Just how err....mistaken are we?

[ludwigb]

I know we Democrats can be just as boneheaded as everybody else many a time, but please people. Enough is enough. I used to actually believe, despite all evidence, that the Democrats are not merely the party of the people, but the party of intellect. But my faith is shaken. According to Zogby, Dem voters believe John Kerry is "far and away the most electable" candidate. That's right, more electable than GENERAL Clark and charasmatic media icon Edwards.

What are these people smoking?

Ah....now I understand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or to restate my case, let me just quote a gleeful Republican.

http://38.144.96.23/tacitus/archives/001466.html#001466

Dear Democrats

Today many of you will have the opportunity to help select a man who stands a regrettably strong chance of becoming the next President of the United States. The probability is that most of you will eschew the charismatic Southerner(s) with mainstream appeal for a stodgy patrician Massachusetts man whose main appeal is to....well, people such as yourself. Questions: Do you think that people such as yourself are representative of Americans at large? Do you look back to a long history of national electoral success with old-line Northeastern liberals? Are you just running with the perceived winner, here, or is there a sincere decision that this guy is your heartfelt pick? Best of luck to you, and thanks for the South and West.

Sincerely,
Tacitus

[Dookus]

1. Just because people

disagree with you, doesn't mean they're stupid.

[ludwigb]

3. Come on....

it's a joke. Still I do believe Kerry supporters are mistaken, perhaps to the point of delusion.

[indigo32]

5. stupid may be too harsh a word

mistaken perhaps is a better word. But hey... I could be mistaken too.

[THUNDER HANDS]

2. I could tell you what I'm smoking

But the Feds might be watching. :smoke:

Speaking of which, it's almost 4:20....

BRB.

[Wetzelbill]

4. Wow, you should be a Kucinich supporter

[ludwigb]

6. Let's light it up!!!

We might as well start now. It'll be our consolation for the next 4 years....

That is, until Ashcroft comes closing in on us ;)

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

7. What is so hard to understand?

kerry has won 7 of the last 9 primaries. In a matchup with Bush if an election were held today, he would beat him hands down.

So, you are calling the majority of the voters so far stupid. Since they don't vote for YOUR candidate, they are obviously stupid. I see.

Maybe you are the one that needs a reality check.

[ludwigb]

8. Ok ok...

I'll change my heading....:)

[ulysses]

9. not much of a Kerry fan, but an answer nonetheless...

Questions: Do you think that people such as yourself are representative of Americans at large?

When Americans at large are given the full facts and are willing to think about the negative impacts of conservatism on their own lives, yes, I do.

[PurityOfEssence]

17. That's fantasyland. You couldn't have proven your opponent's case better

"willing to think about the negative impacts of conservatism"? America is good. We've already got it it right. Change is an insult to all that we stand for. What facts? We've already been told the facts. The economy's going great. We did the world a service by getting rid of Saddam. The poor are lazy and deserve it. The environment's there for us to do as we please. Corporations are godlike and should never be restrained. Social programs are theft. The womb is public property and messing with it is the murder of our future infantrymen who will save us from inferior and jealous cultures.

We have to fight an aggressive media war, and everyone's flocking to the worst of the three contenders. That's just plain crazy.

John Kerry said it himself: we're not electing a cabinet, we're electing a President. He sways many people when he's surrounded by firefighters and veterans, but he's going to have to stand toe-to-toe in a debate all by his little self.

To like Kerry takes some sense; many have none. I like the guy, but he's got a reserved persona that is simply not engaging for broad groups of the electorate.

At least it's not as big a mistake as Dean would have been, but it's incredibly frustrating when there's the star quality of John Edwards standing right there, ready to go.

[oasis]

10. America's fed up with Bush. A "Northeastern liberal" would be a

welcomed change.

[ludwigb]

14. well..

I can tell you don't live in Tejas, son.

[ramapo]

11. We'll see

Kerry is by no means my first choice candidate. I'm not sure that candidate exists. It would be a combination of Clark's experience and intellect; Edwards' charisma, speaking talent; Dean's guts in acting like a Democrat; Kuchinich's policies; Kerry's experience and war record; and Sharpton's wit.

Edwards would be beaten up as a big, bad trial lawyer with no experience, Dean a tempermental maniac, Clark a guy who didn't know if he was coming or going (repub or Dem, for or against Iraq).

Kerry has the qualifications. He's not charismatic but he'll do ok. So he's rich. So is Bush, Cheney, Rice, etc. Kerry will have to overcome the Northern Liberal label. Maybe he'll run as an American Patriot. Wouldn't that be novel. If he can't overcome what is essentially a meaningless label then he doesn't deserve to be President.

Now are some of us so stupid that we refuse to vote for Kerry and allow Bush a second term? That would be tragic.

[ludwigb]

12. Clark is the clear winner by nearly all of those criteria

Clark is a Vietnam war hero, without the animus of a substantial number of veterans who believe Kerry betrayed them in his remarks before Congress. Clark also has a refreshingly ordinary speaking manner (while also being arguably the greatest intellect of the field). He is begining to show some serious political cajones. And when it comes to the war on terrorism, Clark's experience is at least as good as Kerry's.

Clark is the candidate that can run as an American Patriot and make it stick. He is Rove's worst nightmare.

[mistertrickster]

13. The idea that one can read people's minds and decide who is

more "electable" ten months from now is really pretty silly.

I think Kerry is as electable as any of them. Dean seems to draw negative vibes like a magnet draws iron filings--too bad 'cause he's my candidate.

Edwards IS from the south and that's a plus because the south is so damn parochial they seem to only want to vote for one of "their own," but on the other hand, he's a first term TRIAL LAWYER, which is like everything conservatives hate about the 'nanny state.'

Clark is a fine man--I love it when he gives the media hell--but someone who has NEVER held public office doesn't exactly have the electablity issue sewn up.

Plus both Edwards and Clark are locked into federal matching funds, which has been widely debated on these boards, but face reality, it's not a plus for electablity. If it were, Bush would be doing it.

[goodhue]

15. Dem voters believe Kerry is most electable

because Kerry is winning the most elections.
Its no deeper than that.

[Westegg]

16. "Question: Do you think that people such as yourself ...

....are representative of Americans at large?"

Um, yeah, actually. At least, I certainly hope so. And am I just "running with the perceived winner"? No, actually. Isn' t the "perceived winner" George W. Bush?

[Moderator]

18. Locking.......

1. If you start a thread in this forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. The moderators have the sole authority to decide whether a thread topic is inflammatory.



DU Moderator