Here is why Dean can't win in Nov 04

[Gman]

<snip>
Lieberman brings up Dean's opposition to trading with countries that do not have the same labor and environmental standards as the United States, and he calls it "stunning": "He said he would not have bilateral trade agreements with any country that did not have American standards. That would mean we would not have trade agreements with Mexico, with most of the rest of the world. That would cost us millions of jobs." Then, after peppering Dean with jabs, Lieberman rears back to throw the knockout punch: If Dean were elected president and carried out his promised trade policies, "The Bush recession would be followed by the Dean depression."
,
,
Dean counters by insisting that trade agreements need mere "international standards," not American standards, on labor and the environment. But that's not what he told the Washington Post (as the Lieberman campaign helpfully points out in its release) on Aug. 25. More important from my perspective, it's the exact opposite of what Dean told me when I rode with him in July on his campaign van in Iowa. When I asked Dean if he meant just general "standards" or "American standards," he insisted that he would demand that other countries adopt the exact same labor, environmental, health, and safety standards as the United States. But the audience wasn't riding with me, and they rally to Dean in his time of need, applauding wildly. Lieberman is left to lamely reply, "That's a reassuring change of position."
</snip>

Well, just what the hell is it, Dean? Do you even know?

If Dean continues to make incredibly stupid statements like this, he's toast NOW in November 04 as will be all of us. He may win the nomination, but he's toast against Bush in September 03. Is Dean just plain stupid? Is Dean just going to rely completely on his charisma? I'm starting to think the answer is yes to both questions.

Dean is dangerous because he very well could win the nomination but he is starting to appear to be a bumbling idiot. Remember the terms "light-weight" or lack of "gravitas"? Dean is looking like a rank amateur in the drop dead serious politics of running for president.

Note that attacking Lieberman does not get around the fact that Dean is coming across as a bumbling idiot. If Dean was well prepared ad had well thought out positions, this would never have happened. The MTP interview apparently was not an aberation. Dean apparently does not have what it takes to be the leader of the free world.

Flame away! Asbestos suit is now on!

http://slate.msn.com/id/2087877/

[LittleApple81]

1. Even if he were a bumbling idiot, if he were a Republican he would get

the Republican treatment and considered a genius, if compared with the Republican lot. Unfortunately, in America it seems to be a matter not of issues or intelligence but to have a "selling point", the most money in the bag, and the press on your side. These last two points will hurt Dean more than being judged "a bumbling idiot" by his fellow democrats.

[HFishbine]

2. Right O

I know this post is going to kick this thread, but it's necessary to suggest that the best remedy for threads like these is to let them sink.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

3. Kucinich is better than both of them

Kucinich would get us out of NAFTA and the WTO and make bilateral trade agreements with each country. Let's face it, trade with Mexico is going to be different than trade with Canada.

Lieberman and Dean are both full of it on trade.

[Gman]

6. A "remedy" for threads critical of Dean????

This is not Howard Dean's board, contrary to popular opinion..

[Nederland]

44. Kucinich?

You mean the guy who didn't realize K-Mart wasn't profitable?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

46. that was a clever slam against Kucinich by the "moderator" wasn't it?

"You mean the guy who didn't realize K-Mart wasn't profitable?"

When did Kucinich say that? He didn't, that's a lie. When asked about prices at Walmart (profitable) and Kmart (unprofitable) he said we should pay attention to the profit margins at Walmart and Kmart, then the so-called moderator made a joke about Kmart not being profitable.

That was even lower than Lieberman's slam against Dean. Let's not pretend that Kucinich doesn't know about failing companies and the job losses that causes - he's been talking about it longer than most.

Kucninich promoted bilateral trade agreements with our allies and trading partners, which is far better than the bureaucracies at the WTO and IMF and their corporate lobbyists.

[Nederland]

63. Not how I recall it

do you have a link to a transcript? I couldn't find one...

[Nederland]

74. Found It

This is actual exchange:


SUAREZ: Congressman Kucinich, if we follow the advice and the assurances that you just gave and start to pull out of some of these treaties, if we start to demand these standards abroad in the places that America acquires the things it sells in its stores, won't the price of everything that you see when you walk into a Wal-Mart go up, everything that you see when you go into a Kmart or, indeed, even to the supermarket?

KUCINICH: Well, the real question, Ray, is what kind of profits do the Kmarts and the Wal-Marts of the world make?

SUAREZ: Well, Kmart, not too much.

(LAUGHTER)

KUCINICH: But on the misery of those people in Third World countries who are working for pennies an hour and are finding themselves unable to support their own families.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/transcripts/090403demsdebate.html


Obviously Kucinich was trying to claim that Walmart and Kmart were profiting off the misery of people in the third world. In the case of Kmart, he was simply dead wrong.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

76. He was absolutely correct, Kmart is no longer bankrupt

Besides, Kmart has been around for years, it's recent troubles are mostly because of strong competition from Walmart. What Kucinich said was correct.

[noonwitch]

4. Dean is just taking a more pro american labor stance

I'm a union member and a big issue for unions is that american companies can build plants in Mexico(and other poorer countries) and close factories here, because they don't have to pay the employees in Mexico as much, there's no OSHA and they probably don't have to pay for health insurance or any other benefits. In my opinion, Lieberman is wrong for wanting to encourage other countries to continue practices that not only cost american jobs, but also exploit the labor pool in a less-developed country.

[RogueTrooper]

5. looks like the writer was in cahoots

with the Lieberman campaign when he wrote that article.

I, like many, many others disagree with the premise that Dean cannot win in 2004.

What exactly did Dean say that made him come across as a "bumbling idiot"?

[Gman]

13. The example

is what happened when Dean switched his position from American labor standards to some kind of "international" standards which is exactly what he did. He comes across, IMHO, as bumbling. The August 25 statement about American standards now looks like it wasn't very well throught through when he can get knocked off balance so easily by the obvious implication that it would cut off trade with 80% (I'm guessing) of the world including Mexico, China, Indonesia. The American labor standard, while admirable, would put half the US out of work.

I was giving Dean the benefit of a doubt until last night. The MTP interview was NOT an aberation. He doesn't have what it takes.

[RogueTrooper]

19. Well, sir, I disagree

I believe his position on internation trade is what we are needing.

Whether these standards be American or International is moot. I would guess that "American" was used because it is a better sell than "international". I think Lieberman paraphrasing an article in the WP and trying to pass it off as a direct quote from Dean is rank amateurism on his part.

[tjdee]

23. Um, aren't they distinct differences?

Isn't that the whole point?

American standards are different than International standards. I don't think they're interchangeable, or that the point is moot. Again, I don't think this is the hugest deal, but you know what?

Al Gore was roasted on much less.

And here's Howard Dean. Misspeaking about Edwards' war position. Misspeaking about the social security thing. Misspeaking about his position on trade and standards. And more to come, I expect.

[RogueTrooper]

Al Gore was roasted

because he let himself be roasted on these issues, not because he was roasted per say.

Edwards voted for the war. That is his problem.

Dean will change his position. If he thinks that the prognosis needs to change, he will change it. Howver, if you look at his postions you will find that the diagnosis rarely changes.

[tjdee]

31. Umm...

Dean came out and SAID he mischaracterized Edwards' position.

He came out and SAID he misspoke about Social Security.

So can you tell me how it is that Kerry isn't changing his "diagnosis" on the war instead of "waffling" as I hear so many times on DU?

[RogueTrooper]

40. Kerry's vote for the war

I do believe he apologized to Edwards after a little intemperate rouging up. Good, I am glad to support a candidate who can apologize instead.

I believe he said he changed his position when presented with different facts. That would not be the same a misspeaking.

As for Kerry's war vote...

He hoisted himself on his own petard with that one, mate. He voted for the war because he was running for the Presidency and he made a calculated political decision. Right now, he is getting his just desserts.

[virtualobserver]

42. the scary thing is.......

it is hard to say just how bad this situation in IRAQ is going to get.

Kerry's statement that 'Howard Dean's opposition to the war was wrong' seemed like a big mistake to me.

It will bite him in the ass.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

53. a "war" and an "occupation" are 2 different things

Kerry is no simpleton, although there seem to be a lot here on DU who act like that one vote define a lifetime of service to his country.

[virtualobserver]

61. "To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq. "

is the first line of AWR.

Kerry authorized it with his vote.

Every negative post-war prediction has come true. I could see that in advance. Why couldn't Kerry see it?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

29. neither Dean nor Lieberman can get their trade stories right

Lieberman went for a low blow, and it kind of worked, since Dean refuses to take the US labor side against NAFTA, and is trying so very hard to find the middle ground between the corporations and American workers.

He can't, and he will continue to be hammered on this until he either admits his pro-corporate positions or admits his support of NAFTA was a mistake.

Dean's trying to talk out of both sides of his mouth, and Lieberman called him on it. Lieberman, at least, is proud of being a Republican.

[TLM]

59. Dean is trying to find the balance between two extremes...

To get rid of NAFTA and WTO would be a disaster. I know I'd personally lose my job were it not for NAFTA.

However we also can not to allow the current situation to continue where workers around the world are being exploited, and American industrial jobs are hemorrhaging out of this country.

Dean's position is reasonable and can work, where rather than break the whole system as Kucinich wants, we lay down standards for American corporations and require them to meet the same standards regardless of where they move their factories. We also attach some progressive level of worker safety, labor, and environmental standards to our trade agreements with other nations.

NAFTA and the WTO can be reformed... but to destroy them is foolish and will cause more harm than good.

[chimpymustgo]

47. Howard "would you like syrup with those waffles?" Dean.

This is such a pattern with him. He shoots off his mouth, says whatever works for the situation.

He has not thought a lot of things through. Dean is not ready for prime time, and I hope voters will realize that soon.

[TLM]

57. That's your bumbling idiocy, not Dean's

"the obvious implication that it would cut off trade with "

Nowhere has Dean said that we would cut off trade with nations that did not meet these standards instantly.

You have to understand there are two different issues at work here... our rules for the nations we trade with and our rules for the American corporations that operate in other countries.

American corporations will be made to meet American labor, environmental, and safety standards no matter where they build their factories.

As for other nations, we will work to lift their nations up as well, but that is going to be a process that takes time and is put into place incrementally... starting with a general level of standards we can agree on, and tying better levels of trade status to those nations efforts to raise the standards in their countries.

[SCantiGOP]

56. right, rougetrooper

Carter in 76 and Clinton in 92 were considered much more longshots at this stage of the campaign than Dean is. I picked Dean out of the field as my candidate of choice months ago not just because I agreed with his hard-hitting tax and Iraq positions, but because I judged him to be the most electable of the group.

[NicRic]

7. One name for a win !

AL GORE !!!!!!

[Solomon]

9. True, True

:beer:

[ScreamingMeemie]

33. Do that and we've lost the fence sitters. It's not about us and who we

would like to see in office. It's about those who are disgruntled and have yet to make up their minds, and Al Gore isn't going to grab those people. Sorry.

[Starpass]

8. So am I allowed (gasp) to ask a question here??--before thread banned

Morning papers state that Dean changed his canceling Bush's tax breaks stance because of Kerry criticism. They state that he now endoreses basically what Kerry said and that would be to keep in the middle class tax cuts but get rid of the wealthy ones, etc. Now I know that Dean supporters had a thread going the other day about why Howard was so correct on insisting all the taxe cuts be cancelled. Now could they start a thread on why it isn't............bottom line, folks: they all are politicians, they all tap dance, and if you start going nutso on everything wonderful about your candidate and everything ohhh, so bad about everyone elses, I will guarantee you that you will be eating crow at some point right next to the Freedom Fries gang. You haven't seen the last of the tap dancing.

[LittleApple81]

10. Almost anybody but Bush is the answer.

Please, let us focus! Attacking our own is not the answer.

[Gman]

14. I'm not attacking Dean's qualifications as a Democrat

I'm attacking Dean as the potential Democratic nominee in an intraparty way. If he gets the nomination, I'll walk through fire to get him elected even though I'll have the same feeling I did in '84 and '88 that it's an exercise in futility.

[tjdee]

27. Is this true?

Can you provide a link?

But Starpass, you KNOW that this isn't tap dancing. If this is true, all it shows is Howard Dean "listening" and being "flexible" on the issues. I know that ALL Americans will believe that.

[chimpymustgo]

48. Tjdee, Dean has brilliantly "evolved".

Should we start keeping a list? KKKarl is - with glee.

[TLM]

62. Dean is in favor of middle class tax reform...

The only question has been to do it by repealing all bush tax cuts then implementing new more reasonable tax policy later... or leaving the few middle class tax cuts from the Bush cuts in place.

Frankly I think it would be a better plan to repeal them all and then put new tax cuts into effect that target small businesses and middle class working people, and the working poor. This is something Dean is in favor of doing.

However it might also be a smart political move to leave the few Bush tax cuts in place that did get to the middle class, just to deny the republicans that key attack of saying Dean will raise taxes on the middle class.

I can see good reasons for both ways of doing it.

[Sinistrous]

11. And Lieberman's solution to the hemmorage of US jobs

to slave labor camps, and dollar a week child labor sweatshops is what? Seems he wants the status quo. That certainly would make the Republican corporatists very happy.

[virtualobserver]

12. here is a snip from that article

-snip One multilateral institution that might not fare so well in a Dean administration, though, is the World Trade Organization. In what would be a radical departure, China and other countries could get trade deals with the United States only if they adopted "the same labor laws and labor standards and environmental standards" as the United States. Whether or not that demand was consistent with WTO rules? "That's right." With no concession to their relative level of development? "Why should there be? They have the right to have a middle class same as everyone else."

Dean says, "We've tried it" -- NAFTA, WTO -- "for 10 years, and has it succeeded? No. . . . What's the purpose of trade? If it's to create jobs, we haven't done that in America."
-unsnip

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40299-2003Aug24.html
on edit I added the link

The current setup is costing us millions of jobs NOW, and abusing the rest of the world. Lieberman's attack is absurd. Multinationals are taking advantage of these agreements to ship jobs overseas, abuse people with low wages, and weaken our labor and environmental situation.

Sen. Status Quo (Lieberman) would do nothing to change this. Your "idiot" label applies somewhere other than Dean.

[Gman]

20. While Dean's original statement is admirable

, as I said previously, the implication is that he would just do it. Dean offers no "road map" of how to bring these countries up to standards. The implication is that he would just cut them off which would have catatrophic economic consequences.

While the American or "international" standards make great rhetoric, it's hollow without the "how to" piece.

Now, I don't really believe that Dean would just cut these countries off. But this is an example of the kind of commercials you will see from the RNC in Nov 04...

(fuzzy, grainy picture of Dean). (voice) "Howard Dean said he would cut off trade with any country that does not meet American labor or economic standards. Then he changed his position just two weeks later to some sort of international standards. Dean's plan would cost America (fill in a number in millions) of jobs...."

[virtualobserver]

34. I know that conventional wisdom states that you must have.....

a detailed plan in place. But I diagree. If Dean put a hyper-detailed plan on the table, that wouldn't work either, because it would just be picked apart.

....this would be complex, but we need to fundamentally change the way we make decisions about how we structure trade agreements and how we reward corporate behavior.

NAFTA and WTO rules are fundamentally unsound and destructive to everyone in the world except for the giant corporations.

Dean would encounter great resistance to changing this. But I know that no unmotivated candidate could possibly make significant changes.

[Gman]

50. I agree with you

on the point that NAFTA and WTO rules need to change and made more fair to American workers. I also think it is a great idea that these countries meet some sort of standard. In NAFTA, they're supposed to meet standards, but they're not enforced in Mexico.

Buf as for a detailed plan, people don't want the details. People do want someone with a clearly articulated vision and some basic steps on how to get there. The candidate that fails to articulate their vision in clearly understandable terms, and without contradictions, will not win.

[tjdee]

21. Dean said last night that he disagreed that we need to get rid of the WTO.

He said "I disagree with Mr. Kucinich that we need to disband NAFTA and the WTO."

Or something to that effect.

??????

[virtualobserver]

36. we do need a WTO

but it needs to be changed.

[Dhalgren]

66. Why do we need a WTO?

"We" as the American public, not the international corporations. The WTO is set up to promote and facilitate the intern. corps. not the working people of any country. If the US and Mexico had bilateral trade agreements, both populations would benefit. The same with every other trading partner we have. Once our trade agreements are taken out of oue elected officials hands and given to an extra national body, we lose. Show me anywhere where NAFTA or the WTO or their like has improved to lott of any workers anywhere?

[virtualobserver]

70. I agree that it hasn't helped....

But I would like a single, fair, world standard. I'm not anticipating an easy transition to that, though.

[aneerkoinos]

75. "We" as the people of the earth need WTO

... but different WTO

We don't wanna go back to pre-globalization era version of colonialism and nation state protectionist capitalism, we need to give globalization a new meaning and democratize WTO and other international bodies. IMF and World Bank are impossible to democratize because buck votes in them and so they should probably be got rid of, but WTO is in principle (not in practice) semi-democratic, one vote/country, and if there is will, WTO can be used to promote democratic, social and ecological aspects of globalization instead of current neoliberal orthodox economic policies, together with ILO and other organizations. It is interesting to note that George Montbiot has recently changed his view on WTO from opposing to supporting it because it's policies can be changed and it offers huge opportunities.

My heart bleeds everytime I see progressive people taking nationalistic and protectionist stand instead of internationalism and solidarity. Experimenting socialism in one or few nation states lead to catastrophy, and catastrophy and moral bankruptcy awaits all progressive policies that put some workers rights (e.g. US workers, who btw should envy EU standards and put up a fight instead of praising US standards and whining about cheaper but better educated "injun" labor) before other workers rights. Once again, some people think they should be more equal than others...

As for Dean, I don't know but I get the impression that his basic values are in the right place, he's seeing the heart of the problem all by himself, which is not really difficult for any semi-intelligent person who bothers to give it some thought, and is coming towards the only solution that is true to progressive values, just to workers everywhere and pragmatic - but far from easy. But being USAn and stranger to leftist thought he currently lacks language and other means to tackle this problem - THE problem of modern world! - in a way that is analytical enough to be effectively communicated to voters. I think he's in the middle of mental process that with little encouridgment and right information might lead to extremely important and positive outcomes for all the world. One serious problem in his thinking is that he's (or has been) thinking too much in terms of bilateral trade treaties instead of multilateral approach through UN and WTO, but I think thats because he's been exposed to little else that mainstream US thinking, not because ideological barriers. Send him to study trip to World Social Forum, engage him in serious discussions with Lula and others, at least buy him a book or two...

[PATRICK]

24. Dean's approach

could also be categorized as flexible and fearless,which coming from a thoughtful man open to reason, seems less a rigid calculated approach and not at al light weight stupidity. These aren't gaffes or reversals so much as open musings based on sound values. Some of it has to do with
being a governor as opposed to a Senator, but overall, for now, having a confident intelligent Democrat who speaks his mind is more a plus to get rid of everyone's inhibitions and choreographed dullness. I think Dean exposes his honest idealism mulling out policy benchmarks that your campaign manager was supposed to set in stone. Shrugging off attacks and not being worried much about dialogue presentation has its limits of course.

Hmmm. That sort of sounds like a flame. I think it is overstated for now. Any point about Dean's weakness(which there is, everyone has them) contained in the above post isn't worth the exagerrated heat. Even the conservative rags can barely generate steam trying to brand Dean as a lefty liberal.

[Sterling]

71. Lieberman's attack is absurd.

Almost as absurd as the idea he actually has a snowballs chance in winning the nomination. What a sad little man he is.

[CWebster]

15. Much ado about nothing

Just Lieberman looking for a cheap-shot. It painted Lieberman as an imperialist actually--with inappropriate insensitivity to the exploitation of the low-income countries by US companies, but it also demonstrated Dean's intentions as altruistic in front of a Latino audience.

[bowens43]

16. Quite a rant but....

your subject line is misleading. You have provided no evidence that Dean can't win.

[Racenut20]

17. I have nothing against Gov Dean

As a candidate or a person.

I am just convinced he couldn't carry Florida if he had a wheelbarrow. (duh, hmmm. do they still make those in the US?)

[searchingforlight]

28. I disagree.

Maybe not now but when those people get to know him, meet him in person, see him in action he will have a good chance in Florida.

Florida was hit hard by the last election and they have been hit hard by BushCo. They will know an honest, intelligent man when they see one.

I predict he will even do well in the Cuban communities.

[Ganja Ninja]

18. Setting standards for wages and working conditions

is not a bad idea, likewise for setting environmental standards. Obviously it can’t be done all at once and would have to be phased in over time on a country by country basis. Dean has the right idea though.

Regarding the source of the article the Slate is fair and balanced just like FOX. Here are a few headlines from the past few weeks to illustrate:

Howard Dean, left-wing impostor
Howard Dean is getting cocky
Howard Dean's national security problem
Why Does Howard Dean's first TV ad sound stilted?
The gullible Mr. Kerry
Bob Graham's inexplicable candidacy

Get the idea?

[ClintonTyree]

22. LIEberman........................

attacking Dean is a sure fired way to end his campaign quickly. Holy Joe just doesn't get it that Dems don't want his version of what being a Democrat is about. I wish he'd quietly slink back into his Senate office and just show up to vote (probably in favor of the repugs at that). Dean needs a little polishing if he's to be the nominee, but he is far from unelectable. We NEED a pitbill to take on Bush, Dean fits the bill, Kerry is starting to get his masculinity back, Gephardt? (who knows).

[teryang]

25. Don't they wish it were true

Dean will get the nomination.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. I Have Problems With A Dean Candidacy

but I won't deny he's a bright man...


He certainly isn't as gaff prone as *

[rock]

30. A turd on a stick would win against bush*sucks

It doesn't even have to be a long stick.

[robbedvoter]

32. Best post on the thread.

While it's legitimate - and productive to discuss the candidates stands/misfires - framing a thread like this is off putting enough to keep me from reading (and that, no matter what the name of the candidate invilved)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. The First Rule Of War, Combat, or Any Competition

is not to "misunderestimate" (sic) your competition....

[farmbo]

35. What's "stupid" about imposing US labor & environ. stds. in Mexico?

As insidious as that prospect sounds to Holy Joe(and to the Lieberman-leaning poster of this thread)it is a rational compromise in the NAFTA/ WTO debate.

Why wouldn't Mexico comply with these standards? Are they going to turn their backs on their biggest trading partner? Will they restrict their trade to China and Indonesia? I think not.

There's a process that's used to obtain compliance with Fair Trade laws by all of our trading partners; it's called "Leadership" (a concept which seems to have escaped Lieberman's grasp)

[artr2]

38. This is the same shit that the press did to Al Gore last election

And we are making progress! Instead of the press doing it WE are. Let's just nitpick him to death. Earth tones anyone??

[tjdee]

39. Earth tones are a bit different than POLICY changes. n/t

[library_max]

41. "My Candidate Sucks So Bad That I Have To Attack Yours"

All hail CoffeePlease1947! He has come up with the perfect formula for dispelling all these negative campaign threads! All you Dean-bashers, Kerry-bashers, any-Democrat-bashers, please repeat after me: “MY CANDIDATE SUCKS SO BAD THAT I HAVE TO ATTACK YOURS.”

If I were a Bush supporter, I would be ROFLMAO to see all these Democrats ripping each other to pieces. My candidate in the general election is Anybody But Bush. As for the primaries, I haven’t decided yet. Amazing, ain’t it? Considering that the primaries are only six months away.

Come on, ladies and gentlemen! Unity, please! Eyes on the prize! BUCK FUSH!

[virtualobserver]

43. "your candidate is attacking my candidate"

why is that happening? Are they trying to win some sort of contest?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

45. Let's Assume Dean is Clueless

I don't believe that for a minute, but for the sake of argument let's say Dean has no idea what he's talking about.

Now look who he's running against--a fucking partial birth abortion named George W Bush.

Now explain to me again how Dean can't win, please. Eagerly awaiting your insightful explanation.

[Gman]

52. Sorry, but if it were that simple

we would have taken back the Senate and be within 3 or 4 votes of control of the House last year. People weren't given a clear alternative and the "why". At this rate, Dean's not doing it either.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CentristDemocrat]

51. I agree, Dean looked flustered at times.

I don't know what the big fascination with him is. I have yet to see him in an interview/debate setting where I've been overly impressed. I thought Gephardt, Edwards, Kerry and Kucinich were very good last night. Dean looked shaken.

[TLM]

54. Dean Bashers get desperate....

Dean handled that attack perfectly, and the audience reaction was a clear reflection of that... booing Lieberman's cheap shot and cheering Dean's reply.

Some nations can meet American standards... some can not. Dean has not said we should cut off all trade with nations that can't meet American standards, however we should insist on the goal being to lift these nations up to our level.

The bashers, Lieberman included, want to act like this is an either/or issue where either we have full US standards met right now, or we cut off all trade. That's not the case.

I think Dean was quite clear, that we can't have open boarders with nations that do not meet some level of labor, safety, and environmental standards.

And what LIEberman ignored is that this cost is not directed at the countries, but the American corporations that move to these nations to take advantage of their lack of standards.

US corporations will have to meet American standards, regardless of where they build. However if a nation like china does not meet our standards, that doesn’t mean we cut off all trade, rather it means we take steps to move those nations to meeting an agreed upon level of standards.

[CWebster]

55. Very often

It is US companies seeking to exploit low income country labor, resources and lack of pollution regs.

[TLM]

64. Exactly. and the point a lot of folks are missing

is there are two different levels here.

There are the rules we have for our corporations that move over seas... then there are the rules we have for our trading partners.

These are two very different things.

We can tell American corporations that they have to meet American standards where ever they build, and in doing so completely remove the incentive for them to move to other countries to exploit their lax laws and standards.

We can tell Ford, if you build a plant in Mexico, you have to pay them an AMERICAN minimum wage, let them unionize, meet American labor, safety and environmental standards. This will mean ford won’t move to Mexico... and if they do, the workers in Mexico will get a much better job, which will not only help build their middle class so they can in turn buy our products, but it will help build respect and affection for America as a leader and not an exploiter.


What we cannot do is tell China or Mexico that they must suddenly meet American standards or we'll cut of Trade, and that's not what Dean is saying we should do. Rather he is saying we need to attach labor, safety, and environmental standards to trade agreements to point these nations in the right direction and reward them for raising these standards to agreed upon levels.

It is a sound trade policy that can work, not only for trade, but for national security. If we stop exploiting people in other countries and start working to make things better for everybody, maybe there won’t be so many people who want to kill us.

[Capn Sunshine]

58. And how would someone see that as "a knockout punch"

It appeared to me that candidate Lieberman shot his mouth off in front of the party faithful and only succeeded in grievously wounding himself.

[Gman]

65. You are correct about taking steps to move these nations to meeting

an agreed up on level or standard. That is exactly what needs to be done. The "how" part is what Dean has not articulated. At this point I don't even think he knows. If he had a clear vision of how to do this, the entire incident with Lieberman would never have happened.

Again, Dean comes across as just shooting from the hip with whatever he thinks about at the moment. That may work for a while. But it damn sure isn't going to work in November next year.

[TLM]

68. Nice try, but nope....

Dean has the honesty and vision to see what needs to be done and say that it needs to be done. They had one minute answers, this was a debate, not a trade summit.

How we go about doing it is going to be a more involved process, and you can be sure Dean is going to base detailed plans on the input from the nations we're working with so the solutions benefit everyone.

And if you think long intricately detailed explanations of how trade policy plans are going to be implemented is what Dean needs to win in November, you have a lot to learn about the American electorate.

As it is Dean is pushing the envelope of the average American voter's attention span. I dare say if Dean wasn't so fiery and engaging, he'd be too smart for most people and would be following in Al Gore's footsteps, being branded the smartest kid in class.


And by the way, LIEberman would have taken his cheap shot regardless... he is desperate.

[Sterling]

72. he is desperate

I know. It is actually getting sad. I feel sorry for people who have so little to work with for their candidate. It must really bother them to realize Dean is on the way to getting the party nod.

[Philosophy]

60. American jobs depend upon oppressing people in other countries

Is Lieberman working for Haliburton too now?

[unfrigginreal]

67. What a big post for little substance.

Dean counters by insisting that trade agreements need mere "international standards," not American standards, on labor and the environment.

And what is your disgruntlement with this position? We've already heard how you disagree with his unstated position.

[Gman]

69. My disgruntlement is that

Dean appeared to only realize the economic implications of his previously stated position on American standards versus international standards when Lieberman brought it up. To me, and to apparently a whole lot of other people, it became apparent that Dean really doesn't have a well thought out and defendable position on labor and environmental standards for the WTO and NAFTA. As I said earlier, if he had such a position, the whole incident would never have happened.

[unfrigginreal]

73. What other people?

Why don't you post a few articles that suggest that "Dean really doesn't have a well thought out and defendable position on labor and environmental standards for the WTO and NAFTA"?

You seem to be making a big deal about nothing, Dean clearly stated tonight that he was talking about international standards.

I even read where the facts indicate that Lieberman was using a paraphrased statement to make his case. That would be really low, don't you think, if Lieberman was found to be twisting Dean's words.