# Democrats -- No Winners?? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 28, 2004, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526 "2004-04-28T17:51:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![ghuff1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/0ea827/32.png) [@ghuff1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ghuff1)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/41 "2004-04-28T20:44:32Z")
> [@rockle](#): > > Personally, the word _I’d_ use begins with “T.” But YMMV. > > Pardon the repetition, but, uh, _cite?_ I didn’t read anything in this thread to suggest that. Mostly what I’ve read is you flying off half-cocked, and other people trying to figure out what the heck you’re talking about. What _exactly_ are you debating here? > > Whom would you recommend instead of Kerry or Dean? Who do you think can “actually win”? And how can you say these are “bad” candidates? Apparently there are a lot of Democrats in this country who disagree with you, since somebody obviously voted for these people. > > Pardon my snark, but would you like a medal for that, or just a chest to pin it on? (Reference to Sen. Kerry unfortunately unavoidable.) There’s not much of a debate here. Hell, I can’t even figure out the _question._ > > On preview … > > Excuse me, but WTF? I can defend Kerry outright on the basis of one thing alone: he isn’t GWB. (Two things, if I can count that he doesn’t look like a chimp in a suit when he gives a public address.) I am brutally honest with myself. He’s not my Malibu Barbie Dream Candidate[sup]TM[/sup], no, but he’s not the worst possible candidate either. > > Seriously, dude, what are you talking about? If you just want a bunch of random assorted Kerry-bashing, maybe you should check out the Pit. This was a great post. ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/42 "2004-04-28T20:44:57Z")
> [@Starving Artist](#): > > I get so furshlugginer tired of these kinds of comments. Think what you will about Bush, but he’s not a dumbass, he’s not a moron, he’s not an idiot, he’s not a knukkle-dragging mouth-breather, etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum. \*Anyone \* who gets a Bachelor’s Degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard is not dumb. Facts 1. He acts and talks like a moron 2. He got a Bachelor’s Degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard Even though I know Yale and Harvard have a good reputation, I’m not sure if it is possible for morons to graduate from there. So there is some uncertainty there. But, I can actually see with my own eyes that he acts and talks like a moron, and, as they say, seeing is believing. So, faced with 1) and 2), I would say that the most probable conclusion is that he is, indeed, a moron. Corollary: it is possible for morons to graduate from Yale and Harvard. ---
**Author:** ![ghuff1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/0ea827/32.png) [@ghuff1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ghuff1)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/43 "2004-04-28T20:46:12Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > Facts > > 1. He acts and talks like a moron > 2. He got a Bachelor’s Degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard > > Even though I know Yale and Harvard have a good reputation, I’m not sure if it is possible for morons to graduate from there. So there is some uncertainty there. > > But, I can actually see with my own eyes that he acts and talks like a moron, and, as they say, seeing is believing. > > So, faced with 1) and 2), I would say that the most probable conclusion is that he is, indeed, a moron. > > Corollary: it is possible for morons to graduate from Yale and Harvard. Answer: Yes. ---
**Author:** ![rockle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/73ab20/32.png) [@rockle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rockle)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/44 "2004-04-28T20:52:24Z")
> [@ghuff1](#): > > This was a great post. Was I just “whooshed”? ---
**Author:** ![ghuff1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/0ea827/32.png) [@ghuff1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ghuff1)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/45 "2004-04-28T21:04:36Z")
> [@rockle](#): > > Was I just “whooshed”? What do you mean by whooshed? I seriously think that was an excellent post. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/46 "2004-04-28T21:21:35Z")
> [@ghuff1](#): > > What do you mean by whooshed? I seriously think that was an excellent post. I believe he’s surprised that you would agree so wholeheartedly with a post that discredited all of your posts in this thread. “Whoosh” refers to someone not getting a joke - thus, “whoosh” is sound of the joke going over your head. ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/47 "2004-04-28T21:41:16Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Maybe it’s because the Democratic party is more concerned about reasoning and intelligence and issues, and less about picking a candidate with a voter-friendly “aw shucks” veneer? Dammit, rjung, if you wanted to talk about the Bizzaro topic again, [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=19915&highlight=bizzaro](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=19915&highlight=bizzaro) you should have started a new thread, not hijacked this one. Only in bizzaro land could anyone say **any** politician was concerned with “reasoning and intelligence” - I mean, at least with a straight face. People concerned with reasoning and intelligence don’t tend to get elected in this country (maybe any) since scruples are a barrier to polical advancement. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![rockle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/73ab20/32.png) [@rockle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rockle)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/48 "2004-04-28T21:54:02Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > I believe **he’s** surprised that you would agree so wholeheartedly with a post that discredited all of your posts in this thread. (Bolding mine.) Ahem. _ **She.** _😉 Carry on, then. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/49 "2004-04-28T22:03:11Z")
[QUOTE=ghuff1] What facts are you talking about?? [quote] “If the Dems lose” will be fact if they do end up losing. > [@](#): > > And, I think they’re both morons. Well at least you’re an equal opportunity expounder of contentless statements… ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/50 "2004-04-28T22:45:56Z")
Wow, that was some seriously bad coding. Ahem… > [@ghuff1](#): > > What facts are you talking about?? “If the Dems lose” will be a fact if they do end up losing. I which case you might want to reconsider who is the idiot. > [@](#): > > And, I think they’re both morons. Well at least you’re an equal opportunity expounder of contentless statements… ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/51 "2004-04-28T23:27:38Z")
> [@elfkin477](#): > > Only in bizzaro land could anyone say **any** politician was concerned with “reasoning and intelligence” - I mean, at least with a straight face. People concerned with reasoning and intelligence don’t tend to get elected in this country (maybe any) since scruples are a barrier to polical advancement. :smack: Wow, and I thought I was cynical. 😉 I never said Kerry was a saint who washed the feet of lepers and donated his wife’s fortunes to charity, but from where I’m sitting, it’s blindingly obvious that John Kerry could out-think, out-analyze, and out-reason George W. Bush any day of the week. Then again, that’s a fairly low bar to reach, given that Bush has admitted he doesn’t bother to follow the news and doesn’t like reading large books – which might be acceptable if you’re striving to be a slacker, but not a desirable characteristic for a PotUS. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2004, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/52 "2004-04-28T23:33:34Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > …and doesn’t like reading large books … You mean like those **large** coffeetable books? Yeah, they’re just too heavy to hold for very long. 🙂 It’s the \*\*long \*\* ones that give us all so much trouble… ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2004, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/53 "2004-04-29T00:59:14Z")
> [@](#): > > Facts > > 1. He acts and talks like a moron > 2. He got a Bachelor’s Degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard You forgot: 1. He scored roughly the same on his SATs as Al Gore. 2. He scored very highly on his Officer’s exam, including scoring in the top 5% of all officer candidates on the ‘leadership’ test. 3. He managed to graduate from fighter pilot school, was considered to be one of the top pilots in his squadron, and was considered by other pilots to be ‘the smart one’. 4. He managed to beat a popular incumbent governor of Texas, and then win re-election in a landslide. 5. He beat Al Gore twice in the Presidential debates. 6. He rose to become the most powerful man in the world. Against this evidence, we have, well, the fact that he’s not very confident speaking off-the-cuff in public, and he has a Texas drawl. This, to a nuanced, deep-thinking Democrat, is proof that GWB is ‘stupid’, and all the other stuff is just an unexplainable anomaly. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2004, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/54 "2004-04-29T01:03:45Z")
But speaking of stupid… John Kerry does not strike me as one of the sharpest knives in the drawer. He got his ass routinely kicked in the Democratic debates against people like Dennis Kucinich and Howard Dean. His legislative record is paper thin, and after graduation he went to Boston College to study law instead of Harvard or Yale. Every time I hear him speak he hurts himself with unforced errors, like he did in that softball interview with Chris Matthews a few days ago. I’ve never heard him say a single thing that was insightful or deep. So, where are Kerry’s SAT scores and his college grades? Since we’ve picked George Bush’s to death, how come we don’t have Kerry’s to compare them to? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2004, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/55 "2004-04-29T01:06:04Z")
**rjung** said: > [@](#): > > where I’m sitting, it’s blindingly obvious that John Kerry could out-think, out-analyze, and out-reason George W. Bush any day of the week Would you like to make a friendly wager on that? Here’s what I propose: After the presidential debates, if Bush is not perceived as the winner I will post a thread on the SDMB with the title, “George Bush is a stupid moron.” If Kerry is perceived as the loser, you post a thread “John Kerry is a stupid moron.” ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2004, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/56 "2004-04-29T01:43:59Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Wow, and I thought I was cynical. 😉 I prefer to think of it as pragmatism. 🙂 However, given a dozen or so years ago one of my English teachers declared me “The most cynical 15-year-old [she’d] ever met,” and nothing has made my views any rosier since then I suppose you’re not off the mark… ah well, I guess some of us never went through that idealist phase. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2004, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/57 "2004-04-29T02:05:21Z")
> [@ghuff1](#): > > The Democratic Party produced one of the greatest politicians in history…Bill Clinton. Immediately following him they can’t find a competant enough person to run for president. Everyone knows why Al Gore lost. Everyone also knows Howard Dean was their supposed savior until he acted like a complete psychotic on national television. Now they place someone who is most likely going to be excommunicated by his church, throws medals/ribbons away in protest, and not to mention his voting record. Is it that hard to find someone that’s not such an easy target? This should’ve been the easiest election year for Democrats in recent history. They’re running against a complete moron and are probably going to lose. > > BTW…I was a Kerry supporter until I actually reviewed his voting record. The only excuse his voting record that I’ll accept is that someone was buying his vote. If they weren’t then he’s dumber than GW. Either way his voting record lost my vote. Since you’ve apparently decided that when someone asks a question, a mere judgements of the post’s greatness is an acceptable answer, let me just say that this was not a great post and leave it at that. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2004, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/58 "2004-04-29T03:43:00Z")
> [@Binarydrone](#): > > We should probably talk about this. The fact is that Bush is perceived by many as dumb. This is (as far as I can tell) because his public speaking skills are horrid, he does not seem particularly knowledgeable about much and because he makes a lot of weird faces. In other words, he looks and acts stupid. > > So, is this where we get in to some kind of debate about the different kinds of intelligence? Like he was good at reading textbooks and taking tests but just has a weird looking face and poor public speaking skills? > > I am willing to entertain the notion, but want to be sure that is what you are saying. I will repeat something I said in another thread a month or two ago. I believe Bush suffers from what I call “Warren Beatty” syndrome. I believe most people here would acknowledge that Warren Beatty is a very intelligent, talented and accomplished person…but put a microphone in front of him and he stutters and stammers and acts like a fool. Donald Trump even spoke about it when Beatty was contemplating running for president. Trump said he’d never seen anyone have such a difficult time speaking publicly. I wondered about this for a long time and finally read an article about Beatty where among other things he addressed this. He said that he’d always been uncomfortable doing interviews and speaking publicly because of how acutely aware he was that every word he said could be taken out of context or twisted around into something he never said or meant, and that this awareness made him so guarded and stifled by trying to anticipate every possible permutation of anything he said that he had trouble forming a coherent sentence. I think in Bush’s case, he is so acutely aware of the consequences of the election this fall and its impact on world events, and that he faces such an openly hostile press absolutely faunching at the bit for him to admit “some” sort of error that they can exploit in his opponent’s favor, that he appears to be struck dumb when in fact he’s considering so many things simultaneously while at the same time under pressure to say _something_ that he appears nervous and uneasy and even dumb when he’s actually far from it. But having said that, given that this board is dedicated to “fighting ignorance” and that so many of its members pride themselves on their intelligence, it surprises me that so many of the posters to these forums continue to portray Bush as some sort of moron, when his educational acheivements, for the most part, far outdistance those of their own. If you disagree with his policies that’s one thing…but claiming he’s dumb or a moron only shows the ignorance and/or bias of those making the claim. ---
**Author:** ![iamme99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/57b2e6/32.png) [@iamme99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamme99)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2004, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/59 "2004-04-29T07:53:55Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > You forgot: > > 1. He scored roughly the same on his SATs as Al Gore. > 2. He scored very highly on his Officer’s exam, including scoring in the top 5% of all officer candidates on the ‘leadership’ test. > 3. He managed to graduate from fighter pilot school, was considered to be one of the top pilots in his squadron, and was considered by other pilots to be ‘the smart one’. > 4. He managed to beat a popular incumbent governor of Texas, and then win re-election in a landslide. > 5. He beat Al Gore twice in the Presidential debates. > 6. He rose to become the most powerful man in the world. > > Against this evidence, we have, well, the fact that he’s not very confident speaking off-the-cuff in public, and he has a Texas drawl. This, to a nuanced, deep-thinking Democrat, is proof that GWB is ‘stupid’, and all the other stuff is just an unexplainable anomaly. Sam, I don’t know where you get your figures from, but they are incorrect. If you did some research, it would help your case a lot better. Below are some excerpts from [LINK](http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2003/01/dreier-p-01-27.html) (I’ve made some selective highlighting): > [@](#): > > \*\*Presidential Legacy > Bush’s stance on affirmative action belies a student who received some conspicuous legs up. \*\* > > By Peter Dreier > Web Exclusive: 1.27.03 > > President George W. Bush was an affirmative-action beneficiary, at Yale University and then at Harvard Business School… > > Bush was admitted to Yale in 1964 under an affirmative-action policy for children of alumni – what colleges call a “legacy” system. Legacy preferences still exist, of course, at most selective schools, including Michigan and Yale. But they no longer carry quite the same weight they did at schools such as Yale, Princeton University and Harvard University when Bush was applying to colleges in 1964. > > The president never released his high-school grades from Andover – an elite New England prep school that his father had also attended – or his SAT scores. But several years ago, The New Yorker got hold of Bush’s Yale records and discovered that he scored a 566 on the verbal SAT and a 640 on the math SAT – 180 points below the median score for his Yale classmates. > > … > > **But Bush’s Yale transcript shows that he was a C student. He got particularly poor grades in political science and economics.** In his freshman year – the only year for which The New Yorker obtained rankings – Bush was in the 21st percentile of his class. In other words, 79 percent of the students had better grades than he did. Indeed, when he gave a speech at Yale’s 2001 commencement ceremony, he joked, “To the C students I say, you, too, can be president of the United States.” > > Bush has never released his GMAT scores. During the five years between his graduation from Yale in 1968 and his application to Harvard Business School in 1973, he had no obvious career trajectory or major accomplishments. > > … > > During this five-year period, Bush served part time in the Texas National Guard. And even his acceptance to the National Guard’s pilot-training program required special treatment. **Bush scored only 25 percent on a pilot-aptitude test, the lowest acceptable grade.** Nevertheless, commanders of the Texas Guard, aware that Bush’s father was then a U.S. congressman from Texas, swore W. in as an airman the same day he applied. > > In 1973 he was discharged from the National Guard in order to enter Harvard Business School. By that time, Bush had already been rejected in his home state by the University of Texas’ law school because of his lackluster performance at Yale. So when the admissions directors at Harvard Business School looked at Bush’s transcript and application, they must have seen something that allowed them to take a chance on an applicant who could charitably be labeled an “at-risk” student. (And it probably wasn’t that he’d been president of his fraternity, Delta Kappa Epsilon, known as the hardest-drinking jock house at Yale.) > > … > > Bush, a mediocre student, got into Andover, Yale, Harvard Business School and the Texas National Guard’s pilot-training program because he was rich and well-connected. His subsequent business career – including his early efforts to start an oil company, the financial favoritism that allowed him to buy part of the Texas Rangers baseball team with hardly any of his own money, the political favoritism that allowed him to persuade the city of Arlington, Texas, to subsidize a new stadium – was due in large part to his family and social connections. These connections laid the groundwork for Bush to enter politics and helped catapult him to the presidency. > > … And to close this out, a surprising on-topic comic: [Boondocks](http://images.ucomics.com/comics/bo/2004/bo040428.gif) ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2004, 10:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526/60 "2004-04-29T10:18:01Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] You forgot: 1. He scored roughly the same on his SATs as Al Gore. [QUOTE] Cite please? In any case, it’s known that SATs don’t test intelligence, but apt > [@](#): > > 1. He scored very highly on his Officer’s exam, including scoring in the top 5% of all officer candidates on the ‘leadership’ test. Cite please? Also, what does the officer’s exam test exactly? > [@](#): > > 1. He managed to graduate from fighter pilot school, was considered to be one of the top pilots in his squadron, and was considered by other pilots to be ‘the smart one’. - Cite please? - \*\*iamme99’\*\*s response seems to dispute your assertions - Being considered ‘the smart one’ by other pilots hardly seems to be an indicator of intelligence. > [@](#): > > 1. He managed to beat a popular incumbent governor of Texas, and then win re-election in a landslide. How does winning an election make you smart? He most likely will get re-elected President, but that is no proof that he is smart. Surely you must agree that intelligence is not a pre-requisite to getting elected to any office, with all the advisors each politician has, with the sound-byte-crazy media and public, and with all the attack ads form both sides. > [@](#): > > 1. He beat Al Gore twice in the Presidential debates. I don’t agree with this assesment. The expectations of him were so low, that simply by not making a fool of himself, the stupid media (who shamelessly focused on such important issues as “how much makeup Gore was wearing”) claimed that he did great. > [@](#): > > 1. He rose to become the most powerful man in the world. As I said above, winning an election is no proof of intelligence. Also, if it wasn’t for those stupid butterfly ballots in Florida, he would not be President today, so he is President due only to a random election-time quirk, to say nothing of the Supreme Court’s role in all of this. Any other facts you’d like to bring up? Up to now, the only possible indicators that I see are that he was accepted and graduated from Yale and Harvard, and I have already mentioned that I don’t know whether it is possible for someone to ‘coast’ at these places, though I assume it is possible. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-no-winners/242526.md?page=4)