66% couldn’t name ONE?

WOOHOO! Now Yanny and I can look forward to Bush getting re-elected! :P

Senator JFK is having $ problems…

See…
http://www.lasvegassun.com/drudged/060404635.html

He cannot use his rich wife’s, Mrs. Heinz Kerry, money!

But the last few lines of the article explain tha t she cann give her money to an organization with no direct connection to JFK. This organization can spend the money to support the Senator’s campaign.

Sounds to me like CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM FELL THROUGH!

Or did I miss the US Supreme Court knocking its block off.

Don’t tell me a law is actually going to stop a democrat…:wink: :wink:

@Deviant:Scripter:

Don’t tell me a law is actually going to stop a democrat…:wink: :wink:

Actualy I think that applies to polititions in general. :roll:

Ouch!!
No doubt the Democratic party is in disarray, and no doubt there be factions that would wish to dilute the potency of a Sharpton… still I don’t think that anyone had to coerce Mosely-Braun into running!

By the way, I’ve met the former Dem NY governor candidate (Carl McColl) and he’s all right – but – the party just didn’t see the upside in writing a major check for TV commercials in what was already a failed campaign! Pataki (the then and current governor) had it sewn up. Naturally, this being politics, and NY politics at that, there was plenty of screaming and yelling and accusations of betrayal etc. (sometimes referred to as "a candid and open discussion of the issues).

So what’s the handicapping look like now? My personal feeling is that Kerry, as front runner, could pick Graham for VP to help win Florida in Nov04. Or pick a California moderate as running mate – although California is probably one of the ((few)) “theirs to lose” states for the Dems.

A friend of mine says root for Vermont governor Howard Dean – on the theory that if you’re going to lose anyway, might as well go down in flames having made the case for the higher principles – as for example, the universal healthcare program that Dean launched in VT a couple of years ago.

The rest are mainly running now for name recognition with an eye on '08 (Edwards) or because they’ve learned that you can earn major influence and $$$ by running for president (Lieberman), making it one of the more rewarding things you can do with your clothes on ((or in Clinton’s case, otherwise)).

@ZimZaxZeo:

still I don’t think that anyone had to coerce Mosely-Braun into running!

She was planning to run for the other Senate seat in IL(the one she didn’t lose.) But the DNC talked her out of it… destroy Sharpton’s chances and keep/eliminate a black woman from the senate(killing 2 boids w/1 stone.)
@ZimZaxZeo:

By the way, I’ve met the former Dem NY governor candidate (Carl McCall) and he’s all right – but – the party just didn’t see the upside in writing a major check for TV commercials in what was already a failed campaign!

Could they be setting him up for a second run in 2006 with face/name recognition? We’ll see…
@ZimZaxZeo:

My personal feeling is that Kerry, as front runner, could pick Graham for VP to help win Florida in 2004. Or pick a California moderate as running mate – although California is probably one of the ((few)) “theirs to lose” states for the Dems.

I’ve seen/heard Graham mentioned elsewhere, but the way he’s handled the Democrat debates would you want him on your ticket?!?
@ZimZaxZeo:

Vermont governor Howard Dean – might as well go down in flames having made the case for the higher principles – as for example, the universal healthcare program that Dean launched in VT a couple of years ago.

Though I believe he left his state in a poor financial situation…
@ZimZaxZeo:

The rest are mainly running now for name recognition with an eye on '08 (Edwards) or because they’ve learned that you can earn major influence and $$$ by running for president (Lieberman).

Here we agree completely. Each will now be introduced as former Democrat presidential candidate… incorrectly as only one will have that distinction.

I wish to point out, as in a previous post, that most of them are senators. Recall that senators have a poor won/loss record running for US President.

With what Bill and Hill are putting the Democrat Party through now I’d say they are preparing the Dem Party for a 2004 loss. Then Hillary can run against a newcomer/not incumbent in 2008. 2012 will be too late as Hillary will be 65… too old for most voters now… after Bush, Clinton and W!

The year that Hillary runs will be the year that the Republican party raises the most money ever. Anyone disagree?

Ho-hum. This is like below WWF in entertainment value, once you’ve seen the first ten minutes.

Yet the outcomes affect everyone’s life – especially those in the middle class and below. Interesting how my sister despises Hillary on supposed moral grounds, while my mother admires her as a woman of achievement.

Certainly she has “brass tubes” that workaholic blonde lawyer – and without a doubt she has plunged into Senatorhood with her eyes on the White House… she has the highest negatives of any woman in politics, for sure - - and so did Eleanor Roosevelt!

In a sense, she ought to incorporate herself as a licensed money-printing machine for both parties! She is a polarizer. At least she’s not made out of oatmeal.

@Deviant:Scripter:

The year that Hillary runs will be the year that the Republican party raises the most money ever. Anyone disagree?

The year she runs, and I think we can agree that she will try, I will not only make the first political donation of my life, but I will go to my local Rep. party HQ and volunteer some time.

That s all we need Clinton with PMS. :roll: :o :( :roll:

@dzfish:

That s all we need Clinton with PMS.

:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
**dzfish!**How rude!
:oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:
But true:so true!
:P :wink: 8) :D :lol:

June 27, 2003

Results of the moveon.org Democrat members poll…

In most presidential primary processes, pundits, pollsters and wealthy donors determine the outcome long before the actual primaries. By the time the rest of us cast our ballots, the nomination is typically a done deal. The MoveOn.org PAC primary allowed hundreds of thousands of voters to speak out now.

On June 24th and 25th, 2003 we held an online vote to help our members express their preferences among the current field of Democratic candidates. This vote also served to determine if there was consensus among MoveOn members for a candidate endorsement for the 2004 presidential contest. In just a little over 48 hours, 317,647 members voted, making this vote larger than both the New Hampshire Democratic primary and Iowa caucuses combined.

No Candidate Wins Majority
in MoveOn.Org PAC First-Ever Democratic Online “Primary”

Estimated $1.75 million raised in pledges to Democratic contenders

Most votes to **Dean, followed by Kucinich, and Kerry.

Friday, June 27, 12:00pm—No candidate won a majority in this week’s first-ever Democratic online presidential primary, therefore MoveOn.org PAC will not make an endorsement at this time. Howard Dean received the highest vote total with 43.87% of the vote (139,360 votes); followed by Dennis Kucinich with 23.93% (76,000 votes); and John F. Kerry with 15.73% (49,973 votes).

The rest of the field was in single digits: John Edwards, 3.19% (10,146 votes); Richard Gephardt, 2.44% (7,755 votes); Bob Graham, 2.24% (7,113 votes); Carol Moseley Braun, 2.21% (7,021 votes); Joe Lieberman, 1.92% (6,095 votes); and Al Sharpton, 0.53% (1,677 votes).

MoveOn.org PAC hailed the primary as a tremendous kick-off for the campaign to defeat George Bush next year:

• 317,639 votes were cast in the “primary,” more than the 2000 New Hampshire Democratic presidential primary, the Iowa and South Carolina Democratic presidential caucuses, combined;

• 54,370 voters pledged to volunteer for their preferred Democratic contender;

• 77,192 voters authorized MoveOn.org PAC to give their e-mail addresses to the candidate of their choice; and

• 49,132 voters pledged to contribute money to their candidate, for a total estimated at more than $1.75 million ($35 average contribution).

“And one of the most promising results for Democrats in 2004, is that most MoveOn.org voters said they would ‘enthusiastically support’ a broad array of candidates as the party’s nominee next year,” said Wes Boyd, MoveOn.org PAC treasurer.

“This is only the beginning,” continued Boyd. “Our most important objectives have been met: early Democratic grassroots involvement; increased contributions and volunteer support for each campaign; and mobilization of the Democratic base to defeat George Bush. We wanted people to have a seat at the table, and they have taken it.”

I’d say this shows liberals trying to take full control of the Democratic party. Who was the last iberal, or if you prefer the term ‘progressive’, to run as either major parties candidate? George McGovern(1972. I was to young to vote, but knew what was going on.) Did he win. No! I recall he planned to cut each branch of the the military by 1/4 or as much as 1/3. I remember he had a history of flipping on the issues.

DEAN/SHARPTON in 2004!!
Go! Go! Go! Go! Go! Go! Go!**

Oh! Hillary is planning for 2008.
She needs some experience and a higher profile.
It’s time to get rid of Tom Daschle as Minority Leader in the Senate.

Source :
http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/1895.htm

Talk about nepotism!

Can you say “regime?”
Sure you can!
See, I knew you could.

Heh-heh!

Off topic , but still politics…

Early July, 2003…

Sen. Daschle(D-SD) is running political ads 16 months before his next election!

Source :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35040-2003Jul9.html

I’d say someone’s a lil worried about his SEAT(read SAS.) :D

July 12, 2003

And now it appears some of the Democrat contenders to the throne do not want to debate their fellow combatants…

Source :
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6291857.htm

…or is it that they don’t want to be paraded before every group…
…the first was sponsored by ???..
…the second by the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition…
…this third(troubled) one by the NAACP…

…Or COULD SOMEONE BE A WEE BIT PREJUDICED???

Late July, 2003
Catching up on past commentary…
@Xi:

Hillary Clinton seems to be staying out of it as a rookie US Senator. However, when she is included she is the frontrunner. Could she be a ‘dark horse’ or compromise candidate? She will be in the hunt in '08.John F. Kerry, who requested that the “F.”(“JFK,” for those of you who need a hint) be included…is currently the frontrunner (2/03, due to the fact that he has not campaigned at events since he is recovering from prostate cancer.)Rev. Al Sharpton is a close second. He is charismatic and more wellspoken than any other candidates. The Dems. are setting up a series of ‘favourite son’ black candidates to syphon (variation of siphon) off enough of his likely voters so that he does not win states, nor have a powerblock of delegates from states that split their delegates.

Xi, nailed Hillary, nailed JFK and Sharpton WAS second.
@Deviant:Scripter:

You know who I would absolutely love to see win the Democrat presidential primaries? Al Sharpton.

DS and Xi sitting in a tree, k-i-s…
@Yanny:

He is the #2 Dem candidate. Seems like a nice guy. I’m not sure though if he has the bounce to beat Bush. However, I do trust the guy. Too bad the ignorant Christian Mid-West base which he needs will never elect a Jew. Idiots.

Yanny!…typical NJ stereotyping. :D
@Xi:

Gore couldn’t even win his home state. If he’d won he’d have been the first to do it without his home state.He lost because of his own choices (discussed elsewhere on these fora.)
Bush won by the courts(pl.), chosen counts(pl./Gore), laws(pl.), constitutions(pl.), and Electoral College. Only Democrats and the uneducated(thank the Dems. for that, as they control most urban areas where the uneducated learned[redundant after stating ‘Democrats’]) and Europeans believe that Gore won and or Bush cheated.

Xi, you nailed it again!
@Yanny:

I had a problem with the 2000 Presidential election. Because the election was so close, meaning in several states it was with in the margin of error, I think we should of called for a Run off in each close state. Disclaimer: I don’t deny that Bush won however I think we need a new system for doing it.

I propose a new law: If any Candidate in any Presidential race wins the state but does not win by 50%, a run off is in order…Why? Because these races are just too close. We have a 1-2% margin of error on these ballots. That is unacceptable. Unfortunately, there is no viable solution to reduce that margin of error.

There will always be a margin of error.
@Deviant:Scripter:

Get rid of the old, blind folks in Florida and that’d bring our margin of error down to around .05% .

Nope! You forgot about the dead Democrats voting in Chicago since the first Mayor Daly!
@Xi:

Y_y, …some would protest that there is no 'None of the above" choice. A lot of folks wouldn’t vote the second time.

Hear, hear!
@waraxis:

Xi, couldn’t you say that the Democrat party is starting to clone the Green party.

I coincide, warbaby.
@Xi:

war__, I am in agreeance! They seem to think that moving further to the left will return their voters/followers.

This tactic seems to be losing them voters.
@waraxis:

Xi, do you think the Green party will do better in 2004?? I think they are gaining ground in Calforania and Washington. Could this cripple the Democrats in the near future in those 2 states?? I will not be surprised if Ralph Nader runs for them in 2004.

waraxis, I think you nailed it!
@waraxis:

…havn’t you guys heard on non-presidantial elections they(Green Party) are either keeping their numbers or getting more. I think thats why the Democrat Party is starting to act like them on the West Coast.

Oh, yeah!
@waraxis:

…Yanny I don’t think John McCain will leave the Republican Party now that he is a major player.

Oh man, are you getting good at this!
@Xi:

I think the Dems will lose votes to the Green, Reform and Republican Party in 2004. Except for catastrophy, and yes it does happen, Bush is a two-term Pres.

Xi, I’m a little confused. I thought earlier you said Dems would win. Did you correct yourself or change your tune?

Some day you will return to this forum and look at these facts to see how this election developed.

The Teamsters’ Union has endorsed the attempt by Dick Gephardt to be the win the Democratic nomination as candidate for the @))$ US Presidential race.

SOURCE :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9211-2003Jul31.html

I find it interesting that they chose him because, according to Rep. Gephardt, “My dwas a milktruck driver and told me every day how great it was to be a milktruck driver thanks to the union.” He forgets to mention that his father had to join the union just to to get the job. In addition, Rep Gephardt’s brother has said, repeatedly, that their father NEVER said a word resembling the stories of Rep. Gephardt.

Ex-Governor Dean was touted as the “new McCain” because of his $ intake on the internet.

Now, Dean is the “New Spam Politician” because his campaign has advertised on the web!

SOURCE :
http://www.msnbc.com/news/954100.asp?0cv=CB20&cp1=1

Just wondering… has anybody recieved spam from The Dean?

Not yet, but it’s on the top of the “things I couldn’t care less about if they never happen” list.