So you considering exploiting the death of thousands of innocent Americans and the resulting fear of the rest being good politics? Come to think of it, you’re probably right. It’s reprehensible and disgusting, of course, but it works politically.
I’m sure you’re bursting with pride.
I thought this debate was all about people challenging GW for the election. 
Where did all this other stuff come from??
From elucidator
I thought one of the successful things the 'Pubs did at the last convention was to pretty much marginalize the dinasaur faction of the party. Isn’t that kind of why Pat Buchanan bolted from the party?? Isn’t the Bush government executing a fairly radical departure from traditions dinasaur conservativism…I thought thats were all that ‘neo-con’ stuff comes from.
I think you are still thinking of the Republicans in terms of their more radical factions, 'luci…and in the mean time, the 'Pubs have moved on, marginalized that faction in their party (paying lip service only), and attempted to capture the center…the non-aligned Independents and center Democrats and Republicans.
-XT
That’s open to some interpretation, Xt. From here it looks like they have taken the Trog Right for granted. After all, where are they going to go? But willingly and voluntarily, for the sake of principle, abandon some 10-15% of the voting population? Not on yer life.
As to the neo-cons “stuff”, Mr. Richard Perle…
" I can only conclude that the visceral anti-Americanism just runs deeper than any other set of values that is meaningful on the left and hence the obsession with and the disparagement of what they define as a neoconservative approach to international affairs."
Same shit, different mouth.
I suppose its open to interperatation, as you say. From my perspective, not being either a 'Pub or a consevative, it looked like what they were doing was to marginalize the old school right (as you say, where can they go?) while trying to approach the middle and the non-aligned. Perhaps this is an over simplification, or perhaps its a happy accident…it just seemed that way to me, from what little of the last 'Pub convention I saw on TV. Of the speakers I remember listening too, almost non of them spouted the same old bullshit that I remember earlier conventions.
I still don’t see anything on the horizon either in the Repubican party or and Independant that will hurt Bush or even make a fight of it though. If there is a split in the party over the old school right not getting what it wants or whatever, its not going to be a huge factor in THIS election…thats trouble thats still down the road. Maybe 2008. In the mean time, there is no Perot to swipe votes from the 'Pubs, and I would be extremely surprised if anyone IN the Republican party even bothers to run against Bush…just not going to happen IMO.
-XT
Probably so. But any scenario that would cause Karl Rove to wake up screaming is just short of Heaven.
Not Gov. Dean, his first activist SCOTUS appointee; Judge Napoleon Jones Jr. (should he win in 04).
[
](http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20031219-9999_7m19boys.html)
So your logic is that you want to vote for someone who will win ?
Hell, I’m gonna write in Billy-boy’s name again. Nobody said nothin’ about non-consecutive terms in that amendment, right?
Shoot…it does say “no more than twice”…
You’re right, it is a loaded word. I think I know how to avoid that problem.
Hey, that’s right, nothing stopping anybody from writing in John McCain or whoever.
Of course, except for the Kodos “That’s right, THROW your vote away!” factor.
Dean is starting to subtly annoy me but I still won’t vote for Bush because of it (and it’s the principles, I don’t have this visceral hatred of the guy that is getting almost comical to me sometimes). I wish there was a Rockefeller Republican out there, because I voted for Bloomberg with no qualms and am generally happy with him. I know this puts me in a tiny minority, but as a white girl living in the Bronx I’m used to that. 
Neither one of them? Sure is a relief to hear that from at least some of the hard right.
To the OP: There’s an old saying that “You can’t beat somebody with nobody.” Who’s the somebody who can beat the somebody? Only McCain?
Goes for those calling Dean a bad candidate for the Dems - gotta say who’d be better, and why. Doesn’t get that far, usually.
From ElvisL1ves
IMO, Lieberman is a much better candidate. The reason is, he has more appeal to the center and the non-aligned voters than Dean OR Bush does. He won’t win against Dean in the primaries (mores the shame, as thats who I would have voted for), but I think he WOULD win against Bush…or at least give it a good shot.
McCain is the only one IMO that would have even a snowballs chance in hell of challenging Bush either from the Republican party or as an Independant…but he has already said he won’t run.
-XT
Clark is the strongest candidate on his record compared to Bush’s. Dean really is the most qualified IMO because of his executive experience. The candidates from the Senate love to tout their “experience” as opposed to Dean’s, but it’s BS of the highest order. Being a Senator does not prepare you for the Presidency like being a governor does. The only edge it gives a candidate is the experience of dealing with Washington politics. That’s important, of course, but not as important as running a state and having to deal with a legislature.
The reason I think Clark is the strongest candidate compared to Bush is his military record, which makes Bush’s look really lame by comparison, and his foreign policy experience. I disagree strongly with many of the positions he’s taken and probably won’t vote for him, but I would imagine that Karl Rove does not want to have to face Clark if he can help it. Dean is much more of an easy target for negative advertising, and it’s sad to say, but Dean is his own negative ad when he speaks most of the time to anyone but a very pro-Dean audience.
My favorite candidate is Lieberman too, second would be Edwards. I’d vote for either of them over Bush. Kerry, Clark, and Dean can still win me over, the rest are pure crap, especially that loser Gephardt. How can a man who loses the House so many times think he can win the Presidency?