Have the Dems Found their Man?

Remove all ads!

Can nice guys finish first sometimes? I hear Dems saying: "Well I dated Dean but I'm marrying Kerry."

The tide turns just a little more. But is it enough? The big test will be the South. Well, Kerry moves to SC soon, and there are a lot of Vets there who remember Vietnam and Kerry has a real war record, something Shrub can't touch.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4049942/

 

The Democrats need to find a better candidate after Dean ruined his campaign with that very unpresidental roar.

Whoever faces Bush, will also have to deal with a changed Electorial College map. The states, that Bush caried in the 2000 election, have gained 5 electors. The Gore states, naturally, lost 5.

So, the Democrats also have to contend with the fact that they are facing a 10 point deficit in the general election.

Add into the mix that Saddam will be on trial at the end of this year. The stories of rape rooms, torture, murder, oppression, etc... will validate the war in the minds of Americans.

Any candidate what faces Bush must be able to weather this.

Hmmm.

 

Kerry may indeed be the Dem's man. It'll be interesting to see what happens in SC. (Maybe another JFK in the making... LOL)

 

Even if Dean doesn't get the nomination they should allow him to have at least one debate with Bush Jr. I'm telling you, it would a trouncing on the order of the time I was in the spelling-bee competition with the kid who picked other people's noses.

 

Well, it appears that Kerry has done it. He has a big come from behind win in New Hampshire. It _appears_ to be curtains for Dean at this point. I hate to count him out this early, but it's looking pretty grim for him.

As for Kerry, it appears that Big Mo is with him for the moment. But can he beat Bush? Which would be the best combination if he does get the nod from the Dems -- Clark? Edwards? (God help them if it's Lieberman). Maybe Dean? Not a chance of that, IMO. But stranger things have happened.

 

I'd like to see a Kerry/Edwards ticket.... but I'm a little partial towards Edwards as the second man, having lived in the Carolinas for years. Either way, I'll have to say, Kerry really grows on you....and if the voting public doesn't turn fickle, he may have a chance! Maybe there really could be a shrub-burning in Texas!!

 

It's a good thing that Kerry has emerged. Dean had Dukakis/Mondale/McGovern written all over him.
Kerry can make things interesting.

 

@ Chandos

A recent newsweek poll asked voters if they had to choose today in a race between Bush and Kerry, Kerry won 49% to 46%. Not a huge margin, but notable.

But that's if you put any stock in polls.

 

DR - That must have been the same Newsweek poll that I used at the top of my thread. The more interesting thing about that poll is that Shrub's support is evaporating. At the moment there are two things at work here IMO: He has lost credibility over the WMD issue in Iraq and the State of Union Address was not very good. Usually just after the big speech they move up in the polls, but Shrub went down in the polls. So he may bounce back a bit once he can get back in front of the cameras. The media is starting to hammer on this issue a bit and Blair is really suffering over the WMD issue also.

I'm not sure about the economy, since unemplyment is a bit down, and improving. But overall the economy is still not close to what it was when he took office.

 

God I'm a douchebag! I didn't even see that was exactly what you posted. My bad.

Anyway, recently I heard a pundit on CNN (can't remember who, but he was a Republican IIRC) describe Bush's popularity as a bouncing rubber ball. It drops down, bounces back up very high, but each subsequent bounce gets progressively smaller. I think this is an excellent comparison.

At the beginning of his term, Bush was seen as a fairly ineffective, but not totally unlikable president. Then 9/11 happened, and he responded quickly with military force (which, in all fairness, any decent president would've done). Approval rating shot up to like 90%. Eventually, his numbers leveled out again. Then we declared war on Iraq, whom we were told was crawling with WMD. Under such a threat, America felt going to war was the right thing to do. Plus, Saddam is an evil bastard. Despite tough talk, Bagdhad falls in less than 2 weeks. Approval goes up, though not quite as high as 9/11. Post-war goes badly, economy gets worse - ratings go back down. We capture Saddam, ratings go back up briefly to about 62%, right-wingers declare Bush unbeatable and victorious. A weak-ass State of the Union speech, Powell admits Iraq and al-Quaeda aren't related, David Kay reports that WMD never existed. Economy still sucks, despite a slow rebound. Ratings go back down.

Bush desperately needs another catastrophic event or the capture of Osama to keep that ball a bouncin'. Because it's obvious his administration can't maintain popularity through their policies alone.

 

DR - Don't be so hard on yourself. With all the political action right now, there is like a zillion polls out there.

 

Well, let's hope that Howard Dean's losses in Iowa and NH take the wind out of his sails. Once they start in with the satire (especially when it's this funny), you're finished.

 

Encouraging to see a war critic like Kerry is getting so much support.

 

He voted for the war.

 

Kerry is very much a hawk. He supports the War on Terror and supported the Iraq phase.

He's trying to paint himself as a cautious supporter. We will see what happens.

The only anti War On Terror candidate is Dean. He gained a great amount of early support from the very active and very vocal far-left. They, however, do not constitute the majority of our party.

 

Oh well, mixed that up then.