Is Kerry right or wrong on this issue?

[politicasista]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1004279

I know it's just spin, but I was trying to talk about this the other night, but it didn't come out right. :shrug:

[fedupinBushcountry]

1. It is spin

and the fact is that Kerry said the same thing in the primaries as did Dean.

EOM.

[politicasista]

3. And he is focusing more on diversity now than then?

Am I missing something? :shrug:

[Mass]

6. He has always been focusing on diversity (real diversity that is)

but may be he did not imply the big wigs enough for their taste?

[politicasista]

9. I know Kerry is focusing on it, but I thought....

Dean maybe now cause he is DNC chairman.

[ProSense]

8. And for the record

here is one of the recent legislation co-sponsored:

DECEPTIVE PRACTICES AND VOTER INTIMIDATION PREVENTION -- (Senate - November 10, 2005)
GPO's PDF

--- Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I proudly join as a cosponsor of Senator Obama's Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act of 2005. This important legislation will protect voters from the deceptive practices that aimed to keep them from the polls on election day.

Free and fair elections are the foundation of our democracy--a democracy built on the unassailable principle that every single American should have an equal say in their government. No American should ever approach their polling place in fear. No American should ever worry that they will somehow be penalized for exercising their fundamental right to vote . No American should ever be tricked into thinking they do not have the right to vote .

The Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevent Act takes great strides towards ensuring that no American will ever be denied the right to vote . It both criminalizes deceptive practices and provides affected individuals with a private right of action. It prevents the negative effects of deceptive practices by ensuring voters get accurate election information. It also requires the Attorney General to report allegations of deceptive practices, the actions taken to correct them, and any prosecutions resulting from those allegations.

We have worked hard to bring fair and free elections to people around the word-including the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. We must do everything in our power to ensure that our own elections are at least as fair and as free.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2005_record&page=S12679&position=all

S.1975
Title: A bill to prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack (introduced 11/8/2005) Cosponsors (4)
Related Bills: H.R.4463
Latest Major Action: 11/8/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COSPONSORS(4), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)
Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham - 12/12/2005
Sen Feingold, Russell D. - 12/12/2005
Sen Kerry, John F. - 11/10/2005
Sen Leahy, Patrick J. - 12/12/2005

[politicasista]

10. Thanks n/t

[fedupinBushcountry]

2. Read

Will Pitt's reply on that thread it sums it up pretty well.

[politicasista]

4. Thanks I will n/t

[Mass]

7. It is excellent.

[Mass]

5. spin and historically false

Clinton, for example, did not win the nomination in IA and NH, but much later in the South.

However, IA and NH allow candidates who do not have a lot of money to campaign and send their message, and who knows, may be win the nomination for president or VP.

Without IA and NH (or states like that) candidates like Kucinich or Sharpton could not run. They would be dead before the context even started. And it would probably have been the same for Edwards.

The issue is not black vs white here. It is big states vs small states. Imagine you start the nomination process in NY or CA, it would only be a money race, with the person who can buy the most ads winning. No town meetings, no meetings in living rooms, no contacts with real people.

[karynnj]

13. I agree - if anything the people who seem to get the least say

are the huge majority of Democrats on the 2 coasts(ignoring the 2 small states of DE and NH) and Illinois. Many southern and rural states vote before them. Also, from the last 2 elections, Iowa and NH are purple. There's something to be said in picking a candidate - not based on the blue or red states but purple ones.

All these states voted before March 3 in 2004. Iowa, New Hampshire, Arizona, Delaware, Missouri, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Michigan, Washington, Maine, Tennessee, Virginia, Dist. of Columbia, Nevada, Wisconsin, Hawaii, and Utah. Winning NH and Iowa was good, but look at the next 6 states (all on the next election day), they are not hospitable to a New Englander. If anything the states missings are the big solid core Democratic states. If Kerry weren't so much better than the others, he wouldn't have dominated on that day. If Edwards were a stronger candidate he could easily have, like Clinton in 1992 have swept these mostly rural, southern or southwestern states.

[wisteria]

11. This is absolute bull sh*t and to try and spin it this way is nasty.

I wouldn't be surprised if this little "suggestion" didn't originate within the DNC itself. All of Senator Kerry's efforts on behalf of minorities serve to discredit this crap for what it is. His integrity on the issue of fairness in voting should not even be questioned.

I agree with him on this and I fail to see what other states like Alabama or W. Virginia could actually offer in contrast. We are suppose to vote our principles not our fears and prejudices.

[politicasista]

12. I wasn't trying to spin it n/t

:shrug:

[wisteria]

14. I wasn't refering to you, I am sorry if you misunderstood me. I

was suggesting other people were nasty for making race an issues out of Kerry's opinion.

[politicasista]

15. It's all good n/t