View Story | 19 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
ONE Out of curiosity, can you expand your thoughts on why this election won't be decided on Policy?
TWO His solution on Lobbyists is a cruel joke!! The problem remains because so many politician's spouses "become" lobbyists or their children "become" lobbyists. Like trent lotts kid, who prior to his new vocation, managed a pizza parlor in Miss. And K's own campaign manager Mary Beth is married to a Lobbyist and K's brother works for a law firm that does lobbying. Now what, they'll not going to have access to K.
(its funny the media won't harp on that, not now anyways, yet they were harping on Dean's hiring of Roy O'Neil because he headed a business lobby)
THREE "Not talking about Viet Nam." A distingushed poster to this site, Chicken Little, mentioned last week that K can't talk about Iraq because it will remind people that he voted for it. And prior to that observation, I was surprised that K didn't jump on Paul O'Neills book. He avoided it in interviews to the point of feigning Naiveté about the gravity of O'Neills expose. But it fits. Now who knows if it will work.
McCain: He's Constipated and Ready to GO
by Al Rodgers on Wed Jan 28, 2004 at 11:12:58 PM PDT
I don't think this election will be decided on policy, but I have a narrow definition of policy. I don't mean general positions like "healthcare is good" or "education needs more money" or "we need more jobs." I mean detailed positions about how to reform the tax code, or how to actually provide healthcare for all Americans.
I may be underestimating the electorate, but the fact is that the media is never going to give wide coverage to specific issues of policy because it doesn't sell papers or get people to watch the news. Besides, the gulf between what the Democratic party now believes and what Bush has done is so wide that the difference should (and I emphasize should) be apparent to everyone.
As far as Vietnam goes, I merely mentioned this because it surprised me. If the Republicans hit hard on foreign policy experience, it's one of Kerry's strengths that he is a decorated combat veteran. Especially in the primary, this is one thing, for better or worse, that sets him apart from the other candidates, with the exception of Wes Clark, of course.
While Chicken Little may be right about Iraq and Kerry, the CW I've seen indicates that democrats are more comfortable with Kerry because many of them were also misled by the administration, and fell for their lies. Therefore, they're more comfortable with Kerry, rather than Dean, who lords over the other candidates that he was clever enough to see through the President's lies.
All that being said, I'm not a Kerry supporter - I just wanted to see him live when I had the chance. I've supported Dean for months, and I will still probably vote for him on Tuesday.
by Edge on Thu Jan 29, 2004 at 12:05:17 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
You know "I'm a uniter, not a divider" "'I bring honor and blah blah blah" "Gore is a bore"
The only extended-general policy talk in the debates,was when shrub made a big deal against nation building in Debate II.
The rest was about who was more likeable and who would you feel more comfortable with for the next 4 to 8 years.
I couldn't watch his victory speech last night, but from what I read, he didn't bring up Iraq either. Well who knows, but I was in tears and in rage earlier in the day when I read the reuters bulletin about 6 G.I.s gettin blown up.
I like that reference to "Lords", it makes me think about why the voters didn't think the same thing when K and joe got heavy handed after The Kurds captured Saddam, not withstanding a third of the party, and atleast half of indep. supported the war prior to the invasion.
by Al Rodgers on Thu Jan 29, 2004 at 12:54:24 AM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 19 comments