|Commissar Ed: Need directive RE which Dumocrat to support||Dale Brigham|
Nov 10, 2003 7:58 AM
Apparently, my comrade cell members have either been rounded up or have simply lost interest in fomenting insurrection, so your communiques to the Peoples Republic of Columbia (MO) have not yet been received. I apologize in advance for using this public forum to reach you and receive your official directives. Of course, given the level of discourse on this board, I can't imagine anyone actually believing anything stated herein. We will exploit that glaring weakness to our advantage, Commissar.
I need your guidance on which of our party's Glorious Presidential Candidates to support in the upcoming primaries and subsequent presidential election, assuming (naively, pehaps) it won't be cancelled for "security reasons." I am prepared to donate up to $100 USD from my cell's treasury (mainly proceeds from our annual May Day bake sale) to a candidate of your choosing.
Please confer your guidance and wisdom upon me, Commissar. Explanation and/or justification of your selection criteria would be most appreciated. We must know your thoughts, so that we may parrot them to the masses.
As Always, Your Obedient Useful Idiot,
P.S. Sorry about that Wildcat OT loss to the Razorbacks. Remember, roundball season starts soon! DB
|SEVEN overtimes! What a nightmare.||OldEdScott|
Nov 10, 2003 8:37 AM
|We Dumocrats are in a pickle, Comrade Dale. We have a potentially winnable race next year, but we don't have a candidate who seems capable of seizing that opportunity. Sigh. Where's Bill when you need him?
Quick handicapping (odds of winning nomination/odds of beating Bush):
Lieberman: Nope. Puts people to sleep. 99-1/200-1
Kerry: Nope. His campaign is already sinking like a rock. Fired his campaign manager yesterday, a very bad sign. 99-1/50-1
Gephardt: Outside chance. Surprisingly resilient out there. Should do well early, may pick up some momentum. 25-1/25-1
Edwards: Hmmm. Really likeable on the campaign trail. A southerner. If he can survive past Iowa-New Hampshire (big if) he has some targets of opportunity. 25-1/15-1
Clark: Who'd have thought he'd be such a dud as a campaigner? Still, he may find his sea legs and improve. Needs to four-in-hand his ties. That knot he uses makes him look like Al Haig. 10-1/5-1
Dean: As a redneck myself, I'd have liked it better if he'd never apologized for the rebel flag remark. We don't mind insults, really. And we like it when people say: 'Yeah, I said it and I meant it and if you don't like it you can kiss my ass.' Dean would have picked up points for that down here. Even money/4-1
I dunno, comrade. Depends on what you want. If you want a winner, Dean's the best shot we have (especially if he can get Clark on the ticket). If you just want to make an idealistic Commie pinko statement, you might want to look elsewhere 'cause Dean's no liberal. Gephardt's the only real liberal in the bunch, and he's sort of hovering there with the POSSIBILITY of taking off. Home-state boy, too -- you might get a job in his admnistration and burrow from within!
Nov 10, 2003 9:50 AM
|I agree with most of what you say. But, given Clark's lackluster performance, I think that a Dean-Edwards ticket would be the strongest combination. Comment?|
|It would be a very useful ticket, yes.||OldEdScott|
Nov 10, 2003 9:57 AM
|And it could be the stronger combination if Clark fails to improve. People keep assuring me he will (improve), but all I can see is Al Haig on meds.|
|Directive received, Commisar; My humble comments follow||Dale Brigham|
Nov 10, 2003 10:07 AM
|Esteemed Commissar Ed:
Yes, winner wanted! Ideology quite irrelevant. In point of fact, I'm more of a Yellow-Dog Dumocrat than a Libbrul. Just want to taste a bit of victory after almost four years of bitter defeats.
To your takes on our ragged herd, I humbly add the following:
Lieberman, Kerry, Gephardt -- All reasonably qualified to be President; all no-hopers this time around. Sort of speaks for the process, don't it? I hope you are right about Gephardt, but losing those union endorsements lowers his odds, IMHO.
Edwards -- If you say he has a chance, he must have raised some dough, because I hear nothing about him otherwise.
Clark -- Maybe having run for elective office sometime before jumping into the deep water of presidential politics is actually a good idea. I had no idea he'd be such an unprepared candidate. I was hoping for better; perhaps he'll come around.
Dean -- Who gives these guys advice? Yankee morons? (Is that redundant, Ed?) Heck, the only chance he has down South is to embrace NASCAR dads, guzzle Busch Light (they's watchin' their figgurs) with them, and get on stage at a Toby Keith concert (preferably, not as a target of said beer cans). He says the one true thing (uhh, we needs these guys votes) uttered in the whole dad-gum race, and he gets nailed for it. You are absolutely correct, Ed. If he would have just said "Hellyeah, I said it, and hellyeah, I meant it," he would have gained a measure of credence from the hoi-polloi. Sadly and predictably, he caves, thereby looking lame and stupid (Note to Doug Sloan -- "Hellyeah I said it!") to both Libbruls and NASCAR dads.
Ed, we need at least one of these candi-bots to acquire some cojones, channel LBJ (may he rest in peace in his own lil' corner o' Hell), and kick some bee-hind. If ya' ain't pissin' somebody off, ya' ain't doin' nothin'!
The $100 stays in the cell treasury until further orders.
BTW, back at TAMU/College Station in the mid-70s, I trooped around in an Econoline van owned by a buddy from San Angelo sporting a stars-and-bars Confederate beach towel (cheaper than a flag, and more absorbant, too) showing in the back window. Thought nothing of it, at the time. Of course, I wouldn't put one in the back of my Hyundai wagon these days. Would not want to offend anyone or cause an accident (e.g., fellow drivers laughing uncontrollably).
Your Humble and Obedient Servant,
|i've always liked the confederate flag.||rufus|
Nov 10, 2003 6:06 PM
|it may raise the hackles of a lot of folks, but c'mon, it's just a piece of cloth. it's just a great looking design.
but then again, i like the look of Iron Crosses too. :O
PC be damned.
|Well, as usual your analysis is excellent.||OldEdScott|
Nov 10, 2003 6:26 PM
|Gephardt's union-endorsement problem bruises him, but it's not fatal. I think the influence of the unions (rank and file) in Dumocrat politics is vastly overrated these days. Hell, the line guys are running rebel flags IN their pickup trucks and voting Repub, most of the time.
Edwards I just say is likeable and good on the stump. If he survives the early shakeout, he may get some money and do well in the Southern primaries. A long shot, but who knows?
You're VERY acute about Clark. Never underestimate the value of having actually run a campaign before. LBJ himself, speaking to a TERRIFICALLY qualified potential candidate who'd never stood for office before, declined his entreaty to endorse him. "Go run for something, dog catcher will do, and actually git elected. THEN come back and talk to me." Politics, like surgery, can't be done on good intentions. You have to LEARN it by doing it. Clark's finding that out, and it's painful to do it at the highest imaginable level. Whew.
Keep your C-note. We'll need it in the fall. I'll let you know when and where to mail it (probably C.O. Old Ed Scott, Parts Unknown Farm, Parts Unknown, KY 40299. Make it out to Red's Red Dot Liquors, and I'll, uh, launder the contribution there.)
|what i don't get about clark..||rufus|
Nov 11, 2003 8:19 AM
|he was hemming and hawing for something like six months about whether he was going to run or not, and then he finally decides to throw his hat in the ring. yet, in the first debate, when asked for specifics of his economic plans, etc., he said that he was still working on them, and should have something concrete within the next week.
don't you think that these were things he could have been working on in the months before he declared, so when he finally stepped in the ring, he wouldn't come off as so unprepared? it just struck me as amateurish and lazy.
|Give it to George Soros||moneyman|
Nov 10, 2003 10:12 AM
|He is taking the message to the people in a big way.
You may have to register to read it, but the worlds' favorite drug legalizing advocate will be spending lots o' dough to dis-elect the President. And I say dis-elect intentionally, because Soros does not appear to care who gets elected, as long as it's not the current occupant of the White House.
From the article: "A President Dean would owe far more chits to Mr. Soros than Vice President Dick Cheney has ever owed to Halliburton."
Follow the money.
|Follow the $170 million Bush is planning to raise? nm||OldEdScott|
Nov 10, 2003 10:19 AM
|Sure! And while we're at it...||moneyman|
Nov 10, 2003 10:46 AM
|Let's get rid of McCain - Feingold campaign finance "reform" at the same time. In fact, let's just get rid of limits on the amount that can be contributed by individuals and have full disclosure. Soros can run all the ads he wants under his moniker America Coming Together (ACT) and no one will really know who is behind it. He can't give millions to the Dems directly, but he can give it to an advovate of the Dems, just like others can do it for the Repubs. With full disclosure, we would know for sure who is bankrolling the pols, and whose bread the pols will subsequently be buttering.
Let's say that Dean wins (shudder!) and Soros has spent $100 million through ACT to get that result. Does Dean pretend that he has no allegiance to Soros because the money came through ACT? I don't think so, either. Yes, the same came happen on the other side of the aisle as well, but I am not familiar with anyone who is willing to commit that kind of serious money to the GWB campaign.
|I'm with you, brother! Money is speech.||OldEdScott|
Nov 10, 2003 10:56 AM
|Raise it, spend it, I don't care. I've never liked spending limits or individual contribution limits. Raising money is a test of popularity too. It's part of the process.
My point is, Republicans shouldn't whine if we field a candidate who can raise or motivate an obscene amount of money for his candidacy too. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. GWB is taking presidential campaign spending past the statosphere. I expect we'll either go along for the ride or get our asses whipped, and Dean doesn't give me the impression he likes getting his ass whipped. I like that about the man. If Soros can give him a boost, more power to him.
|Please see Tyson Foods for reference. I has and does ...||Live Steam|
Nov 10, 2003 11:15 AM
|happen on the other side of the aisle :O)|| |