Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

Gay Marriage did not elect Bush

Old 11-06-04, 11:55 AM
  #51  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
I think the dems made a mistake selecting Edwards as the VP candidate, let alone the presidential candidate.
bhk is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 11:55 AM
  #52  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 36,981
who would have been a better VP candidate?

i think Edwards was supposed to deliver a southern state...he failed.
Venusian is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 11:57 AM
  #53  
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: In mourning
Posts: 26,303
Originally posted by Venusian
who would have been a better VP candidate?

i think Edwards was supposed to deliver a southern state...he failed.

I meant better as a Presidential candidate. Edwards would have been destroyed.



@ bhk
Pharoh is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 12:02 PM
  #54  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 123,068
I still wonder how Gephardt could have done. Sure he has as much charisma as a cardboard box, but I think Democrats were pretty much guaranteed the states they won (except for NH) no matter who the candidate was. Geography played more of a role than the actual campaigns (which were both poor). I think Kerry won every state he possibly could. He basically maxed out. I think Gephardt's potential max (ability to win midwest states and NM) was higher than Kerry's.
Red Dog is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 12:04 PM
  #55  
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: In mourning
Posts: 26,303
Originally posted by Red Dog
I still wonder how Gephardt could have done. Sure he has as much charisma as a cardboard box, but I think Democrats were pretty much guaranteed the states they won (except for NH) no matter who the candidate was. Geography played more of a role than the actual campaigns (which were both poor). I think Kerry won every state he possibly could. He basically maxed out. I think Gephardt's potential max (ability to win midwest states and NM) was higher than Kerry's.

He was the exception I talked about. I always felt him to be the most formidable, though it seems the Dems never liked him that much.
Pharoh is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 12:06 PM
  #56  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 11,747
Originally posted by Pharoh

I strongly disagree with your second point. Enough people in this nation approve of the President, especially in states that matter electorally, that he would have been President regardless. Further, the gay marriage issue, or the homophobe issue as you so nicely put it, did not decide this election. You can keep on believing it, but there is no proof to back up that claim.
I never said that the homophobe issue decided the election! I don't believe that it did. I said that had Kerry been able to convince voters that he'd be better able to protect them than Bush can, the homophobe issue would not have been a factor at all.

By the way, had Kerry been able to convince 140,000 more Ohioans of that (or had they decided to change their votes for some other reason) he would have still come up way short in the popular vote but he would be President. Please don't act like the result was a fait accompli.

Don't worry though, I think the Republicans will only pick up one, maybe two, more Senate seats in 2006.
Okay.... And this should concern me... why?
dork is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 12:09 PM
  #57  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,639
Originally posted by Pharoh
I agree to an extent. I made the comment in one of the debate threads about all of them were being viewed through the reality of the first debate. After that no matter how well the President performed, he would be considered the "loser." This was clearly the case in the third debate especially. That first debate cost him at least two points.

However, I still maintain that Mr. Kerry was a good candidate. Seriously, who would have been better?
I agree - out of that field, nobody would've been any better, though I supposed you could make a case for Lieberman(though I'm not sure how their base would've like Joe).

I also thought Kerry would be the best candidate during the Dem primaries. I did go back and forth on it, but I remember a few days before Iowa I told my wife that Kerry would be the only one out of them that could maybe beat Bush. As much hey as was made about his Vietnam deal, it really did help him in the campaign running against this President, who was widely seen as a strong wartime leader.

When Kerry was running so badly in August and September I felt it could be a Dukakis-style blowout. But he did turn it on in the end, though the President largely helped him on that regard with his disastrous first debate performance, whiich literally took a 6 point RCP average race to a virtual TIE almost overnight. A huge swing. And huge momentum given to Kerry by the President.

Also, I think Kerry "closed" well, because he simply has no core convictions. Meaning, he was clearly flailing around during August and September in the campaign - grasping every which way to try and make some traction, landing on every side of every issue, and struggling to find a theme.

But because he has no convictions of his own, once the end of a campaign is in sight, he was really able to focus and turn it on - because then he's close enough to the finish line to be able to assess the situation and figure out what he should "believe" and what his strategy should be. Once he's close enough, he can see what he needs to do and he does it - because he certainly doesn't have any core beliefs holding him back, he can bend and twist whichever way the political winds say are the best at the end of the campaign.

He certainly did that here.

Last night, Evan Thomas on O'Reilly was making a big deal out of Kerry rejecting Clinton's advice to support some of the local gay marriage ballot-initiatiives. Kerry did not, and Thomas called that "principled". But it was anything but.

Kerry said he was against gay marriage, but legislatively, he obviously wasn't - neither in these ballot measures or in Bill Clinton's "Defense of Marriage" act.

Kerry also said he supported Missouri's ban when they did it earlier this year:

"Drawn into a Missouri debate over same-sex marriage, Sen. John F. Kerry said in an interview published Friday that he would’ve voted for the gay marriage ban passed overwhelmingly this week by [Missouri] voters."

But he then turned around and said he opposed that same initiative when being interviewded by a gay magazine.

Some "principle".

This was simply a guy who doesn't really believe ANYTHING, and so it's much easier to go where you need to at the end of a campaign. He was empty enough to fill any crack that needed filling, because he had no internal structure of his own to keep him from such plasticity.
natesfortune is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 12:11 PM
  #58  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 11,747
Originally posted by Venusian
who would have been a better VP candidate?
Some have said Wesley Clark or Anthony Zinni. Someone with more hawkish credentials to offset Kerry's weakness in that area.

Edwards was pretty clearly a huge mistake.
dork is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 12:13 PM
  #59  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
By the way, had Kerry been able to convince 140,000 more Ohioans of that (or had they decided to change their votes for some other reason) he would have still come up way short in the popular vote but he would be President. Please don't act like the result was a fait accompli.
He wouldn't have been able to do it. Ohio is a republican state. The republican get out the vote campaign was very finely tuned worked because they had practice runs in 2002. The dem ground game was outsourced to 527 groups like moveon.org. The 527 groups then couldn't have contact with the state dem party due to campaign finance reform.

Seriously, take a look at

http://jaycost.blogspot.com
bhk is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 12:16 PM
  #60  
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: In mourning
Posts: 26,303
Originally posted by dork
I never said that the homophobe issue decided the election! I don't believe that it did. I said that had Kerry been able to convince voters that he'd be better able to protect them than Bush can, the homophobe issue would not have been a factor at all.
Point taken


By the way, had Kerry been able to convince 140,000 more Ohioans of that (or had they decided to change their votes for some other reason) he would have still come up way short in the popular vote but he would be President. Please don't act like the result was a fait accompli.
Agreed, it was close, and it could have turned the other way. However, I definitely think the deck was stacked against whomever the Democratic candidate would have been.


Okay.... And this should concern me... why?
Maybe I am the confused one. I thought you were bothered by the Republicans strengthening their holds on the government, particularly because of their use of moral issues to attain victory.
Pharoh is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 12:32 PM
  #61  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 11,747
Originally posted by Pharoh
However, I definitely think the deck was stacked against whomever the Democratic candidate would have been.
Of course! That's why the actual result was more frustrating than a 60-40 blowout would have been. I'm only even discussing this issue because it seems clear to me that victory was attainable after all -- if only the Democrats weren't so tin-eared to the actual worries of the electorate.

Maybe I am the confused one. I thought you were bothered by the Republicans strengthening their holds on the government, particularly because of their use of moral issues to attain victory.
The "morals" issues is a separate, and very depressing, aspect of the election (perhaps the main one, actually). But just telling me that a few more Republicans will come into office does not frighten me, a priori. It very much depends on which Republicans we're talking about.
dork is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 12:45 PM
  #62  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,639
Yes, Ohio was close - but Pennsylvania was even closer. So again, it's not AS close as you're making it out to be.

It did not come out to "just 130,000 voters in Ohio". That's about 2.5% of that state's electorate, and moving that much of the state to Kerry would not have been easy, and would likely be mirrored in the national resuts anyway. Bush won the nation by 3 points. He won Ohio by about 2.5. Had Kerry just barely won Ohio, mathematically, he would've likely been extremely close nationwide as well. That's just the way it works. Bush increased his percentages over last election in almost every state. State totals are closely reflected and tied into national sentiment, with fairly little variance for most states.

Whatever their "center point" is - be it favoring Dem or Favoring Republican - is where you tend to start out in an election, and then you can add national victory margin to that "center point" to get each state. In the case of Ohio, it's distressing for Republicans, because it looks like its "center point" is now a tossup. This could change before next election as jobs come back, but who knows?
natesfortune is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 01:49 PM
  #63  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Originally posted by Pharoh
He was the exception I talked about. I always felt him to be the most formidable, though it seems the Dems never liked him that much.
I don't believe you and Red Dog are serious about Gephardt.

Clearly, if culture issues decided the campaign, only Lieberman had a chance.

Lieberman clearly does not carry the 'cultural divide' baggage that the other Democrats had.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 02:54 PM
  #64  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 123,068
Lieberman had no shot whatsoever.
Red Dog is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 02:57 PM
  #65  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,731
Originally posted by Venusian
who would have been a better VP candidate?

i think Edwards was supposed to deliver a southern state...he failed.
Biden? Kerrey? Clark?
CRM114 is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 03:00 PM
  #66  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,731
Originally posted by dork
The "morals" issues is a separate, and very depressing, aspect of the election (perhaps the main one, actually). But just telling me that a few more Republicans will come into office does not frighten me, a priori. It very much depends on which Republicans we're talking about.
If the GOP were to pick up 5 more seats in 2006, they'd be able to place anyone on the Court they wanted.
CRM114 is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 03:01 PM
  #67  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Originally posted by Red Dog
Lieberman had no shot whatsoever.
He had not shot with you!!!

Tell me what votes did Kerry receive that Lieberman would not have received?

BTW: No VP candidate was going to be able to deliver a southern state - and that includes Bob Graham.

The right presidential candidate might have won a southern state or two.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 03:01 PM
  #68  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,731
Originally posted by Red Dog
Lieberman had no shot whatsoever.
Evangelicals would vote for a Jewish man? I HIGHLY doubt that would EVER happen. Joe isn't a "good Christian man" regardless of his apparent moral convictions.
CRM114 is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 03:03 PM
  #69  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Originally posted by CRM114
If the GOP were to pick up 5 more seats in 2006, they'd be able to place anyone on the Court they wanted.
I assume you mean 5 more senate seats.

The house doesn't vote on judicial nominationations.

classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 03:03 PM
  #70  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 123,068
Originally posted by classicman2
He had not shot with you!!!

Tell me what votes did Kerry receive that Lieberman would not have received?

BTW: No VP candidate was going to be able to deliver a southern state - and that includes Bob Graham.

The right presidential candidate might have won a southern state or two.

Newsflash - he's Jewish.


And as I said before, I also never believed (except for a brief period on election day) that Kerry had a shot.
Red Dog is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 03:04 PM
  #71  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Originally posted by CRM114
Evangelicals would vote for a Jewish man? I HIGHLY doubt that would EVER happen. Joe isn't a "good Christian man" regardless of his apparent moral convictions.
Are you serious?

Evangelicals are among the largest supporters of the State of Israel.

Evangelicals would much rather vote for a Jew than they would someone who they consider to be openly hostile to religion.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 03:05 PM
  #72  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 123,068
C-man, to turn the table, you think he had a shot because you loved him.
Red Dog is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 03:06 PM
  #73  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Lieberman would have carried every state that Kerry carried.

He would have a better chance, IMO, of carrying Florida.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 03:07 PM
  #74  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Originally posted by Red Dog
C-man, to turn the table, you think he had a shot because you loved him.
When you become better acquainted with how today's evangelicals feel about Jews, feel free to rejoin the discussion.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-06-04, 03:09 PM
  #75  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 123,068
Originally posted by classicman2
When you become better acquainted with how today's evangelicals feel about Jews, feel free to rejoin the discussion.

Please. They would vote for a guy like Bush over Lieberman in a second. Face facts, your boy had no shot.
Red Dog is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.