DOW closes at 10,000+, What does this mean for Dean?

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2003-12-11 07:28pm

Mr Bean wrote:
Wow...you're one rabid Republican, aren't you?
Wow thats a Ad-Homean attack is it not?

And if that is the entire length of your post is a one liner Ad-Homean attack things are not looking back

No, it's not an ad-hominem attack, because we're not debating anything. I made an observation based on his last few sentences taking an EXTREMELY derogatory view towards Howard Dean. I might agree with him, but that doesn't stop me from making that observation.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-12-11 07:28pm

Vympel wrote:Perhaps someone can explain why he was reading about goats to kindergarten kids for 20 or so minutes after he had been told of the attack?

Didn't want to freak the kids out?

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2003-12-11 07:30pm

Joe wrote:
Vympel wrote:Perhaps someone can explain why he was reading about goats to kindergarten kids for 20 or so minutes after he had been told of the attack?
Didn't want to freak the kids out?

That would probably be a good idea, but you'd think that he could've sprung up on telling the kids in the nicest manner what happened. Nothing to make a kid feel a special bond w/the Republican party than the president himself telling you about the worst terrorist attack on American Soil...

EmperorSolo51 · Post by **EmperorSolo51** » 2003-12-11 08:11pm

Xenophobe3691 wrote:
Mr Bean wrote:
Wow...you're one rabid Republican, aren't you?
Wow thats a Ad-Homean attack is it not?

And if that is the entire length of your post is a one liner Ad-Homean attack things are not looking back
No, it's not an ad-hominem attack, because we're not debating anything. I made an observation based on his last few sentences taking an EXTREMELY derogatory view towards Howard Dean. I might agree with him, but that doesn't stop me from making that observation.

He's right, It was not an ad-hominem attack. To answer Xenophobe's question, I am a Republican that believes that the Dems are hoping the economy will tank.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-12-11 08:16pm

EmperorSolo51 wrote:I am a Republican that believes that the Dems are hoping the economy will tank.

And do you have some actual evidence for your claim that the Democrats secretly want the country's economy to go into the toilet? Or is your description of potential motive considered evidence, in which case you are subscribing to the mentality of conspiracy theorists everywhere?

If I were an American Democrat, I would be more concerned with pointing out that the economic boost is being borrowed from the future than with hoping it turns into a crash.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-11 09:01pm

Darth Wong wrote: If I were an American Democrat, I would be more concerned with pointing out that the economic boost is being borrowed from the future than with hoping it turns into a crash.

That's too complex a position to work, and that is not a joke.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2003-12-11 09:21pm

Vympel wrote:Perhaps someone can explain why he was reading about goats to kindergarten kids for 20 or so minutes after he had been told of the attack?

They told him a plane crashed. That happens sometimes and the President can't do anything about it. When the second plane hit and they realized people were crashing planes on purpose as perhaps a part of a larger plan, they got the hell out of there.

I'd personally not have a President who runs around in circles wetting himself when a plane crashes. What do you expect him to do?

EmperorSolo51 · Post by **EmperorSolo51** » 2003-12-11 09:35pm

Darth Wong wrote:
EmperorSolo51 wrote:I am a Republican that believes that the Dems are hoping the economy will tank.
And do you have some actual evidence for your claim that the Democrats secretly want the country's economy to go into the toilet? Or is your description of potential motive considered evidence, in which case you are subscribing to the mentality of conspiracy theorists everywhere?

Look the Dems want the economy to sink becuase thier nearly thier whole campaign is centered around the fact that they say Bush has caused this recession. If the economy continues to improve and people begin to go back to work, The democrats will not have any leg to stand on other than the Iraq war issue. A failing economy gives the Democrats the ability to rally the US people to vote for them in november. If it it doesn't the people will turn on them for lying to them and continue to throw out Democratic officials.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-12-11 09:37pm

EmperorSolo51 wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:And do you have some actual evidence for your claim that the Democrats secretly want the country's economy to go into the toilet? Or is your description of potential motive considered evidence, in which case you are subscribing to the mentality of conspiracy theorists everywhere?
Look the Dems want the economy to sink becuase thier nearly thier whole campaign is centered around the fact that they say Bush has caused this recession. If the economy continues to improve and people begin to go back to work, The democrats will not have any leg to stand on other than the Iraq war issue. A failing economy gives the Democrats the ability to rally the US people to vote for them in november. If it it doesn't the people will turn on them for lying to them and continue to throw out Democratic officials.

In other words, you will do exactly as I predicted and use motive as proof, just like a typical conspiracy theorist. Thanks for making my point.

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2003-12-11 09:38pm

EmperorSolo51 wrote: Look the Dems want the economy to sink becuase thier nearly thier whole campaign is centered around the fact that they say Bush has caused this recession. If the economy continues to improve and people begin to go back to work, The democrats will not have any leg to stand on other than the Iraq war issue. A failing economy gives the Democrats the ability to rally the US people to vote for them in november. If it it doesn't the people will turn on them for lying to them and continue to throw out Democratic officials.

Can someone please make sense of this for me? Either I'm missing something, or the Dems will actually tank the economy out of personal gain. Can anyone tell me how that'll happen in a Republican filled Congress?

EmperorSolo51 · Post by **EmperorSolo51** » 2003-12-11 09:43pm

Xenophobe3691 wrote: Can someone please make sense of this for me? Either I'm missing something, or the Dems will actually tank the economy out of personal gain. Can anyone tell me how that'll happen in a Republican filled Congress?

No, They want to use a failing economy as political leverage in upcoming elections. A economy that is growing is dtrimental to Dean's and the DNC's campaign.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-12-11 09:50pm

EmperorSolo51 wrote: Look the Dems want the economy to sink becuase thier nearly thier whole campaign is centered around the fact that they say Bush has caused this recession. If the economy continues to improve and people begin to go back to work, The democrats will not have any leg to stand on other than the Iraq war issue. A failing economy gives the Democrats the ability to rally the US people to vote for them in november. If it it doesn't the people will turn on them for lying to them and continue to throw out Democratic officials.

Give us EVIDENCE, you chickenshit motherfucker.

EmperorSolo51 · Post by **EmperorSolo51** » 2003-12-11 09:54pm

Darth Wong wrote: In other words, you will do exactly as I predicted and use motive as proof, just like a typical conspiracy theorist. Thanks for making my point.

You want proof? I suggest you take a look at the Carville memo. In this Memo, Democratic Stategist tells the Senate to use the failing economy as weapon against the republicans and hope for further economic failings.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/953029/posts
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,47674,00.html

EmperorSolo51 · Post by **EmperorSolo51** » 2003-12-11 09:58pm

Howedar wrote: Give us EVIDENCE, you chickenshit motherfucker.

I have given you your evidence. However, throwing out ad hominum attacks against a person like me who does not engage in such wasteful tactics is rude and ignorant and uncalled for

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-12-11 10:34pm

Stravo wrote: Actually Shep, as someone who has read Bush at war you know he was given a choice.

Yeah, and he went with the Secret Service choice of
uber paranoia, which I agree with totally, what with
four hijacked aircraft on the same morning within hours
of each other and a false report of a massive car bomb
outside the State Department in Washington DC.

Now, we're all adults here, and I don't need our
President going on TV every 30 minutes to pat us on
our backs and reassure us that yes, we are going to be
OK.

No, that's for small town mayors like Giuliani trying to
reassure the panicked population of their city.

The President of the United States has a direct responsibility
to the ENTIRE United States to preserve the government
and its continuity of leadership, and he can't be doing that
now, if he's showing up on TV every 40 minutes to recap what
we already know, or if his location is known to everyone down
to the exact latitude and longitude.

And speaking of small town leadership, I have much more respect
for Washington's Mayor, Anthony A Williams, for sitting down and
not showboating like Giuliani. You have a fucking command center,
and radios for a god damn good reason, and you have the authority
as mayor of the city to do things that people can't do, like order
streets closed the fuck down, or gas mains turned off.

Course, you can't do all that if you're far more interested in media
presence during a national tragedy to go "Oh my god, this is so terrible"
"We don't know anything new" every half an hour or so.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2003-12-11 10:46pm

EmperorSolo51 wrote:
Darth Wong wrote: In other words, you will do exactly as I predicted and use motive as proof, just like a typical conspiracy theorist. Thanks for making my point.
You want proof? I suggest you take a look at the Carville memo. In this Memo, Democratic Stategist tells the Senate to use the failing economy as weapon against the republicans and hope for further economic failings.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/953029/posts
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,47674,00.html

Um, no, the memo talks about attacking Bush on his record and where he was perceived to be at his weakest. And I don't see where you pulled the "hope for future economic failings" red herring from.

Try again.

EmperorSolo51 · Post by **EmperorSolo51** » 2003-12-11 10:58pm

Patrick Degan wrote:
EmperorSolo51 wrote:
Um, no, the memo talks about attacking Bush on his record and where he was perceived to be at his weakest. And I don't see where you pulled the "hope for future economic failings" red herring from.

Try again.

Maybe I didn't read it correctly. But hard-core leftist democrats on places like the Democratic underground (as shown earlier) are afraid that a strong economy will give Bush victory 2004.

EmperorSolo51 · Post by **EmperorSolo51** » 2003-12-11 11:04pm

Stupid, no editing

Maybe I didn't read it correctly. But hard-core leftist democrats on places like the Democratic underground (as shown earlier) are afraid that a strong economy will give Bush victory 2004. And These hard-core dems are the very people Howard Dean and the Democrats are trying to court.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2003-12-11 11:20pm

EmperorSolo51 wrote:Maybe I didn't read it correctly. But hard-core leftist democrats on places like the Democratic underground (as shown earlier) are afraid that a strong economy will give Bush victory 2004. And These hard-core dems are the very people Howard Dean and the Democrats are trying to court.

Democratic Underground is simply the leftwing analogue to FreeRepublic and both sites are populated by nutcases. There is no indication that Dean or any of the other Democratic candidates are tailoring their message to recruit DU any more than Bush is angling himself to suit FR.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-12-11 11:48pm

Actually it's slightly more credible that Bush is playing to the Freepers than to think of Dean playing to the Undergrounders...

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-12-11 11:51pm

MKSheppard wrote:Wow, the economy is growing like crazy, and we have a man who isn't afraid
to make the hard decisions in the office of President

Like spending four domestic dollars for every dollar on the War on Terror and beginning an enormous new entitlement package when the budget was already in a deficit?

Lay off it Shep. Don't be rediculous.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2003-12-12 12:17am

EmperorSolo51 wrote:Stupid, no editing

Maybe I didn't read it correctly. But hard-core leftist democrats on places like the Democratic underground (as shown earlier) are afraid that a strong economy will give Bush victory 2004. And These hard-core dems are the very people Howard Dean and the Democrats are trying to court.

Bullshit, my good man

Half the DU'ers are scared to fucking death of Dean or hate his guts

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-12-12 12:35am

This might surprise you, but I'm guessing that Dean actually could probably care less about pandering to the DU'ers. Why? Because they're going to vote for him in the end anyway. He doesn't have to expend effort to appeal to them because they hate Bush so much they'd vote for ANY Democrat who had a reasonable chance of winning.

tharkûn · Post by **tharkûn** » 2003-12-12 02:36am

Iceberg: The wonders of the primary systems in a two party country means you have to pander to the centre of your party faithful for the first election and to the centre of the population in the second.

Wether Dean heads left in the primary or right depends on who he is up against. Not knowing squat about DU'ers who are their top choices? Clark? Dean? Dean may have to reach out to them depending on what issues are going to decide the primary.

Dean has the social left, pretty much garunteed. The economic left is a completely different game. I expect Dean will move leftward on some issues and rightward before the primary. In the general election he should (and likely will) head right towards the centre.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-12-12 03:02am

The top Democratic choices are Clark (centrist), Dean (centrist leaning left on social issues and right on economic ones), Gephardt (a friend of mine who lives in MO refers to Gephardt as a "ghetto king") and Kerry (ringer for an exhibit at Madame Toussaud's). Beyond those four, the rest are just taking up space on the dais.