Howard Dean, thanks for the election! GOP will be thanking Dean in November. (1 Viewer)

[Pure Energy]

This is a very early prediction that hasn't appeared in the press (not that I've seen anyway) but because you're reading this you get a head's up on everyone else. My prediction is this election is the Dems to lose (weak economy, unpopular war in Iraq, spiraling energy costs, failure during Katrina, etc.) and only lack of leadership and particularly the missteps in MI and FL (stripping them of 100% of their votes, inability to promote a make-up election, failing to take into account the number of delegates in each state) will be the key factors in deciding the election for the GOP. When the dust clears, the fingers will not be pointing at Obama or Clinton. The likely target is DNC leadership (or lack of leadership)--Howard Dean.

You heard it here first!

 

[purvis_guy]

I Can Haz Election!

 

[THAJCODE]

 

[SaintJ]

Another slow night in Jersey.

 

[St. Greatness]

BYAHH!!!!!.......oh, sorry about that, but someone had to do it. I do agree with what he said about Hillary and Obama (about ending the battle between the two, so the GOP won't win).

 

[SoonerJim]

It's a strange era in which we live when Howard Dean is the voice of moderation and sanity in the Democratic party. He was a quite reasonable character as governor, but became afflicted with animal spirits when Bushhate became the coin of the realm in Democratic circles. Now, Bushhate is accepted dogma, as natural as breathing to those not old enough to remember LBJ or Nixon.

It's March, so predictions are necessarily speculative. I still do not see the anticipated Great Depression Sequel, and the current Basra offensive will help determine whether Iraqi forces will fare better than did the South Vietnamese army in 1975. Having them tested now is preferable to an internecine battle, with us not able to effect an outcome. that was our problem in 1975; we were out of the country.

Some events are accepted truths, namely, the person best able to answer the infamous 3am phone call. There is only one with that experience, Hillary Clinton. While Hillary served crumpets in the East Wing, Bill was serviced by strumpets in the West Wing. That, in a nut, is why Obama leads. The Kennedys were randy and classy.

 

[longtime lurker]

This is a very early prediction that hasn't appeared in the press (not that I've seen anyway) but because you're reading this you get a head's up on everyone else. My prediction is this election is the Dems to lose (weak economy, unpopular war in Iraq, spiraling energy costs, failure during Katrina, etc.) and only lack of leadership and particularly the missteps in MI and FL (stripping them of 100% of their votes, inability to promote a make-up election, failing to take into account the number of delegates in each state) will be the key factors in deciding the election for the GOP. When the dust clears, the fingers will not be pointing at Obama or Clinton. The likely target is DNC leadership (or lack of leadership)--Howard Dean.

You heard it here first!

I'm a registered Democrat in Florida and you are right. There's a battle between the party elite in the State and the DNC. Both of those groups have essentially forgat about the everyday voters in this State and have taken them for granted. The longer this drags on...the greater chance that the Democratic Party loses votes for the Nov Elections.

I can't speak for every Democrat, but a lot of my friends share my same feelings.

 

[SaintJ]

Now, Bushhate is accepted dogma, as natural as breathing to those not old enough to remember LBJ or Nixon.

What does this mean? Or were you just rambling?

 

[SoonerJim]

Nixon was loathed for a three decade old career littered with the savaged reputations of real and rumored Communists, Alger Hiss and Helen Gehagan Douglas being respective examples. Nixon books are second only to Lincoln's in quantity, and surpass all in invective. It was all deserved.

Johnson's reputation is better only in comparison, as his quest to complete his role model FDR's legacy progressed to an extent unimagined by FDR himself. Vietnam and the abandonment of Civil Rights tainted his record. This nation was roiled for a solid decade, and historical perspective is occasionally necessary when assessing current personalities.

 

[SaintJ]

Nixon was loathed for a three decade old career littered with the savaged reputations of real and rumored Communists, Alger Hiss and Helen Gehagan Douglas being respective examples. Nixon books are second only to Lincoln's in quantity, and surpass all in invective. It was all deserved.

Johnson's reputation is better only in comparison, as his quest to complete his role model FDR's legacy progressed to an extent unimagined by FDR himself. Vietnam and the abandonment of Civil Rights tainted his record. This nation was roiled for a solid decade, and historical perspective is occasionally necessary when assessing current personalities.

Fail on the answer, although there were a number of large words.

What is Bushhate, and where is the proper contextual linkage to Nixon and LBJ, or were you just engaged in a deflection action?

 

[RSF]

large words

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/internecine

 

[SoonerJim]

If 20 years of democratic hegemony follows Bush as Republicans did after Lyndon Johnson, then perhaps I'm "deflecting". The upheavals of that period were of a degree not witnessed since the 1930s. I'm arguing for historical perspective. I am aware John Dean wrote a book titled "Worse Than Nixon", but Bush is a piker compared to Nixon's assault on the Constitution and his myriad enemies.

The emnity towards Johson was buyer's remorse, being the crude successor to JFK and failing so badly at the end. Johnson never got out from the shadow of Kennedy or "his boys", the latter of whom never accepted Johnson in the role.

 

[RebSaint]

This nation was roiled for a solid decade, and historical perspective is occasionally necessary when assessing current personalities.

So why the intolerant atttitude regarding rev. Wright? Or our we perpetually in 1960? Can Obama be the candidate which transcends the tripartite blessing of mulatto coloring, JFK blessing, radical civil rights tenor.

We can decipher your bigspeak.

 

[Sabine]

Makes absolutely not one bit of sense.

Why not?

 

[TPS]

>>The likely target is DNC leadership (or lack of leadership)--Howard Dean.

Which is ridiculous because it's misplaced anger IMHO. I listened to Chairman Dean a few weeks ago on NPR discuss the issue at length. Everything he said was legitimate. We are a nation of laws and rules and you play by them. You don't change the rules in the middle of the game. While it would suck for the voting Democrats to hold their eventual nominee liable for their own state party's mistakes, there was a plan in place on how the primary was to be run. I'll see if I can find a transcript of that interview, and anyone who finds fault with Dean's assessment of the situation simply doesn't know what they are talking about. I'm not suggesting that he won't bear the brunt of whatever blame might get passed around, but it's still misplaced. Florida already cost the world 8 years of the worst presidency of any of our liftimes on every imaginable issue, policy and screwjob against the American People [tm] - and I don't care what any of you Carter haters say about it because it will only prove that you don't know what you're talking about there either...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=87928836

Begins at 3:51 into the conversation (7:00 or so explains exactly what's up). Listen to it and find fault with any of his logic. Seriously.



TPS