A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics
|
|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics | |
|
March 23, 2004Kerry Reaping What He Sowed?Remember the whole "foreign leaders want me to win" flap? Well it looks like this quote has come back to haunt him in the form of an opportunistic left-leaning foreign leader, and Kerry has had to run away. I find this very amusing because Kerry opened the door by bringing it up. And now the Bushies are going to haunt leftist government web sites looking for praise of John Kerry. The end result will be that, as long as Kerry is unwilling to name the names of the foreign leaders he was referring to, the Bushies are going to suggest who he was talking about. It won't even matter how vociferously Kerry tries to distance himself. The point will remain that "far lefties prefer Bush." Petard hoisting in progress. Posted by Brian Keegan at March 23, 2004 09:37 AMComments
This isn't directed at you Brian... good upate. I have two words regarding who in another country wants John Kerry to be elected or who he says wants him to: who cares. This is the kind of tit for tat pointless crap that Americans are annoyed with. And we wonder why nobody votes anymore? WHAT ABOUT THE ISSUES MAN!?!?!?! KERRY: Foreign leaders want me to win. Give me a break... what the hell does this banter have to do with anything important? While these two ivy league geeks are arguing over nothing... Ralph Nader is in Texas talking about issues. This isn't a plug for Ralph, but you get my point. Posted by: Mathew Pruitt at March 23, 2004 10:48 AMMatthew, I of course share your frustration with the lack of discussion on issues of substnace, and/or the lack of discussion thereof. But you have to realize that in the end, for better or worse, many undecided voters are going to make a decision about who to vote for on a very visceral level. Political campaigners understand this, and that's why emotional appeals work. Add in the voter-ADD factor, wherein eyes glaze over if policy minutiae are delved into, and the you understand why the soup tastes as it does, n'est-ce pas? Posted by: bk at March 23, 2004 12:31 PMYes, too much nonsense put out there by media --by way too many media --which ups the prices we pay for things (but they never make studies on that do they? Try looking at them like braying asses that they are and ass kissers for own image. Only a few deserve any credence. Take a look at Bok's portray today of Bush & Kerry today on Bok's political cartoons and any more he lists on national topics at Akron Beacon Journal site. Think he is particularly good and is non-partisan in his approach. Janus Posted by: Janus at March 23, 2004 01:04 PMI understand the rules of the game, Brian, and I don't mean to sound argumentative toward you, because I know that you agree. The country is split into thirds and in order to win, Bush and Kerry have to get a majority of the independents, and emotion can go a long way in helping them do that... I also know that the game continues to be played because most major candidates do not have the integrity to do anything else. I think the McCain candidacy in 2000, the recent Dean campaign, and even to some extent Nader then and today, prove that people are looking for something different. Had a majority of the Republian primaries allowed independent voters in 2000, we would be talking about the policies of President McCain, and had Howard Dean not fallen in love with himself, he would be the Democratic nominee. Furthermore, polls recently have shown that Nader has made major gains among 18-25 year olds who are not accustomed to the current political culture. All of these candidacies, although they where not completely absent from politics, where mostly issue based. The first of the two major parties that has the intestinal fortitude to do the right thing and walk away from the fluff strategy, in my opinion, stands to make major gains. The trouble is that doing so is a major risk, and there aren't many dare devils left in politics anymore. Take a look at both candidates for instance: Kerry was at his best when he thought he was going to lose to Dean and caimpaigned like it didn't matter, and Bush has always been better when he was governing or politicking from the heart. Ever since either have gone into general election mode, Bush a year ago and Kerry a few months ago, the debate has been blunted and turned into mudslinging about things that, in the long run, really don't matter. As long as politics is determined on emotion than centrists are dead in the water, because our strong point is that a majority of the American people agree with us on the issues. This is tough, because if we don't play the game we have an even more uphill battle, but if we resort to fluff like the major candidates than we will simply become another vanilla political movement that people might eventually support, but not neccesarily from the heart. By standing on the issues, we not only win elections, we win hearts and minds, and with that kind of political clout we can accomplish great things. Posted by: Mathew Pruitt at March 23, 2004 01:41 PMGood for Kerry for shutting Chavez down. But we do need a vision from Kerry. |
Archives
March 2006
February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Dubai Out
Why So Long Between Democracies? Round One, Centrism Rock Lobster? Blackwell Releases "Worst-Treated" List "IRV" used in Burl., VT for mayor election. Great idea! Random Thread Election 2006: Round One A Proper Multiculturalism Bush proposes line item veto act - what's changed?
|
