did dean lose when saddam was caught ? wasn't that the real

[diamond14]

downward spiral of the 'angry man' campaign?...

the last few weeks, it seems that dean cannot find a message...his original 'saddam' message chimed with many Americans....Kerry avoided that message completely, certain that saddam would be caught...

while Kerry stayed out of the muck....dean fell right into it and based his whole campaign on it...

Kerry is a shrewd campaigner...Dean falls into big holes of his own making....


Go Kerry
http://www.JohnKerry.com

[DuctapeFatwa]

1. It definitely did not help him to directly contradict the regime

Kerry takes great pains to keep the focus on why he is the best person to run the occupation and implement current US foreign policy.

Dean tried to do that, but people don't want to hear that the world is not safer because of bush, and he gave the impression that he did not support the president.

I don't think voters will have that perception of Kerry.

[Melodybe]

2. ARG!!!! You are already spewing the media's lies!

Dean lost b/c the media hates him, not b/c of Saddam (he is RIGHT about that) not b/c he is really angry (the media said that and trivialized the lies we were told and the pain we are feeling)! Clark didn't do better b/c the media called him crazy and suggested his campaign was completely dead all week long. Edwards won't win b/c they will stress the inexperienced lies.

Don't you see the only candidate where the negative things are actually true is KERRY!!! That is why he is the weakest candidate. His stump can not touch D/E/C. He is the blandest safest of all!!

[woofless]

3. The only one who lost anything when Sadam was caught

was Sadam. As far as I can see his "capture" has not changed a thing. No win for shrub and no loss for us. He is a non-issue. The only people who are touting it as some kind of victory are diehard Bushco uber alles.

Go Kerry

[Goldom]

4. Saddam's capture...

In chronological order, and in quick succession:

1. Saddam is caught
2. Dean claims "we are no safer" with Saddam in custody.
3. Kerry bashes Dean for this "absurd" claim
4. Minutes later, the terror alert goes UP to orange.
5. NO one points out that Dean was RIGHT

That right there has made me angrier toward Kerry than anything else...

[Melodybe]

5. Thank you!

[NewYorkerfromMass]

6. It certainly didn't help, and Dean compounded it with his reaction.

I think in the end that cost him some crucial support and began to turn things away from him.

[milkyway]

7. If so, then Dean lost for speaking the truth (which Kerry won't do).

I live in Manhattan with my wife and two kids. In the back of every person's mind, every day, is the idea that we could be attacked by terrorists. Parents, especially, have to deal with this. When Saddam was captured there was a lot of talk about it, of course, but not once did I ever hear anybody express any kind of relief that we were less likely to be targeted by terrorists now. Nobody ever thought to mention it because everybody knows it did not do a damn thing to make us safer. Howard Dean knew this and said so. John Kerry knew this also, but did not have the balls to tell the truth. I will not feel much safer with a President Kerry than I do with a President Bush. John Kerry is a follower. These times demand a leader.