I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
Done!
sorry but what is the significance of the 18 cents? I mean, why 18? I don't think that's his district #...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp...ml?
nav=hptop_tb
Kerry Leads in Lobby Money
Anti-Special-Interest Campaign Contrasts With Funding
By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, January 31, 2004; Page A01
Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), who has made a fight against corporate special interests a centerpiece of his front-running campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, has raised more money from paid lobbyists than any other senator over the past 15 years, federal records show.
Kerry, a 19-year veteran of the Senate who fought and won four expensive political campaigns, has received nearly $640,000 from lobbyists, many representing telecommunications and financial companies with business before his committee, according to Federal Election Commission data compiled by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
For his presidential race, Kerry has raised more than $225,000 from lobbyists, better than twice as much as his nearest Democratic rival. Like President Bush, Kerry has also turned to a number of corporate officials and lobbyists to "bundle" contributions from smaller donors, often in sums of $50,000 or more, records provided by his campaign show.
"Senator Kerry has taken individual contributions from lobbyists, but that has not stopped him from fighting against special interests on behalf of average Americans," said Kerry spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter. "If anyone thinks a contribution can buy Kerry's vote, then they are wasting their money."
Kerry said on Jan. 19 that he would "happily release any lobbyist meeting I've ever had," but he has yet to do so. Cutter said Kerry will not release records until he compiles data on every meeting over the past 19 years, which will be a "pretty lengthy process." Kerry will not release it "piecemeal," she said.
Most members of Congress and presidential candidates turn to corporations and their Washington-based lobbyists for political assistance, most often with fundraising. All the presidential candidates take money from special interests, including Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.), who like Kerry has targeted corporations and lobbyists in his stump speeches. And Bush has far outpaced them all.
Because Kerry has made his fight against "Washington special interests" a new theme of his presidential campaign, campaign rivals and campaign finance watchdogs have accused him of hypocrisy.
no significance. I just picked a number, and my sitemeter started up on April 18. Coincidentally it's a number representing charity in judaism, but I didn't know that..
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp...ml?
nav=hptop_tb
Retired Army Gen. Wesley K. Clark, a newcomer to national politics, is running a television ad that hits Kerry and others for ties to special interests. "Special interest deals. Promises unkept. Do we really need another Washington politician?" the narrator says in the ad. "A politician won't change the way Washington works."
"John Kerry has been withdrawing money from the special interest bank for his entire career and now -- because it's the popular thing to do -- he wants us to believe that he's going to close the account and go after the people that have funded his political career," said Jay Carson, a spokesman for former Vermont governor Howard Dean.
"The note of reality is he has been brought to you by special interests," said Charles Lewis of the nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity, a watchdog group that has closely studied the senator's relationship with special interests. "It's very hard [for Kerry] to utter this rhetoric without some hollowness to it."
"I think it's harder for someone like Kerry to take on" Bush over special interests "because he's taken money . . . from a lot of the same" corporate sectors, added Larry Noble, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, which monitors money in politics. Dean, who has raised more money than Kerry in this campaign, has taken considerably less from lobbyists.
Cutter said her boss would have no problem fighting Bush on the issue because "Kerry has spent his career fighting against special interests, while Bush has never met a special interest he doesn't like. While Kerry was fighting to keep oil companies from drilling in ANWR [the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge], the White House was inviting them in to tea."
Kerry or any other longtime politician inevitably faces this charge when running for president as a self-styled reformer. Unless the candidate is someone like Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who has made a name for himself by fighting for reform and against corporate giveaways, or a self-financed independent, like Ross Perot in the 1990s, it is very hard to turn the theme into an effective campaign message, Noble said. "It's the classic situation: Most politicians get money from what they are calling special interests because they are the ones who give."
Kerry, who did not begin his campaign with a heavy emphasis on fighting lobbyists, appears to have usurped the special interest message from Edwards and Dean over the past few months. Now, Kerry's standard campaign refrain includes this warning to the "special interests" and their lobbyists: "We're coming, you're going and don't let the door hit you on the way out."
One more reason not to trust the undead.
Anyone read the article about Republucans changing to Democrats and voting Kerry in NH? 3,800 of them.
Gee, now who could Rove possibly want to run against Bush?
Everyone thought Dean was the lock for the nomination, and it got to the point that some were demanding other Dem candidates stop attacking him for the sake of unity.
Now everyone thinks Kerry is going to be the guy.
I think Kerry will stumble in some way... we may not even know how right now, a LOT can happen between now and four weeks from now... and folks looking for someone electable (lots of folks) will turn to Clark (process of elimination).
I was out for drinks and dinner with a gaggle of folks last night. All of us were informed Democrats, some were activists. When we weren't taunting the table next to us, an Axis of Right-Wing Evil of local GOP operatives, with easily overheard abuse of Bush, Coulter, Ken Starr and so on, we were discussing the campaign at length.
We had one Clark supporter (me), one Deanie, and several undecided. We all agreed that ourselves, and just about everyone we knew, were above all else looking for electability. (BTW we are all Arizona voters...)
This race is far from over. Today's Common Wisdom can quickly become yesterday's "what were we thinking?"
This race is far from over. Today's Common Wisdom can quickly become yesterday's "what were we thinking?"
renato, I couldn't have put it better myself.
Thanks Thea. I guess I meant to say, "...tomorrow's 'what were we thinking?' "
but I guess you caught my drift.
FWIW I kind of thought Dean would stumble but I was absolutely stunned that he showed so poorly in IA and NH. And he burned through most if not all of $40MM already??? Talk about internet bubble and irrational exuberance...
I've been an interested, curious observer of elections for over 20 years now. Over and over again, the early front-runner is built up and then torn down by the media, just like they do with celebs. The scrutiny gets so damn intense it is difficult if not impossible to withstand. Either they trip the candidate up, or the candidate wilts under pressure and intense scrutiny.
If I were a candidate I would prefer to crest later, not sooner. If my scenario comes to pass, I think folks will turn to Clark and Clark will also, finally, begin to hit his stride at about the same time. I wish Clark had not waited so long to enter the race...
of course I could be wrong. I just have this gut feeling that Kerry is not necessarily the sure thing. I can even foresee a scenario that we actually have a Democratic convention where the nomination is still in play (between Dean-Kerry-Clark), for the first time in decades. Not sure whether that would be a good thing or a bad thing.
The Republican running against Chandler, Alice Forgy Kerr besides running as a good christian, is running on a platform of supporting all of Smirks issues. Makes you wonder why Republicans even need congress-critters if they are there only to rubber stamp all of administration issues. Why send miss Kerr to Washington?
I think Kerry will stumble in some way... we may not even know how right now, a LOT can happen between now and four weeks from now...
Can't remember, but wasn't Kerry attacked a year or so ago for his record in Vietnam? Something about wiping out a village one night. Any info?
renato,
Either way you say it, the meaning is still the same.
Buck,
That wasn't John Kerry. That was Bob Kerry, former senator from Kansas I think.
He was exploring a possible run for President.
If John Kerry had done something like that I suspect we would have heard about it by now.
bf,
that's bob kerrey, though wingnuts have already written articles as if they're the same person
it was indeed Bob Kerry and it was much discussed in the media, at least for, what, 2 or 3 weeks. When he decided not to run, the issue kind of faded.
sorry, Kerrey not Kerry.
Thanks for the info guys. I'm terrible with names.
Done! I sent Chandler $25.18. It would have been more, but times are tough.
Someone should start a "Take back the house" blog. It's hard to keep track of all these elections.
I sent some also. I thought I would go ahead and also contribute to Stephanie Hesgerth (sp?) in S. Dakota, but couldn't find which of my normal blogs was urging this and how much I was supposed to add to the contribution as a marker. Wasn't it this site?
I saw the hit job in the Post and the glee with which it has been pounced upon. All it says is that if you were in national public life through the nineties there is no way you could have been competative without corporate money.
Howard Dean has shown us that there is an alternative. This is the primary reason that everyone who is interested in democracy owes a debt of gratitude to him regardless of the outcome of this contest. But at this point in time, to apply some sort of purity test to campaign funding sources is to disqualify nearly everyone with any serious experience in national politics.
I recall a quote from who I've forget that could be paraphrased as..."An honest politician is one who can drink their liquor, screw their hookers, and vote against them the next day on the Senate floor."
OT: I was out of country when the Janklow thing came down. God it's worse than I heard at first. 100 days... which will actually be 30 days then community service... and his felony record will be expunged.
I'm pretty cynical by now, even more so since Election 2000. But even this was worse than I expected.
I hope the good people of South Dakota shun this guy like nobody's business. If I lived in SD and I came across this guy in public, I'd start haranguing him like no one's business. "KILLER! YOU'RE A GODDAMN MURDERER!"
once again, IOKIYAR!!!
Warn readers that non IE browsers (like Opera) may hiccup at the Chandler java. Switch to IE and save yourself 2 minutes of lost input time!
Which Kerry went tent-camping with Dolly Parton? Jim Kerry, I think.
I gave the guy $20.18.
I still have doubts about Kerry, but I think the thing that really turns people on, besides his positions (which are reasonable), is his military record. I think that resonates with a lot of older voters, and is a nice contrast to Bush. I think Kerry can beat Bush, but he simply has to fight hard. If the rumors are true and he's fighting nasty against Dean, in a way that's good, becasue he will need some of that nastiness to beat Bush.
Gave $xx.18. Come on Whoever-you-are!!!!
(see how we trust you, Artios?)
kudos renato, if what I've read is true, Janklow blew through the stop sign at 50 to 60 mph plus, that shows a total and absolute disregard for anybody else, too bad it wasn't a semi he hit, then all of this discussion would be posthumous. Wonder if the cyclist even saw it coming...poor guy.
Does anyone know of a semi-concise posting of instances where Republican may have interfered with Democratic party contests? My special interests have just given Chandler $20.18.
Doh!
The only thing that surprises me is that the judge didn't give Janklow a fucking medal while he was at it.
Anyone read the article about Republucans changing to Democrats and voting Kerry in NH? 3,800 of them.
Gee, now who could Rove possibly want to run against Bush?
Anonymous 01.31.04 - 10:25 am
------------------------
3,008 Republicans dissed Bush and wrote in Kerry. Just under 2000 wrote in Dean. This is good news. Turnout is low for a basically uncontested primary. The supposed closed ranks among repubs may be faltering. As things get worse, they may be thinking the unthinkable: vote the Donkey in.
I ponied up $xx.18. Always good to have a horse in the race. [I need a 3rd equine expression to really make this work don't I...]
I ponied up $xx.18. Always good to have a horse in the race. [I need a 3rd equine expression to really make this work don't I...]
Maybe something about how I hope Chandler is a regular Kentucky thoroughbred...?
by Nov, i expect it likely that the democrat takes far more than just 1 red state.
Done.
Chandler's the dark horse candidate?
I just gave the guy $30.18 -- yet another small contribution. Many small gifts add up.
Atrios, I was just going to ask if you were Jewish... Jewish charitable donations often feature 18 or multiples thereof because in Gematria (Jewish numerology) the word for "life" (chai) has a value of 18. Then again, one could argue that electing Democrats these days is a matter of life and death...
Thanks all. A few bucks mean quite a bit for a congressional special election. He has a good chance of winning, and a little bit could put him over the top.
nah, not Jewish. father's side, but raised secularly without any sense of jewish identity.
Hey last night I heard something that gave me hope.
I had the TV on while waiting for NOW with Bill Moyers to come on, and there was a financial show on. I heard a guy talking about how many people identify themselves as part of the "investor class", and he said the number has dropped from 52% to 32% in the past few years. He said he thinks the republicans are more "on the ropes" than they realize.
Remember this is a marathon not a sprint. Be patient, and save some money for the eventual nominee, he will need it.
renato:
"I can foresee ... a Democratic convention where the nomination is still in play (between Dean-Kerry-Clark), for the first time in decades. Not sure whether that would be a good thing or a bad thing.
Bite your tongue, this would ensure Dubya's victory. The winning candidate needs several months to organize for the general election & within, short order, get the large monies to get the attack ads going to counter Dubya's attack ads. Otherwise, the incumbent gets to define the challenger & the race is over before it begins.
Past history: 1) Nixon was able to define McGovern while McGovern was still trying to get his campaign & monies together 2) ditto for Clinton against Dole.
I pray for a quick knockout - say early March - where the winning Democrat can immediately move over to fund raising & putting together the campaign for November, instead of slogging it out with his competitors till the fall.
I'm ABB (Anybody But Bushboy) and so I'm voting for Kerry or Clark or Edwards or Dean. Some are better than the others IMO, but they are all good.
If people want to nitpick Kerry's record or any other Democrat, I'm sure they can find things that he (and others) have done wrong but the REAL QUESTION is: what has Bushboy ever done right?????
Give money to another Democratic candidate? Um... No thanks.
Why should I give money to a candidate from a party that (until a month ago) could not stop helping Bush by voting for all of his programs?
Patriot Act. Tax cuts. No Child Left Behind. Privatized Medicare. Iraq War.
And this is supposedly helping STOP Bush?
No, no, no.
Two comments: the "xover" Republican votes for Kerry or Dean were in many cases (about 5000) Dems who voted for MCCAIN in 2000 and were thus entered onto the voter rolls as Republicans this time around (just read that, makes sense too -- you're whatever you registered as LAST and there were a LOT of xover Dems for McCain in NH.
Secondly: IF it comes down to convention time w/3-4 guys still fighting this out, it isn't giving the Republican SMEAR machine time to concentrate on any ONE of them. Oh, I'm sure they'll go negative, but you really have to keep pounding the themes of "personal destruction" and it'll be hard to go anti-"personal injury lawyer" and TWO VietNam war vets AND scream-Dean (it is interesting that the media are backing off "the scream" because they realize they overdid it -- he was trying to sound OVER the crowd din) so MORE candidates keeps the Republicans from concentrating on ONE candidate.
Done. And the stupid fucking wapo article about Kerry has Nedra written all over it.
Errors on the donation page.
Errors on the donation page.
Done. Anyone seen any polls for this race?
thank you Atrios, why wait for November when we can have a Democratic victory in February.
This guy must have a good chance, look how the national media is ignoring it.
Anyone read the article about Republucans changing to Democrats and voting Kerry in NH? 3,800 of them.
Gee, now who could Rove possibly want to run against Bush?
Actually, I think this has nothing to do with Rove. Anecdotal evidence and polling data show real conservatives are not happy with BushCo. A comment from a thoughtful conservative (whom some of you know) in a discussion (link to thread thread; link to original apolitical post) at my site:
Thought I'd let you know that I expect I'll be pulling the lever for the Democratic Presidential nominee in November, regardless of who it is. Bush is a total disaster. When I agree with his rhetoric, he fails to deliver on it, despite Republican control of congress.
OT, but from that TNR blogad:
John Kerry told a northern audience this week that Democrats can win without the south. Last night in South Carolina, he parsed his way out of that position. But he wasn't the only candidate who was up to old tricks...
How soon 'til you can shitcan that thing?
...who could Rove possibly want to run against Bush?
Any one of 'em could whip his drunken fratboy ass, and Rove knows it.
was going to give, but then read his positions
On taxes -In Congress, Ben Chandler will work to grow our economy and create new jobs by cutting taxes for middle-class families, providing tax incentives to attract and grow small businesses, and opposing unfair trade policies that ship Kentucky jobs overseas.
** More tax cuts in a time of record deficits
The War on Terrorism and Homeland Security- Ben Chandler strongly supports the men and women bravely serving our country in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world. In Congress, Ben Chandler will stand vigilant in his support for a strong national defense, an end to international terrorism, and a safe and secure homeland.
** He equates the war in Iraq with the "war on terra" and says nothing criticial of the bush administrations war in Iraq
Tobacco- As Attorney General, Ben Chandler helped Kentucky tobacco farmers secure billions in settlement funds to help resolve growing issues. In Congress, Chandler will use that experience to stand up against cuts in the tobacco quota and work to pass a tobacco buyout bill that delivers on the unmet promise to central Kentucky farmers.
**more government money to Tobacco farmers
Second Amendment Rights- A strong supporter of Second Amendment rights, Ben Chandler has earned an "A" rating from the NRA. In Congress, Chandler will defend the rights of central Kentucky's sportsmen by opposing new gun control laws.
**And opposed to any new gun laws
I'm glad he's an advertiser and supporting Atrios, but make sure you read his postions before you donate. If you agree with them, great, than donate. I don't, even if he is a democrat.
Atrios, that's not the issue. Is your wife Jewish, are your kids (if any) raised Jewish, and if so, why are you so religiously confused?
Thanks for the chance to have fun. I will really enjoy hearing the sound of repuglican teeth gnashing.
Anonymouse: Oh, you must be talking about the Dem party that, in the house, voted against the Medicare bill 12 to 1. Wait... that can't be it. Maybe the senate? Guess not, they also voted against it over 3 to 1. How about the tax cuts? Senate, Dems against over 2 to 1. House Dems against 67 to 1. Even with intense pressure to vote with Bush, over half of house Dems and about half of senate Dems voted against the war resolution.
Yes, there are some shameful examples of rubber-stamping (PATRIOT act, with all of 1 Senate vote against). Yes, the party could use some more GOP-style unity. But don't act like they're letting anything Bush slide through unopposed.
Anonymous,
Do you suppose it's possible that those Republicans who switched over to vote for Kerry may have actually done so because they LIKE KERRY? Not every Republican is in on the Rove conspiracy. And if there were a Rove conspiracy to get Kerry as the nominee, would he share it with 3800 ordinary voters?
And how many Republicans crossed over to vote for other candidates?
There's much more to the crossover voters story - forget the ones who may have voted in the dem primary - according to an article in The Nation, one in seven votes in the republican primary were ABB write-ins, many of them democrats. From the story:
"One in seven Republican primary voters cast ballots for candidates other than Bush, holding the president to just 85 percent of the 62,927 ballots cast. In some parts of the state, such as southwest New Hampshire's Monadnock Region, a historic bastion of moderate Republicanism, Bush did even worse. In Swanzey, for instance, 37 percent of GOP primary voters rejected Bush. In nearby Surry, almost 29 percent of the people who took Republican ballots voted against the Republican president, while a number of other towns across the region saw anti-Bush votes of more than 20 percent in the GOP primary.
"Few of the anti-Bush votes went to the 13 unknown Republicans whose names appeared on GOP ballots along with the president's. Instead, top Democratic contenders reaped write-in votes.
"US Senator John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, who won the Democratic primary, came in second to Bush in the Republican contest, winning 3,009 votes. Kerry's name was written in on almost 5 percent of all GOP ballots...
"In third place on the Republican side of the ledger was former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, who won 1,888 votes, more than 3 percent of the GOP total. Retired General Wesley Clark secured 1,467 Republican votes, while almost 2,000 additional Republican primary votes were cast for North Carolina Senator John Edwards, Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich and the Rev. Al Sharpton. "
Republicans writing in Kucinich and Sharpton in their own primary! I love it!
http://www.thenation.com/thebeat....mhtml?
pid=1221
Donate for the "Dems win!" value, not the value of his positions, if you disagree with them. It's Chandler or Kerr, no other options. Chandler is a little more liberal than Kerr, even if you disagree with him any little bit helps, plus he has Sierra and LCV endorsements. And a Dem victory in a red state in the first federal election of the year is a propaganda victory, no matter what his positions.
25.18 Done.
Is your wife Jewish, are your kids (if any) raised Jewish, and if so, why are you so religiously confused?
And of course, when did your realize you were Jewish and why didn't you let everyone know before you knew and why not and why isn't your wife donating her fortune to help you run this website anyway? If Mrs. Atrios doesn't trust you, why should we???
Maybe Atrios is secular and doesn't care much for organized religion...there are a few of us like that you know.
$30.18
When do we find out the total Atriosian's contributions?
I donated 25.18 but when it came thru on my credit card it was 25.00 - I hope atrios got credit.
Makes you wonder why Republicans even need congress-critters if they are there only to rubber stamp all of administration issues. Why send miss Kerr to Washington?
That's why.
SW wrote at 11:09 a.m.:
"I recall a quote from who I've forget that could be paraphrased as...'An honest politician is one who can drink their liquor, screw their hookers, and vote against them the next day on the Senate floor.'"
The quotation is from Jesse Unruh, who at the time was California state assembly speaker and was referring to the state assembly rather than the U.S. Senate. Another version of the quotation I've seen is: "If you can't eat their food, drink their wine, screw their women, and then vote against them in the morning, you don't belong here." Unruh, incidentally, was the Democratic nominee for governor of California in 1970, and lost to Ronald Reagan, who was running for election to a second term as governor.
Bob Kerry was from Nebraska not Kansas. We Kansans haven't sent a Democrat to the Senate since the Depression. We're responsible for Bob Dole and currently the loathsome pair of fundamentalist foot-washer cum Catholic Sam Brownback and administration waterboy Pat Roberts.
I apologize.
Oh, it's Kansas Day, which the state GOP has appropriated as their's for an annual state convention. A well-placed . . .
"Warn readers that non IE browsers (like Opera) may hiccup at the Chandler java. Switch to IE and save yourself 2 minutes of lost input time!
Mike Finley"
Opera7 works just fine at Chandler's site.
Completely off-topic, but I realized on my way to work this morning that I know very few Republicans well--probably a dozen--mostly through family connections, and over half (that I know about) are on Xanax or other psychotropic drugs--I can only think of one non-republican that I know that took anti-anxiety medication (and she had a horrible family trauma). I know anecdotal evidence doesn't amount to much, but it is kind of interesting. Anyway--1) am I the only one who has made this connection? If not, does being a Republican put you at a high stress level (what with orange/yellow/red alerts and all) or do Democrats just have the good sense not to tell people they are on these drugs?
I had no problem donating to Chandler with Mozilla 1.6 on Mac OS X.
Friends don't let friends use IE.
I've tried to donate to Chandler through both Atrios and D Koss, and at both sites I couldn't get the web page to load. This is not a problem i usually have. Has anyone else had this happen?
I think we may have blown the server.
speaking for someone who has lived in kentucky his whole life, i assure you there is no chance in hell chandler wins this race (unfortunately). kentucky is going down the crapper politically, i heard somewhere that bush has his highest approval rating in KY, more than any other State.
Funny, I can't get to chadlerforcongress.org. with either IE or Netscape Navigator.
Trying the manual approach,I typed in, erroneously, chandlerforcongress.com, and got the site of a defeated Green candidate in Colorado!
JayG, and any one else wondering-- the link to Stephanie Herseth's campaign is over at dailykos (left margin)-- just as worthwhile while chandler's site is down, and it has the added benefit of making you feel like you're screwing Janklow.
also, sorry for the double post, but the most recent poll (SUSA) numbers are:
Chandler (D) 54
Kerr 44
But I've seen elsewhere that it's much closer. Anyway, it's worthwhile.
I think we may have blown the server.
Perfect example of bad news being very good news.
I'm on my way out there tommorrow to help on the ground in KY. Wish us luck...
all fixed now
So when do we find out the numbers??
To the person who lives in Kansas:
Do you think Joan Ruff has any chance of giving Brownback a run for his money? In a recent article, she gave *great* reasons for why she's running against him, but she doesn't seem to be getting any money or promotion.
Re: Ben Chandler
Some surveys, including those from Chandler's internal polls, have them 4% apart (Chandler leading).
The reason that this victory is important is because a) this will be a litmus test for whether or not voters in conservative bellwethers are beginning to wake up from the must-vote-GOP-or-terrorists-win haze of '02 and '03, and b) to show America and the Republicans that Democrats can successfully adapt to the area around them. To survive as a party, we need to have pro-life Dems, pro-gun Dems, pro-war Dems, because that is the makeup of much of the country. People like Ben Chandler will remind voters that Dems are not all latte-swilling pinko liberals, as Rove wants us to believe.
Kentucky Democrats have to be conservative, because it's a conservative state, even moreso after the fiasco with Paul Patton. But don't count Chandler out. Kerr has run as a total partisan hack. Even some of my Republican friends who live in Kentucky have said she is "nothing more than Mitch McConnell's latest winged monkey", and want nothing to do with her. She has no new ideas and not a thought in her head. Every press release, every interview is just "I will fulfill President Bush's glorious plan for America". Hopefully even in Kentucky that isn't enough for voters anymore. There's a good article linked to on Ben's site about a GOP candidate filing for the November elections. The guy basically says that he doesn't think Kerr has a chance in hell, and that Bushco have such little confidence in her that they changed their minds about sending Dubya or Dick down to stump votes for her. He also wondered why she said she needed to get GOP support from outside of the district, but then he heard that some Republicans are voting for Chandler in February and may vote Republican in the November election.
http://
www.chandlerforcongress.o...j_012904_1.html
I think NH will probably vote Democratic this year - well, for president anyway. See, even though there are lots of Republicans here, BushCo isn't all that popular. Repubs here tend to really want *smaller government* - they don't consider humongous deficits, the USA PATRIOT Act, or pork for Halliburton and Bechtel conservative in the least. (And they don't like Bush himself either - NH overwhelmingly told him to take a hike in the 2000 primary.) Perhaps the write-in voters decided that even a damn librul would be better than this idiot.
And remember, in 2000, Bush only beat Gore here by about 7,000 votes, with Nader getting 22,000, and most of the Naderites will vote Dem this year (Anybody But Bush, ya know). So if BushCo gets 85% running unopposed, they have every reason to be scared.
How much is NH anyway? 4 electoral votes? Is that really going to help the Dems?
I hope that the Dems are seriously concerned about California. They must not take that state for granted.
If Gore had gotten those four electoral votes, he'd've been installed as president.
No matter what happened in Florida, it was that close.
Saveoursyrup: Thanks for directing me to Daily Kos' link to Stepahanie Herseth's contribution page. I sent a few bucks her way today as well. We can easily be two votes closer to seperating Tom Delay from the majority powers before the November elections begin.
evave2, I'm not taking the votes for granted, but when we stand a good chance of losing places like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Maryland, maybe even California if the amnesty plan is popular enough among Hispanics and if Arnold is enough of a charmer, those 4 NH votes won't be of much help.
Here's an article about House reps, including 4 "frontliners" (very vulnerable candidates) who are donating their campaign funds to Chandler and if he's successful, hope the same will happen for Herseth. The GOP smugly says "over 150 of ours have already maxed out [on giving funds to Kerr]." She doesn't seem to realize that it makes Kerr look truly pathetic if 150 members of the House had to scrape together enough to support her campaign. It's sad how many good Democratic Congressmen are constantly shut out, rarely able to keep their seats, while totally unqualified GOP hacks stay for decades.
http://www.thehill.com/news/0128...4/
kentucky.aspx
I really hope he can pull through; the papers are saying that tonight's TV debate will probably help Kerr because she isn't well-known around the state. She's also using a duplicate of the attack ads which Ernie Fletcher used on Chandler during the race.
Kerry is the second to last democrat that I would like to see win - it was like Clinton in '92 - complete non-progressive seemingly reagan-democrat.
I know clinton did lots of good, but he did too many conservative things - tax cuts, NAFTA, GATT, Globalization, didn't ratify kyoto.
Dean is the man who says he doesn't want special interest money, etc. So the big-money machine (lobbyists)turns it's eye toward kerry. I know we need to elect a democrat, but I would rather see Dean or Clark or Edwards before Kerry.
I live in Kansas too. My district voted for Dennis Moore when the repub candidate was too extreme. It's possible, even here. Take a look at the democratic woman governor.
The NYT Sunday magazine has an article today on black Democratic voters in the South. The overall argument in the piece is that Democrats are on the verge of losing that voting bloc altogether.
monica, thank you for pointing that out. The article was sobering, to say the least. I hope that the hack McAuliffe takes a long look at every word. This is one of the most socially conservative voter bases in America and they could very easily swing to the GOP. What annoys me the most is that Kerry has a 100% voting record with the NAACP, and yet he made the comments about not needing the South. No matter how much he tempers them, voters won't forget. A recent poll said that 43% of all registered voters would vote for the Democrat if the election was held today, but once the GOP gets through smearing him as a liberal effete and once the voters recoil from his aloof manner, Kerry is highly unlikely to carry SC.
I think the Dems seriously need to consider having someone like Harold Ford Jr. on the ticket as VP. It's well past time. Naturally, he won't get voters just because of his race, but he's also from the South and he's very well-respected by both parties.
At any rate, the Dems are going to have to really work hard to attract their key voter bases this election season. They have been much too lax and they keep paying increasingly ugly prices.
Jon,
I agree with most of what you say above. But what I see in doing GOTV work in New York is less that even the more conservative black voters will go to the GOP (though some have) than that even more people will opt to drop out of the process altogether.
It is a continuing source of frustration that the Democratic Party is willing to write off black voters and seemingly all working and poor people in the South. We feel the repurcussions throughout the country.
I'm not a registered Democrat, but I've learned that it becomes ever more difficult to get people involved in the process at a local level again -- where we can bring about more change, instead of simply stopping the bleeding, as we hope to do at a national level -- after they have given up on participating in even national electoral politics. They just don't want to hear about it.
I'd rather see, say, James Clyburn move into a public position of power within the party than Harold Ford Jr., though you're right that Ford might be more attractive to conservative voters.
The Repugs are doing their best to get blacks (by pushing arch-conservative bigots like Vernon Robinson in NC) while doing absolutely nothing to help blacks, aside from pushing for faith-based iniatives (most of which go to big white churches, but who looks at the fine print, right?).
I hope that the Dems realize the situation before it's too late.
Best places to play, best strategies to win. Player ratings & reviews of top online casinos & pokers with highest payouts & biggest bonuses.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
