I don’t have time to look into it this morning, but according to some, Kerry won. (Thanks for the link, Brian.) I don’t know how useful it is for any of us to dwell on such things now, but I thought it was worth mentioning.
Any thoughts?
Connect
kerry won?
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
35 Comments
Reasons for loss:
Sovereignty We all know that John Kerry changes positions to make the maximum appeal to voters at any particular point in time. When Kerry was NOT trying to appeal to voters he said that U.S. troops should not be deployed overseas without the “permission” of the United Nations. Just how much power would Kerry give the UN over our decisions on national defense? How much would Kerry give up to the European Union in order to gain the “popularity” he so desires over there.
Terrorism: You may believe differently, but I believe that the Islamic terrorists would prefer Kerry in office. I think that they see him as weaker than George Bush. Well, so do I.
Consistency: John Kerry hammers home the fact that he would have formed an international coalition to dispose of Saddam. Well, when George Bush 41 formed just such a coalition to get Saddam out of Kuwait, Kerry voted “no.” When George Bush 43 formed a somewhat smaller coalition to get Saddam out of Iraq, Kerry voted “yes.” I truly cannot make sense of what he actually stands for.
Social Security: The system is a disaster. Kerry wants to continue the present course. Bush has this wild-eyed idea that your money should be placed into an account with your name on it … and account that you can exercise some control over.
Socialized Medicine: It
Terrific points, Mr. Doe. You forgot, however, to use the term “flip flopper.” Also, his running-mate, John Edwards was responsible for the shortage of flu vaccine. Oh, and, Kerry revels in the death of the unborn. And, he had that torrid affair with an intern. We must not forget that.
I don’t mean to be mean, but before you post here, you really should do us all the courtesy of first turning off the Fox News Channel and taking a deep breath. Yes, your side appears to have won this election, but that does not make any of these accusations against Kerry true.
Shall I answer each of these accusations one by one, or shall we split them up?
John Doe- great bullet-pointing, man. I like the format. The first word of each paragraph could be in bold, though, which would make it even easier to scan quickly.
Tony Buttons- let’s spread the joy, and take the accusations one at a time.
Point #1:
Soveriegnty- Dude, the 19th century called. They want their Manifest Destiny back.
Next?
The left may finally be getting it through their thick heads that their agenda (terrorist appeasing, higher taxes, more government control) is not exactly winning at the polls. The defeats were stunning. But instead of realizing that the agenda of the left is not what American wants they instead are trying to find excuses for their loss (Evangelicals, the weather, etc.).
Not only was Bush reelected with the greatest vote total in history, but the Republican party also increased their seats in the House and Senate.
So when does the plane leave for Canada. I have several people I would like to get on that flight.
Tony and Brett -nice comeback to Mr. Doe. You have expressed yourselves well. The democratic party may need some new campaign managers and I am going to write in both of you.
Mr. Buttons, my “side” didn’t win. You sound like a child who wants to take his ball home so no one can play. Why don’t you get of your echo chamber and listen to what the electorate said during the election. Learn something. Maybe it is the left that is out of touch. Does that though even make it into your head? You can come up with any excuse that you want to as to why Kerry lost and why Congress lost even more seats to the Republicans and why there are now more Republican governors. But after you coddle each other with your excuses, realize that on a local, state and federal level, the democrats are out of touch with mainstream America. Whether you like it or not and whether you look down upon the red areas of this country like they are sheep faithfully following every word out of Sean Hannity’s mouth, one thing is certain..hold on..it may be a shock to tell you this…..Bush is your president( i know what you are saying…’Hey Dude, he’s not MY president, I didn’t vote for him). Make the best of it. You are not helping this country or solving any problems with your present ‘condition’. If you want to make a difference or make your political views hold any water, then let go of your hate. Stop subscribing to the views of the far-left that still think Bush ‘stole’ the 200 election. Deal with facts, not the twisting of facts that air-america leads you to believe.
One other comment on your initial response. You said “your side won”. I am troubled by that. I dont see things as sides. I believe we are all Americans. Hopefully proud Americans. When it comes down to it there are not sides in this. Sides are for a football game, soccer game, etc. Not when it comes to politics in my opinion. In elections I dont look at what party I voting for I try to understand the issues and vote the person that I feel closely aligns to what this country needs at that time. Anyway my two cents.
The American have spoken and they are pissed off at the Democratic party. Anyone with a sober conscience and just a bit of common sense can see why Kerry and the Democrats lost this election. The American people can clearly see the Democratic party is a national party no more. I stole that phrase from Senator Zell Miller for the exact reasons he writes in his NYT best seller: The Democratic party has lost it’s touch with the average American and has become the party of special interest — a clearinghouse, if you will, of the extreme liberal left.
It is hard for modern-day Americans to realize that a major party in American politics can actually self-destruct. This happened to the Whigs back in the 1840’s and is exactly the path of the Democrats if they do not heed the wise advice that Zell Miller and even James Carville. Carville was right, the Democratic party needs to rethink what kind of party they are going to be if they expect to be a contender in American politics.
This “new” conservatism of America is nothing of the sort. America has ALWAYS been a conservative people. Just look at Canada and you can see that even our liberal Democrats are light-years further right than the Canadian Conservative party. Canada is a socialist country just as the U.K. and most of Western Europe. The new Europe, the old and former U.S.S.R., is nothing like the old Europe and there is are very good reasons.
So ask yourself this question: For all of John Kerry’s twenty years in the Senate, why was it that he was literally an unknown member Congress until this election? Democrats and Republicans raced to tell America who John F. Kerry is. Fact is, Kerry never stood up for anything other than what would keep him in office and that is NOT an attribute of an American president according to most Americans.
The American media gave John Kerry a complete pass by not challenging him on issues brought fourth by Vets. Most of Kerry’s campaign was the same old one trick pony he use to pull out in Massachusetts. But what the good folks in Boston deem as honorable and what the rest of the nation deems honorable are apparently completely different. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, whether they were right or wrong about a fact or two, deserved to be heard and it forced them to become a 527 group in order to get their views across. And you know what… it worked. The Swift Boat ads were the most damaging political ads of this election and John Kerry paid for it by not answering those questions. No, they didn’t need to set up a debate between Kerry and O’Neil to settle this. Just an objective reporter or two that would simply ask a few questions.
As a veteran of the US Navy myself, I find it quite insulting to the rest of his “shipmates” that he could be such a hero in only 4 months of service. And by the way, this self-proclaimed military hero named Kerry was “other than honorably” discharged from the US Navy. And just so you know, any veteran with an other than an honorable discharge cannot serve as a president of the United States. Kerry worked for eight years to clear this from his record and finally succeeded sometime around, I believe, 1978. Maybe this is why Kerry threatens to bring litigation against anyone who attempts to re-publish his book, “The New Soldier.” I don’t even know what is in that book but the actions of someone wanting to prosecute anyone who reads kind of gets my attention.
While it is easy to blame John Kerry for his failure to win the White House, he mainly has his party to thank for that. John Edwards ran a clean campaign but showed that he too could muster up the nasty just as well as anyone else, once he joined the Kerry camp.
The modern Republican party is THE inclusive party. The Democrats claim time-after-time that they have a bigger “tent.” But the fact of the matter is, Americans do not like the liberal agenda shoved down their throats. They don’t like Federal judges and mayors legislating from the bench, either. The American people spoke loudly in eleven states to the issue of Gay marriage — we simply do not want to change or redefine a long standing institution. Yes, you can have gay unions and do in your bedroom what you wish, but not gay marriage — those 11 states won’t stand for it and protected this institution by amending their respective state constitutions to ensure it.
And if you don’t like what America is saying now, Delta has daily flights bound for France and Canada. This is America and we refuse to conform to the European socialist values that enable us to bury our heads in the sand giving the next Adolph Hitler or Joseph Stalin the opportunity for conquest.
“Sean” and “Ann”-
How can you speak about not taking sides and being inclusive when you couch your language in antagonistic terms? “Thick head”, “echo chamber”, and the people you would like to see move to Canada? Come on. That is no way to enter an “enemy camp” and make peace.
I agree with you 100% that we need to accept the election and find a way to participate. However, we should be careful on issues of abortion and gay rights. There needs to be more measured actions taken on these issues. I think that the political left has pushed both of these issues too hard without trying to understand the thinking of their opposition, and we are now in a situation where there is danger of an overturning of Roe v Wade as well as a major step backwards in the perception of gays in America. Please take note of this and consider the damaging effects of creating an equally forceful yet negated reaction.
My suggestion on abortion is to open a discussion about the factors that contribute to it and treat it as a social ill that will never be fully eliminated. It makes more sense to keep it legal and safe, and to minimize the influencing factors than it does to make it illegal and unsafe (because it WILL continue to happen regardless of the law.) I am also concerned about the potential for people may be prosecuted for murder if Roe v Wade is overturned. Some questions about influencing factors: What is the connection of under-aged drinking and teen pregnancy rates? Should beer companies be held accountable for this? What about a media that presents sex as a recreational activity and takes no responsibility for the message? What about a multi billion dollar porn industry that promotes the image of women as sex objects? What about a Moral Relativism that justifies a lack of accountabiity and encourages selfishness versus self sacrifice? What about the mind set of women without a father? In my own life I have seen the devastating result of a number of friends who seek a father figure. Talk about a bad cycle.
The same goes for gay rights. Did they ask for too much by insisting on marriage? Possibly. They sure did a good job of upsetting those among us with strong religious beliefs. Should they have taken their time and started with making strong and valid arguments for equal treatment and recognition as couples through the law and made a distinction between marriage (church) and civil union (state)? I say yes. Do they deserve to be treated as second class citizens with unequal protection under the law? Absolutely not.
We can and should be having these measured discussions.
From Plato’s Republic-
“The excessive increase of anything often causes a reaction in the opposite direction. Tyranny arises naturally out of democracy and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme form of liberty.”
dermatic69@yahoo.com
Go ahead and gloat Repugs. When your jobs are all shipped overseas, your environmental protections are torn up and thrown away, your civil liberties eroded into pulp, and your sons sent off to fight another pointless war, don’t come bitchin’ to us. You’ll have your draft-dodging, cokehead, chickenhawk and your “moral value” to thank for flushing the country down the crapper.
But hey, at least the queers don’t get to marry now, right? Whoa, what a relief, that is. And..and…and…Anne Coulter has an Adams apple! Nyah!
Dave,
Good points. I respect and actually agree with many of your views. Well written
Sean –
I suspect we also differ on many issues, but it is good to know that we can find some common ground.
Obviously I was referring to Dave Morris when I agreed with his views. Not the over emotional, irrational views of Dave D.
Typical reaction of a liberal when given facts. Go back to class.
Facts? You want facts? Read the Price of Loyalty by former Treasury secretary Paul O’ Neill. Read Worse than Watergate by John Dean.
This is the most secretive Administration in US History. They make the Nixon cabal look like choirboys. Bush is also one of the most disengaged presidents in our history. O’Neill notes that even Cabinet meetings are scripted right down to the questions and who asks them. Everything is run through the political arm, with absolutely zero policy analysis regarding the issues..
They stonewalled the 9/11 commission, they stonewalled the Iraq Intelligence commission, they stonewalled the SEC investigations regarding Halliburton. They outed a CIA operative when Joe Wilson blew apart the Niger/Iraq/Uranium connection. I have plenty of facts.
Mr. Maynard, can you please terminate this thread? It makes me want to cry. I cannot believe that this is where the past few hundred years have brought us. I cannot accept that the struggles of our founding fathers, Lincoln, the Kennedys, King, and others, have brought us to this point. I cannot take the hatred, the class warfare, the slippery language, the personal attacks. We were meant for better than this.
Beth,
Agreed. Class warfare and hatred is not what this country was built on but unfortunately that is what the political campaign became over the past year. Hopefully now that it is all over this country can just move on. This country was built on individuals and their desire for freedom. Hopefully we can get back to that soon.
Anyway I have stated my thoughts on this election and now will go away in peace. Maybe in four years both parties can produce better candidates and it wont be as nasty and divided.
The election is over, lets talk about something else, the way Mark used too, like fun stuff. Christmas is only seven weeks away!
Yes, Mr Maynard, can you please stop the conservatives from arguing with the side well represented by Dave D. and Beth the cryer? This is no place for left wingers to have a big group hug. Maybe if you could censor your site before people get to post we could have a more fair-minded conversation. Oh and Beth, the ‘founding fathers’ phrase is usually reserved for the people that were involved in the founding documents: The Declaration of Independence, The U.S. Constitution, The Bill of Rights. You may want to do a little research while you reach for your tissue box.
I think that the “desire for freedom” is the driving force behind both the far left and far right. We are individuals, but we are also part of a lager political body. Our laws are made with the intent of limiting some of our personal freedoms for the greatest welfare of the many. On the right, Corporations (treated as individuals under the law) fight any limits on their freedom. They push for a Free Market that has a value system that is quantitative versus qualitative. I am of the opinion that the laws have favored their growth and welfare at the expense of the health, safety, and welfare of the other “individuals”. These laws have created a schism between the two types of individuals .
As for “Liberals”, I think there is a desire for the freedom of Moral Relativism which has a value system that is just a grey mess and acts as justification for the excesses of the individual at the expense of the common good.
I think that both of these extreme forms of freedom are poisoning our political body.
” Oh and Beth, the ‘founding fathers’ phrase is usually reserved for the people that were involved in the founding documents: The Declaration of Independence, The U.S. Constitution, The Bill of Rights. You may want to do a little research while you reach for your tissue box.”
Hence the COMMA, which is used to separate multiple, distinct entities. Founding Fathers THEN Lincoln, then Kennedy.
And she’s quite right about the Founding Father. They would be appalled at the lack of transparency this Administration has engendered, not to mention the assault on basic rights and liberties they codified in our Constitution and Bill and Right. The Fourth Amendment and due process is being corrupted in an unprecedented manner at this time in history. The Bxecutive branch has made an unparalleled grab for power, and the media and opposition seem too slack-jawed and stupified to do much about it. The judiciary is the last resort, but that hope is dwindling fast.
This was not a mandate. It was a slim majority vote made from ignorance and fear. The damage may take decades to rectify.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_11/005099.php
Steve Hampton:
“The Democratic party has lost it’s touch with the average American and has become the party of special interest — a clearinghouse, if you will, of the extreme liberal left.”
I hope you didn’t mean to imply that Zell Miller is wise.
Steve Hampton: “Swift Boat Veterans.”
Are you another American blindly pursuing the false constructs that are our politicians’ character? Don’t be so foolish. Also, what questions did Kerry not answer?
Steve Hampton: “Kerry was ‘other than honorably’ discharged from the US Navy. And just so you know, any veteran with an other than an honorable discharge cannot serve as a president of the United States.”
There are hideous gaps in logic in this statement.
Steve Hampton: “we simply do not want to change or redefine a long standing institution”
Actually, you want to change and redefine our constitution.
Steve Hampton: “This is America and we refuse to conform to the European socialist values that enable us to bury our heads in the sand giving the next Adolph Hitler or Joseph Stalin the opportunity for conquest.”
Or George W. Bush. Corporately controlled and corrupted America is as bad as or worse than communism/socialism.
Dave Morris: “strong religious beliefs” = weak-minded drone
Sean: “Go back to class.”
Okay–Inequality.org
All: Quit invoking the “power” of the founding fathers.
Dave Morris, the phrase, “East-coast pretensions,” (from the linked article) describes the Bush family–they are East Coast elitist aristocrats through and through. Don’t let the constructed images of Texas cowboy George fool you.
Oops, I meant to comment on the quote, “The Democratic party has lost it’s touch with the average American and has become the party of special interest — a clearinghouse, if you will, of the extreme liberal left.”
Many see the Democratic Party as conservative and rightist in its allegiances to corporations (e.g., Clinton and NAFTA). Extreme liberal left? I don’t see it.
I think the important thing to note here is that someone who ( “Sean”- I am assuming this ) voted for Bush was able to agree with me on a more moderate stance on gay rights and abortion. That gives me faith that an open discussion can be had on these issues as well as faith that a lot of people that voted for Bush are not strong supporters of more extreme moves against abortion and gay rights. That should be reassuring to all of us.
Dave,
I am much more moderate than the far right on some of the social issues like we mentioned earlier. I would call myself a moderate republican if I had to put a label on myself. However when it comes to protecting our nations feedoms (individual freedoms and security), taxes, social security, etc. I tend to align with where the President stands. I did not vote for him based on his stances on abortions, gay marriages, environment. I voted for him because of where he stand on the issues that are most important to me.
Sean –
Thanks for participating in this dialog.
I agree with the stance that a nation has a need to defend itself. I also think that we are a nation among other nations and we are interconnected with them through trade and communications in mind boggling array of ways. This has an enormous impact on the security of all nations, especially when safeguards for social justice / human rights are not in place and the Golden Rule is not always practiced.
Mark had linked to an article in the New York Times Magazine, written by Ron Suskind, a few weeks back. Opinions about the perceived credibility of the magazine aside, please consider the following passage and feel free to check it against sources you consider credible or go direct to the source – Jim Wallis at the Sojourners -to see if he was misquoted.
The passage has quotes from Jim Wallis, who is the head of an Evangelical organization called the Sojourners. In my opinion he makes a great point about national security. Here is the passage:
Moments after the ceremony, Bush saw Wallis. He bounded over and grabbed the cheeks of his face, one in each hand, and squeezed. ”Jim, how ya doin’, how ya doin’!” he exclaimed. Wallis was taken aback. Bush excitedly said that his massage therapist had given him Wallis’s book, ”Faith Works.” His joy at seeing Wallis, as Wallis and others remember it, was palpable — a president, wrestling with faith and its role at a time of peril, seeing that rare bird: an independent counselor. Wallis recalls telling Bush he was doing fine, ”’but in the State of the Union address a few days before, you said that unless we devote all our energies, our focus, our resources on this war on terrorism, we’re going to lose.’ I said, ‘Mr. President, if we don’t devote our energy, our focus and our time on also overcoming global poverty and desperation, we will lose not only the war on poverty, but we’ll lose the war on terrorism.”’
Bush replied that that was why America needed the leadership of Wallis and other members of the clergy.
”No, Mr. President,” Wallis says he told Bush, ”We need your leadership on this question, and all of us will then commit to support you. Unless we drain the swamp of injustice in which the mosquitoes of terrorism breed, we’ll never defeat the threat of terrorism.”
Bush looked quizzically at the minister, Wallis recalls. They never spoke again after that.
Here is the link to the full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html
I’d like to express my thoughts on the rest, but let’s start here with security.
Relating to the actual post, rather than to the direction this thread has taken:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/05/voting.problems.ap/index.html
“It is not who votes that counts,
but who counts the votes”
Joseph Stalin
See also: http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/todays_show.html
Holy Shit. I leave you guys alone for a day and then I come back to find my house wrecked… I want to start cleaning up, but I haven’t had my coffee yet.
Dave, thanks for trying to find common ground.
Linette’s waiting for me, and the baby’s in her car seat.
OK, I’ll deal with you kids when I get home.
A couple of nice columns in the times op – ed section today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/06/opinion/06brooks.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/06/opinion/06kristof.html?hp
I think the funniest thing I’ve seen this week is all the talk about the “mandate”. There is no sleeping giant. There was no mandate. Having half of the country say they don’t want you, is NOT a mandate.
Also, remember… More people voted for John Kerry than voted for Ronald Reagan when he was elected. In a record setting election, half of the country voted for the “#1 liberal in the Senate”.
I think the sleeping giant is actually the collective brain of the masses of people who don’t realize the slippery slope the neocons are on. When that brain wakes up… eek!
Anne and Sean, you seem to be dealing with some identity issues. Maybe you should go see a counselor about all your hostility. Did you mother spank you too much?
I was going to sit down here and try to write a thoughtful response to John Doe, the fellow who started this thread off, but the more I look at it, the more I think that he
More people voted against Bush this time than any other president.
Mandate? Nope.
Mark,
First John Doe is not a fictional person or stereotype. I respect John Kerry for his views and the views of his followers. I was just stating why I did not vote for John Kerry. I am not one of those blind followers of Al Franken, Sean Hannity, Rush, etc. I listen equally to both sides. As mentioned earlier there are several issues that I dont agree with Bush on but for those issues that are most important to me and my family I do agree with him and felt that voting for him was for the best.
Now that person writing on your site by the name of Ann Coulter is a little off his/her rocker. Believe it or not we are not one and the same.
S