Call me weird but I trust people from inside washington who run for pres

[JohnKleeb]

more than outsiders. Hey its true, at least you know where they have stood, and they aren't all rhetoric. This is probably why I would have supported someone other than Carter in the '76 primaries or someone other htan Clinton in '92. Yes, I am weird. Kerry on :).

[ginnyinWI]

1. I used to think all the D.C. types were corrupt

Too many years in office, too many temptations to take kick-backs, etc. Kind of like my fat-cat representative, Sensenbrenner! LOL.

Anyway, then I discovered John Kerry, and my faith in Washington insiders was restored! He is the Real Deal--can't anyone convince me otherwise! :loveya:

People like Dean just didn't have the political experience to survive the big-time politics of a presidential race. That's why he went down in the primaries. These days you gotta have friends and connections and experience and saavy.

[JohnKleeb]

2. I think Dean had ok experience

I personally found it amusing to see Clark people being hte most questioning of Edwards experience during the vetting because Clark while he is a very smart guy, Rhodes Scholar and all had no government experience, and Edwards had more by comparsion, I found that funny. I dont get why I trust em more so but I think its because at least I know what to sorta expect. With an "outsider" like Dean or Clark, you don't know what to expect, its all rhetoric and heresay, thats my opinion, people can disagree or agree, but it is probably another reason why I didnt feel right about those two. No offense to anyone.

[ginnyinWI]

5. I'm reading the Paul Alexander book right now

and he keeps mentioning how Dean kept saying and doing things that turned people off--like he didn't have enough political sense to keep himself in check. And how when you are on TV you need to tone yourself down, or you look like a raving idiot, because how you come across on the screen. Stuff like that. I'm sure he's a sincere guy, but just wasn't savvy enough. I hope he'll do better if he makes DNC chair.

[JohnKleeb]

6. I have that book, read baout Cleland and Kerry yet?

[ginnyinWI]

8. yup

It's a good book--for anyone who hasn't read it--a lot of personal incidents and stories about JK and THK and everyone. It is sad to read when I read about how much he wanted to help everyone as president. :(

[LittleClarkie]

9. And yet some Dean folk can't accept that Dean lost

and it wasn't "stolen" from him, necessarily. I really hate the "Kerry and electronic fraud" speculations we get sometimes.

What's the name of that Paul Alexander book, if I may ask?

[JohnKleeb]

10. The Candidate

is the name.

[whometense]

14. That was always my sense of him too.

A loose cannon. Good guy, but a loose cannon. Do you think that quality is what appealed to the young Deaniacs? I'm still trying to figure that one out.

[JohnKleeb]

17. I don't know, I think it was the anti war that appealed to many

No offense to elshiva who I can tell really does admire the signing of the civil unions bill. I doubt it's that quality in particular, I think the main thing that attracted them was his opposition to the war to be honest here, I know that's shallow but I just can't see some of the most ethuisatic supporters of Dean being that if you take away his attiude on the war. If Kerry had voted against the war resolution, he'd be a lot more popular here on DU, thats for damn sure.

[whometense]

18. I guess that's true.

It's just that his antiwar stance was so facile - it cost him absolutely nothing.

[JohnKleeb]

19. Yeah I know

It was a nice stance to take but it didn't hurt him politically or make him risk losing office.

[elshiva]

3. Yes, Kerry on,

but still I think outsiders can be good if they are governors. Being a governor is sorta like being a mini-president. I am still a Deaniac and think Dean would have made a great president. He'll be a great DNC chair.

I would have supported Carter, but I hadn't been born yet. I love Jimmy Carter.

That all said, I think a Congressperson or Senator could be a better president than a general. The good thing about an insider is he knows the government. I think Kerry understood alot more about how the government works and the duty of the office than Bush. (That's not saying much, though.)

[JohnKleeb]

4. of course, outsiders can be fine

I just like someone with experience in Washington, because they understand the atmosphere better. Roosevelt in 1932 was considered outside DC but he had actually been FDR's undersecretary of the navy, and was in many ways during the first world war, the real sec of the navy. Outsiders can be a big help, Carter was for sure helped by the fact that he was an outsider.

[ginnyinWI]

7. Carter's time was a backlash against Watergate

We were coming away from Watergate and Nixon, and Ford was tainted as well, being the VP. So people wanted a change big-time. Public confidence in Washington was about zero, after the Vietnam war, Watergate, and a few smaller scandals (Agnew had to resign, etc.) The whole thing absolutely stunk!!
So Carter comes along, and he has this southern accent, and is so refreshingly NOT a Washington insider nor a Republican, so people went for him. He didn't get along so well once he was in the White House, because he wouldn't play all of their games--they were at a loss as to how to handle him. He was a good guy, but only lasted one term--too straight and honest I guess.

But governors are popular picks as presidential candidates.
Carter, Reagan, Clinton, GWB were all governors. Bush I got in because he was Reagan's VP.

[paulk]

11. If you look back over recent history, all the "outsiders" elected

as President recently have had a pretty rough time of it in their first year or two. Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush the younger - they didn't understand how to get things done in Washington and paid a price for it. Well, actually - America paid a price for Bush's fuck-up - 9/11.

I remember at the time of the 2000 election I worked with three other people - two that voted for Bush and one who voted for Nader. I was trying to talk them into voting for Gore and my main argument was that, because of international terrorism, America, "didn't have the luxury of a learning curve" when it came to Bush.

[JohnKleeb]

12. Ive noticed that too

Watergate is what IMO started the outsider phemenon, up to that point last century, we had elected mostly insiders, read Truman, Kennedy, Johnson.

[paulk]

16. watergate started it - america's distrust of government

it can be gratifying to bash politicians
but there is something to be said for experience

if you owned a large company
would you hire the janitor to be CEO?

would you hire an ex cokehead alcoholic fratboy governor, in a state where the poition is largely ceremonial, who'd failed at everything he'd tried in life and would probably be living in a jail cell if it wasn't for his family connections-

would you hire him to be president of the USA?

whoops

[ginnyinWI]

13. and you were so right!

Gore would have continued on with Clinton's anti-terrorism work, and we would have been so much better off. Might have even prevented the attacks on the twin towers, who knows.

[paulk]

15. I was not surprised at all when 9/11 happened

I expected another attack would be made sooner or later - the only thing that surprised me was how successful it was - and that can be tied directly to the incompetence of the Bush administration.

Who was promptly turned into a hero by the media.

I suppose it's natural and even desirable for the media to "prop" up our leader in a situation like that, especially since he was obviously so unqualified for the job - but - enough already! Been there, done that!

they haven't stopped propping him up!


:mad: