Sez Who?

[bain_sidhe]

(Note to Mods... I know the title doesn't *exactly* indicate the content, but it certainly indicates the *theme* of the content, so I hope you'll let it stand! I'll edit it if you'd rather, though)

(_____) is unelectable!!!!!!!

Sez who?

Why is it that every time I come into GD 2004, I come in with the belief that any of our candidates (at least, the major ones) could win in November, and leave with the belief that NONE of our candidates could win in November. I'll tell you why: It's because so many people come in here to argue why some other candidate is "unelectable" instead of arguing why their candidate IS electable.

So, I'm taking on the fight against the "unelectable" meme, right here, right now. And, to demonstrate my sincerity, I'll do the other candidates before my own:

DEAN

He's got an out of control temper!

Oh, yeah? When was the last time you saw him punch somebody? What, never? Hmmm. Other than a stern insistence on taking his "turn" - after giving a disrupter three minutes to state his case - I haven't seen it. I'd argue I didn't see it then, either. Have you seen it? Has anybody?

He's peaked!

:eyes: What, again?

He's too liberal!

Have you read his record as Governor?

He's too moderate/conservative!

Then how come everybody keeps calling him liberal?

He waffles!

Only an idiot would refuse to change his mind when presented with evidence his original opinion was wrong.

GEPHARDT

Boring "old-style" pol.

My dad is a staunch Republican. And a retired factory-worker. And he loves Gephardt. Gephardt speaks "south" - important in flipping at least a couple of "red" states - but more importantly, he speaks "worker." I concede that he'd probably have the most money working against him, because he speaks for labor, and that scares the corporatists to no end. God forbid that workers should WIN a few battles. But, there are a LOT more workers than there are corporatists. And unions are PISSED. They'll work hard to get out the vote. The unions aren't so much a factor in the south, but non-union workers are getting beat up even worse than union workers are. Don't count him out.


KERRY

He ran a terrible early campaign, he hasn't got the campaign skills!

Have you checked his poll numbers in Iowa lately? Kerry has been "counted out" early in the race in almost every race he's been in. And yet, there he is, still representing Mass. in the U.S. Senate.

CLARK

He's a Republican!

No, he WAS an Independant who VOTED for Republicans in the past. So did a LOT of people in this country. He changed his mind, and he can change their mind too, by explaining why they *should* change in a way they can understand. I personally believe that, if he's the nominee, he will flip more states from Republican to Democrat than any of the other candidates would (not that all of them wouldn't flip *some* - just that he'd flip more). And in the electoral college, that's the name of the game. Besides, he's a Democrat. Says so right there on his (new) voter registration. ;-)

He's a PNAC plant!

:eyes: Yeah, that's why he says he's for a multilateral approach to international terrorism and other security matters instead of American Imperialism. That's why he wants to turn Iraq's infrastructure - INCLUDING THE OIL FIELDS - over to Iraqis, and take the "American face" off of the rebuilding efforts.

He was a lobbyist!

Yes, and his clients (for the most part) were the kind of new (and environmentally sound) technology companies we will NEED to create good-paying jobs in THIS country. The same kind of companies he touts as "engines of job creation for *this* country in his manufacturing security plan.

*******

Well, there's lots more unelectable arguments out there, but that's enough for a start. I hope other DUers to use this thread to argue *against* the "unelectability" argument being used on *their* candidate, rather than to counter my (or others') "anti-unelectable" arguments. I can't force others to abide by such a suggestion, but I certainly can urge that they do so.

So, what about your candidate? Why do people say he's unelectable, and how do you answer that?

[jmaier]

1. Nice post.

No one is 'unelectable' until they lose. :-)

[SheilaT]

2. I'm with you.

I have my own favorite candidate, and I'm convinced he's completely electable and hope desperately that he will get the nomination and then win the election.

But I think any of the four or five top guys absolutely can win the election. Especially if we all get behind him, whoever he is, the eventual nominee.

They all have negatives. And we're only fooling ourselves if we don't think this won't be the dirtiest possible campaign, with every weakness of the nominee exploited to its fullest.

It's crucial that we support the nominee wholeheartedly. The enemy is not another man hoping to be president, but Bush and the evil people who surround him.

[Padraig18]

3. GREAT post!

:hi:

[rucky]

4. Money is the only measureable indicator of electibility

and even that doesn't tell you much. ask Pete Huffington.

Everybody has pretty much the same chance of beating *. Even if Dean gets in, he'll still have a fraction of the cash that * does.

So how did Gray Davis do it? He was outspent in a big way his first election.

I'm thinking it had more to do with Pete Wilson than anything. he sucked & * sucks even worse. So the next most reliable factor may be Bush's approval ratings going into November.

[bain_sidhe]

5. Um... kick?

:kick:

[rucky]

7. Folks need time to adjust...

in our return to sanity & common sense.

[slinkerwink]

6. I was with you until the lobbyist part with Clark

His clients were not the new and environmentally sound technology companies---his major client was the Axicom company whose duty was to compile information on every woman, man, and child in America for the despicable Patriot Act.

[bain_sidhe]

8. Axicom actually *started*

as a Democratic mailing list.

From a more in-depth article on his "history" as a lobbyist than the ones you might have seen:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[e-mail]/msg109145.html

He was also becoming increasingly involved with Acxiom, which was founded in Little Rock as a Democratic mailing-list company and which is now one of the nation's largest database processors.

After the 2001 terror attacks, Acxiom, which had never before had a federal contract, discovered its computers had personal data on 11 of the 19 hijackers and sought the government's attention.

General Clark telephoned federal officials for Acxiom on a pro bono basis. By December he had joined the Acxiom board.

"Wes started making phone calls to people in the upper reaches of government," said Jerry Jones, Acxiom's legal counsel, "and then they started calling us."