ask the questions to so it will be representational of the people as a whole. They can't do that on an Internet poll, when people just go in there, don't give demographic data, and vote. These are people who can afford PC's, ISP's, and happen to be signed up on a particular ISP, AOL. Hell, they don't even ask which party you voted for in the last elections. There are polls with the necessary information out there, it's just that no Internet poll is going to be accurate. Yes, I'd say that if they had a Democrat in the lead.
Last edited:
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
Verte-
Wasnt it Dean's claim to fame that a lot of his supporters are computer hacks and geeks?
Oh I guess Dean's camp would be above using AOL though
DB9
Wasnt it Dean's claim to fame that a lot of his supporters are computer hacks and geeks?
Oh I guess Dean's camp would be above using AOL though
DB9
Similar threads
