The upcoming US presidential election

The Graun's coverage is collected here.

I'll begin.

I struggle to think of one issue where Bush has improved the state of the US. Therefore, I will vote for anyone who is not Bush in the election, and I am more energized than ever to get friends and family who may be on the fence out to vote for the Democratic ticket. I think that many Americans feel the same way. I also think Bush is doing himself no favors lately by alienating people who were on his side in the beginning.

I admire Al Sharpton more than the other Democratic candidates, but I would be very, very pleased to vote on a Kerry/Edwards ticket. I liked Dean early, but he reached Perot-like levels of stupidity quickly. Clark should've never entered the race, as he hasn't brought anything of value to the game.

Given it's still only primary season, my first question is- how long until Dean and Clark bow out? (I was glad to see Lieberman go, as he should be a Republican anyway)

Somethingawful's coverage is here:

http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=1949

I love this. Luds, you've got to keep this going all the way through now
My feeling is that Howard Dean peaked too early, lost the hunger and basically pissed on his chips. It is a shame because I thought he was a good bet.
I am concerned at the lack of Democrat candidates.
Kerry is looking good, but he may go the same way as Dean. It's still too far away. I wish I could follow it closer.
Bearing in mind the ridiculous circus last time that allowed GWB in, are the American public determined to vote properly this time?
Hope so.
Great isn't it? I love it.

There's something not right about Kerry though. I think it might be the hair.

He just doesn't seem, er, presidential for some reason.

Matthew

It's the chin.

John

Call me naive, but I've never understood presidental campaigns. I mean, all they amount to is a contest of who "puts on the best show".

Whoever endears themselves to the most people for a few short months gets to decide the course of the globe for 4 years. I think it's somewhat fucked.

Yes, it's the chin.
I disagree Mike. You have to remember that this is the American way and they built this democratic process themselves from scratch and are, quite rightly, very proud of it. It may be a very long drawn out contest, but it gets there in the end and probably creates more interest in politics than any other system, which is great. Why not make politics fun and accessible to the masses?
Over here, the process is so dull and heavy, it just turns people off, and that isn't good for anyone. We also inherited this old system that "tradition" dictates will stay until the end of time - powdered wigs, three bashes on the door with the mace - Jeeze, it sucks!
The USA are doing it for themselves and good on 'em I say.
(I'm in a happy mood today)

Rasher

Where does the phrase 'pissed on his chips' come from? I'm hoping it's not more extreme version of gobbing on your chips to stop someone nicking them. Have the Hollingbury roughnecks been ambushing you on the way back from Bardsley's?

Have you not heard that one before? I suppose it stems from the same thing insofar as if you piss on them, you end up not being able to eat them yourself, so yes.
There was a birthday party in Bardsley's on Tuesday night - it was like a college common room! (Not that I was there of course).

It's hard to sort this out, because in some ways Bush is more akin to a Johnson-era liberal than anyone since Carter. Consider:

Traditional Conservative Platform:
Broadly libertarian.

Bush Administration:
- USA Patriot Act (Broad extension of govt. policing and surveillance powers)
- federal prohibition on gay unions and $1.5bn for marriage initiative(proposed)
- federal govt. funded abstinence programs and mandatory drug-testing in schools (proposed)
- federal money for religious charities
- approval of every social welfare bill brought before him
- proposed gutting of the Freedom of Information Act
- limitation of individual property rights through sweeping new EPA proposals
- etc. (cf. Ashcroft's CV)

Traditional Conservative Platform:
Limited federal spending

Bush Admin.:
-Discretionary spending rate increase of 18% over first three years: highest rate since Johnson admin. (This doesn't count Bush's massive defense increases.)
- Total spending rate is the largest in decades.
- Did not veto a single spending bill in first three years.

Traditional Conservative Platform:
"Fiscal responsibility"

Bush Admin.
Massive tax-cuts (2004 budget gives Feds 15.7% of GDP, compared with 20.9% for 2000).
+ Massive spending increases
= Record-setting deficits, both as a percentage of GDP and in real terms, with no end in sight (compare surplus from last Clinton years).

Johnson administration: Pointless, costly, ideologically-driven war.
Bush administration: Pointless, costly, ideologically-driven war.

If they are serious about their alleged core values, shouldn't the right hate GWB?

ejl,

Well put. It just doesn't make sense. The only reason I can see why GWB is tolerated is because he's firmly in the pocket of big business.

Dan

EJL,

I'm right there with ya. That's exactly what I meant when I said Bush is alienating people that were with him in the beginning.

Meanwhile, many people still can't feed their kids, inner city and rural schools suck, minorities live in near-third-world squalor in our biggest cities, and the number of people out of work continues to look dire.

Like Dan says, his priorities aren't based on the greatest needs but on special interests driving policies. Down with the prick and the old boys club!!!

So what are his chances of getting re-elected?

Well, unfortunately I think it will be the most heated and tight race ever. Some polls have shown Kerry as favored over Bush, but there are 9 months to go and Bush has spent more money on focus groups than any President and he'll have lots of money for his campaign. Despite his blunders, G-Dub's Christian principles still resonate in the South and rural America.

Then there's the possibility of another stolen election, given the electronic voting machines being rolled out in numerous states. They (Siebold, whose CEO contributes a lot of $$$ to the Republican party) didn't go through a rigorous certification process as everything before them. They leave no paper trail. They have major tampering and security issues. They mysteriously lose votes (this happened recently in of all places, Florida, during a local vote).

[This message was edited by Ludwig on THURSDAY 05 February 2004 at 18:37.]

You worry me Ludwig

Did I forget a or something, or is it my uncertainties that worry you?

I'm not sure where the notion that Kerry does not look "presidential" come from? It's my impression from watching and listening to political commentary from the ussual pundits that it's Kerry's "presidential" looks that may be playing as much of a role as anything else. Aside from deans other problems (who was it that said he was "perot-like"?) he doesn't look or act "presidential".

The fact is, how one carries himself and his general look makes such a HUGE difference in likeability. And that's just as responsible for winning elections as anything else.

Judd

I said Dean is Perot-like. What I mean is he talks fast, promises a lot of turning everything upside down, says a lot of things he later regrets, uses slang like "crap" and "screwed", and in general is painful to listen to in an interview.

Clinton and G-Dub don't look or act presidential.
I think Dean looks the most presidental of them all. Kerry looks OK, but his voice is incredibly monotone, and not in a good way like Marge Thatcher's.

I would like Howard Dean to make a comeback.
Ludwig - I just wanted you to say that GW won't stand a chance.
I'm coming over again soon, so I will catch up with the TV over there.

One thing (or actually two) that gives me hope is that usually the tallest of the two contenders wins, and Kerry is tall.

The second thing is his hair may be gray but it is darn good hair, and all election processes have been turning into hair contests the past fifteen years. A bald guy wouldn't stand a chance.

Ludwig's opening statement really sums it all up: it's impossible to think of one single way in which Dubya has made the US a better place during this term.

But of course he's going to say he needs to finish the job, and then we'll see.

And, yeah, Kerry needs to loosen up a little. Dubya obviously is going to do the pork rind thing again, just like his dad - hang out with the ordinary guys and talk about Kerry as a patrician New Englander (which actually would characterize both contenders pretty concisely - and there's nothing wrong with it). But I hear Kerry's been loosening up lately.

I'm a little apprehensive Dean is not going to go out without doing max damage to Kerry first, thus helping the incumbent.

Herman

I wonder if Dean will win my state tomorrow (Washington). Afterall, we've been referred to as "the Soviet Republic of Washington".

quote:

---

Ludwig - I just wanted you to say that GW won't stand a chance.

---

I wanted me to say that too.

Seen at the border of Canuckistan and the Soviet Republic of Washington:

Seen in the heart of the Soviet Republic of Washington:

Lenin Statue in Fremont