That old Debil electability rears its ugly head again:

[Nicholas_J]

Former Vermont govenor gains support for bid to Democratic nomination for president...

While Dean's run is music to the GOP's ears, it's making Sen. John Kerry's supporters a bit antsy.

"I wouldn't say we're nervous, but it does mean he has to work harder in certain respects," said John Knowles, a Kerry supporter and co-chairman of the Hudson (N.H.) Democratic Committee. "I don't believe Dean is going to make it but you can't ignore him."

Knowles, a Massachusetts native, said he was undecided until a few months ago, wavering between three or four candidates - including Dean. But in the end, Knowles doesn't think Dean has what it takes to knock Bush out of the White House in 2004.

"The Republicans will tear Dean apart and he's not ready for it," Knowles said. "The biggest thing is to have someone who can beat Bush.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

http://www.sentinelandenterprise.com/Stories/0,1413,106%257E4994%257E1564189,00.html

[Maple]

1. The Republicans

aren't in any shape to tear anyone apart.

[Nicholas_J]

2. B.S.

Support for the Democratic party is at its lowerst in 70 years.
About 32 percent.

The Republicans are WELL prepared to take apart any democratic candidate with so much as a small hidden thing in their record. Which is where they will rip DEAN to shreds, if he wins the nomination.

The latest Gallop polls shows a massive shift against suport of gay rights since the latest supreme court decision, even among democrats, the middle class is worried about the repeal of the Bush tax cuts, before the additional taxes that they are now paying at the state levels are reveresed by the federal government starting to pump more money to the states. They may not like Bush, but they are afraid of a Democrat who will make things worse for them.

Public Shifts to More Conservative Stance on Gay Rights
Change comes in aftermath of Supreme Court decision


by Frank Newport
GALLUP NEWS SERVICE

PRINCETON, NJ -- There's been a significant shift in public opinion on gay and lesbian rights over the last two months. Two polls conducted in July, after the Supreme Court's June 26 decision to overturn a Texas anti-sodomy law, showed a significant drop in the percentage of Americans supporting legalized homosexual relations. The latest Gallup Poll also shows that Americans are now less likely than they were in May to consider gay relationships acceptable, and also less likely to favor a law that would legalize homosexual civil unions. In fact, support for legalized civil unions has dropped to its lowest point of the four years in which Gallup polls have asked about it.

Support for Legalizing Homosexual Relations Drops

Americans' acceptance of the concept that "homosexual relations between consenting adults" should be legal had -- up until this month -- slowly increased, from a low point of 32% recorded in 1986 to the high point of 60% this May. But two separate Gallup polls conducted this month show a dramatic reversal of this trend. A July 18-20 poll found 50% of Americans saying that homosexual relations should be legal, and a just completed July 25-27 poll confirms the substantial drop in support, with just 48% of those interviewed saying such relations should be legal. Thus, the level of support for legal homosexual relations has dropped 10-12 points in a period of just two months.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr030730.asp


In a survey of 1,225 likely voters in the 2004 presidential election done for the DLC, pollster Mark Penn found that Democrats are favored over Republicans by only the lowest income group, those earning $20,000 or less.

"Among middle-class voters, the Democratic Party is a shadow of its former self," the Penn poll found. "Half a century ago, a near- majority of voters identified themselves as part of the Democratic Party. Today, that number has declined to roughly one-third of all voters."

Softening the bad news was Penn's finding that Bush, despite his high popularity and job approval numbers, still falls below 50 percent on the question of whether he deserves re-election and remains vulnerable on economic issues, notably the loss of jobs.

But not if Democrats lurch to the left, Penn found. The Democratic base -- labor, urban minorities, white liberals -- is too small in a changing America to guarantee victory.

With the exception of Hispanic population growth, national trends -- decline of manufacturing, suburban growth, and increases in college education, white collar and professional jobs -- "do not favor the Democrats," Penn wrote. These voters, Penn found, faulted Democrats as standing for "big government," being " too liberal," and "too beholden to special interests."

"No Democrat will win the White House in 2004," Penn concluded, "without an agenda that speaks directly to middle-class parents with children."

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-10/1059457803260740.xml

[clar]

3. If you want to help Kerry

you should hie yourself over to his blog instead of doing your usual antagonistic schtick here. It is truly pathetic to keep tearing down another candidate instead of working to ensure the nomination of someone you claim to support so passionately.

[AP]

5. I totally disagree. It's good to have a full, open debate.

We're all here to hash out ideas and arguments. It's not supposed to be an echo chamber.

[clar]

6. You're right about full honest debates

Unfortunately, by and large, that's not what's been happening. Instead, nasty sniping from some posters, under the guise of debating issues has dominated for weeks now. I like Kerry, I like Edwards and I like Dean. I don't like the simplistic demonization of candidates. This particular post would be far more palatable if it were not for the lamentable attacks the poster has so frequently employed.

[blm]

7. The poster came on

to DU just like anyone else. He posts tough material now after being treated like dirt for the first month he was here by more than a few Dean supporters who were banned for their cruel badgering,

He gives and he gets. That's the political terrain. N J takes it about as well as anyone here. No glass jaw.

[Nazgul35]

9. Ha!

He posts and runs....look at the threads he starts where he gets hammered over his creative editing of Dean quotes....

Perhaps even lamer is his use of polls to support his view of the world...es
and to save everyone any possible suspense...he'll say that all Dean supporters attack Kerry...all Dean supporters like to polls when the support Dean....all Dean supporters blah blah blah....

The nonsense about who is electable and who isn't has been going around for all the candidates...many could say the numbers are so low for dems because of the dems at the national level (along with the DNC) putting on their best pink tutus....

Truth is...the country has gotten more partisan over the years....individuals who call themselves strong dems and strong pubs has grown...not diminished....the decline of party theory has been discredited over the last 15 years...so if you haven't sat in a poly-sci course since then...ya might have missed that little gem...

So to end all this....opinion does not an informed debate make....especially when you have individuals who purposively edit and spin information about a candidate (KKKarl would be proud)...wait a few days, and launch the same old nonsense all over again...

[dsc]

13. Do you find any of the following honest

A thread claiming Vermont went from 4th to 10th as best place to raise a child when we later found out it went back to 4th the very next year.

A thread claiming that Dean brought the death penalty to Vermont only to discover he was referencing a federal case brought by Ashcroft's justice department.

A thread in which it was claimed Dean personaly signed an order to jail a home school parent for contempt.

A thread in which it was claimed Dean raised the sales tax when it stayed the same 5% Dean inherited.

A thread in which it was claimed Dean raised the property tax bill of poor and lower income Vermonters only to find that he had lowered them.

All of these have been posted by the poster you are claiming brings honest debate. Is this your definition of honest?

[AP]

15. It's not dishonest...

to say that VT went of 4 to 10 if it did in fact go from 4 to 10. And if it went back to 4, well, if it's true, then that's your retort, and you get to make your points. Would you prefer that nobody talks about Dean's record at all?

[Ediacara]

16. N_J's thread was intentionally misleading

Although the figures he produced were true (at least according to sources cited), the fact he left out data showing the Vermont went back up to its previous rank WAS dishonest.

He had access to all the data, yet chose to truncate it in order to make an easily debunked point. That's intentionally misleading.

It's dishonest.

[Nicholas_J]

26. Well...

Just trying out Howard's canpaign methods in my posting.

[dsc]

23. What about the other things?

I gave you a list of several things that were dishonest. You answered item one. What about items 2 and on?

[dsc]

25. am I ever going to get a complete answer?

I really would like to know your definition of honesty.

[poskonig]

21. A-men, dsc!

eom :kick:

[Nicholas_J]

27. Why?

If this is the case, Dean should have limited his own campaign to speaking of his own accomplishments, rather than spend most of his time attacking other democratic candidates....

Dean spend most of the beginning of his campaign tearing down the other candidates rather than running on his own record and ideas.

But then again, if he did, he would not have had much to talk about.

Or is it just that Dean and supporters want to dish it out, but are unwilling to take it?

[AP]

4. Is Dean consciously or unconsciously trying to get Edwards the nom.

I'm operating on the premise that Dean just does not have the resources or the appeal to win in the South and West no matter what happens -- win or lose -- in NH. Whereas, Kerry can do respectably in the south and west IF he comes out of NH looking really good.

Dean and Kerry could do a lot of damage to each other in NH -- they could smear each other and blow too much of their money running against each other in NH. If Dean wins NH, Kerry might never get enough inertia to win another primary, and Dean will never win SC, which is the next major contest, so it'd be the end of him anyway. If Kerry wins NH, it might come at such a cost he won't win again (e.g, to win NH and beat Dean, he may have to over-define himself at such an early stage, and in a way that renders him unelectable in SC).

Just a theory...this is the first time I've contemplated this.

[clar]

8. And now to debate:

I kept thinking throughout the past year that Edwards would catch on. In many ways I find him an appealing candidate. So what happened? Beats me. This isn't 1991. For whatever reason, the dance started earlier this cycle. Dean may have peaked to soon, but if Edwards doesn't get some momentum within the next two months-and what with the absurd recall that may prove difficult- his chances of gaining the nomination are slim to none, and the threat that he may lose his Senate seat increases dramatically.
Kerry, I think, is doing a credible job. He's responding to the challenge from Dean. Cries of flip-flopping or copycat are meaningless. Dean continues to run an amazing campaign; bringing in new people, responding nimbly to attacks and energizing the entire field. As far as predicting electability goes, CW does indeed favor Edwards and Kerry. Should things improve domestically and in Iraq, Dean will face a tougher battle than either Kerry or Edwards. Should the economy further deteriorate and if casualties continue unabated in Iraq, Dean's appeal may well be considerable.

[AP]

12. Two brief comments:

- Edwards raised a lot of money in small groups, which meant that he was forgoing large, high profile events. It was the right thing to do and it worked. Now he's doing the large event campaigning thing, and that's paying off too. All his events are reported as "staanding room only" or "well attended". And if SC is any indication, the more people know him, the better he dowes in the polls. He's up from 6% to 10%, second to Lieberman's 14%, in a month during which he began to raise his profile there.

- Clinton had the same strategy, and he was in the single digits weeks before the NH primary. He turned on the jets, came in second in NH and got the nomination. Clinton spent a full year going around to small groups of large donors, rather than try to appeal to the broad public. He took that money he raised and used it to introduce himself to the public. I think that's exactly what Edwards is doing.

Time will tell if you're right or if I'm right.

[Nazgul35]

10. just a point...

Dean's biggest problem is most people do not know who he is...he has focused his attention on the states that are early in the primary season....and he has begun to build his meet up organization into professional campaign organizations (i.e. Oklahoma)...look for Dean's organization to be more developed in the early primary states...

If you look at the states he is going up in the polls in (a sign of greater name recognition...nothing more...) they are the states his campaign are focusing on...

[dsc]

14. In just a few months

Dean has quadrupled his support in national polls. (from 3 to 12). The only large state Dean has done anything in is California. Yet he has improved in Illionois, California and New York.

[killbotfactory]

11. Kerry has the same position on civil unions...

Winters will be in for a shock if he thinks Kerry is immune from the issue.

[blm]

17. Kerry doesn't define himself with that issue.

Dean didn't either when he first started running. He wouldn't even bring it up when he was speaking to groups and recounting his accomplishments in Vermont. Unless, of course, it was a gay group.

That all changed when the media defined him as a liberal and he tapped into the antiwar liberal support $$$. Now, Dean got the attention and support $$$ he couldn't get before.

If DU is any indication, the left is now enamoured of centrist politicians. Centrists are now pragmatists. They'll excuse any compromise with the GOP made by Dean as a brilliant decision. They are the neo-centrists.

[MercutioATC]

18. You say "centrist" as if it's a bad thing, blm...

Most of us "centrists" and "pragmatists" don't think so.

It's funny how one side trumpets that "Dean is too liberal to get elected" and the other insists that "Dean compromises with the right too much".

Might the truth be someplace in the middle?

[DrFunkenstein]

20. Centrism Means Never Having To Say You're Sorry

I don't know what that means, but it sounds kinda sarcastic, so that's good enough.

Is it possible that Dean is too liberal on the wrong issues, and too conservative on the other wrong issues? I mean, there is more than one policy to consider here.

Personally, I think Dean's a pretty good guy, I just think he's a little light in the boots, if you know what I mean.

I'm saying he's a queer. A hitler-loving queer. The gayest gay in all of gaydom.

[poskonig]

22. Rrrrrrright.

blm claims Dean is Bush-lite on gays, yet Kerry's "superior," more liberal position on homosexuals makes him immune from getting Dukakised.

:crazy:

[dsc]

24. Try again

I listened to a very early appearence of his on CSPAN to a general audience (in Iowa if I recall) he brought it up there.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

19. John Knowles, a Kerry supporter, has a problem with Dean?

I am shocked. Shocked I tell you.

[genius]

28. Bush will tear Dean apart.

Dean is the most inconsistent of all the candidates. Also his supporters have alienated so many people that most people will have difficulty bringing themselves to have anything to do with the guy.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

29. The most inconsistent?

"I voted for war, yet I'm against it."
"I voted for the Patriot Act, yet I'm for doing away with the Patriot Act."
"I'm against a $700b tax cut for the wealthy, yet $350b seems reasonable."