|
Edited on Thu Oct-13-05 05:54 PM by desi826
Dolstein wrote:
"I do. Michael Dukakis, a bloodless technocrat to be sure, but hardly a flaming wild-eyed liberal, was nonetheless transformed in the eyes of the electorate into a card carrying member of the ACLU."
Being a member of the ACLU is not subversive in anyway. They are an organization that stands up for everyone's (including Dick Armey's and Rush Limbaugh's) civil rights.
"Suddenly, the election wasn't about competence, it was about values, and Michael Dukakis was found lacking."
See I remember that differently. All I remember hearing is the guy was an idiot. Much like Dan Quayle."
"Same thing in 2004. John Kerry's distinguished service in Vietnam wasn't enough to protecting him against the liberal label."
Kerry didn't lose because of the "liberal" label.
Kerry, NOT Bush, got the majority of moderate Repub votes.
To the tune of 54% to 45%
Not bad for a guy who was tagged as the "most liberal man in the Senate".
Kery lost because of three things: the MAIN one being vote fraud.
A failure to adequately defend himself against a bunch of open Republican liars
And his failure to reconcile an earlier decision on Iraq with his then present one.
But make no mistake, Liberal had nothing to do with it.
"It shouldn't come as any surprise that both Dukakis and Kerry, who opposed the death penalty (Kerry tried to flip flop, saying he supported it for terrorists, but nobody took him seriously) lost their presidential races, whereas Bill Clinton, who strongly supported the death penalty, won."
Oh come on, dolstein, the death penalty issue doesn't make or break a Presidential election. Maybe a District Attorney election, but not President.
Dukakis and Kerry didn't "lose" their elections based solely on this issue anymore than Clinton won on it.
"There's a reason why the Republicans keep going back to the same playbook"
Yeah, cause they don't have any new ideas
"seeking to brand each and every Democrat they run against as an out-of-touch liberal. It's a very effective strategy."
They may seek it, but the only reason why it is "effective" is because there are too many mealy mouthed Democrats in Washington. They allow Repubs to frame the debate and are constantly on the defensive instead of going on the offensive like they should.
If Dems didn't hide underneath their desks at the first sign of criticism and stood together and FOUGHT the Repubs, they would be unstoppable. Period.
"Most people won't vote for someone who doesn't share their values."
This is not absolute. Like I said, one of the reasons why some Indies will vote Repub is because said candidate says that they understand that Roe v. Wade is not to be messed with, even if they are Pro-Life.
Bernie Sanders has won consistently in a very red district of Vermont because though he has ideas that you would prolly call from the "loony left", he counters that with red meat economic populism and kitchen table issues. So though there are voters who's values may differ with his in certain areas, they offset that with the values that they argee with him on.
Another nuance that goes right over the head of Democratic leadership in Washington, thus leading to MORE Repubs winning elections.
"It doesn't matter how sincere Kaine's religious views are. Nor does it really matter that he's pledged to enforce the existing law. The fact is he doesn't believe in the death penalty, whereas a sizable majority of Virginians do . . . strongly."
And this is STILL no different than ALL of the Bushies. Do you want to go through all of the questionable things they DO believe in that runs opposite to what the majority of the people in this country do? But they are still trusted that when push comes to shove they will uphold the law. Period. This is expected of them.
In this respect, Kilgore is no different.
They get the pass, why doesn't he?
"Kilgore is going to keep hammering away on this point for the rest of the campaign because he knows that once people begin to doubt whether Kaine shares their values, they'll stop paying attention to the economic issues Kaine wants to campaign on."
A smart move because it will also allow him to avoid Kerry's downfall which was not vigorously defending himself against untrue Repub charges thereby giving the impression of weakness.
"The fact is that Kaine is more liberal than the electorate of Virginia. We was able to squeak by four years ago party on the strength of Mark Warner and party due to mounting frustration with the incumbent Republican administration. But Warner isn't on the ballot, the Republicans have been out of the state house for four years and people pay a lot more attention to the governor's race than they do lieutenant governor."
None of this makes a spit of difference or the race wouldn't be a dead heat this late in the game. You talk as if the guy is trailing the guy by 20 points; it's a dead heat. If the Repub is turning ugly, it's because he CAN'T break away or win on the issues, i.e. "Kilgore is too liberal for the state of Virginia" So now he has to launch a smear campaign to win.
But my point is still as long as he defends himself agressively, this charge is not the fatal blow others are making it out to be.
Des
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
