John Kerry: Unfit For Command

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
but instead, I'm a volunteer for the Kerry campaign.

Isnt there a technical term for southerners supporting yankees?

[Pekka]

Kerry basically set up a trap for Bush Team, and it's not looking too good now. He said on the DNC, that he wants to keep the race with good spirits and without throwing the mud. The next thing you know, Bush Team throws mud. That was a trap damn it, easy trap. By this Kerry Team already gained higher moral grounds by default. And this message was integrated to another bigger message, that he wants to act as a unifier, not devider. Obviously indicating that his opponent would be the devider. Now, when you throw mud at him, you will make his point, even when it wouldn't be a fact. It makes you look like the devider rather than the unifier, and being the unifier is a lot better image to give when the voting starts.

Now, that isn't the worst part of the trap. The trap is ever tightening. Now when you start with the mud, what are you going to do, when Kerry will obviously become more aggressive towards the end of the race? He will attack more and more the presidents issues and his history in the job. He will become more clear about what the mistakes made are, he will judge them more and more. Now, when you throw the mud at the beginning, what can you do when they play hardball? Keep throwing the mud? You basically ran out of options in the beginning because you wasted all the bullets, and it makes you look weak and unable to counter it even harder.

That's how I see it, they set up a trap and they walked in it and will be tighter in the trap as the weeks go on. UNLESS they realize it and counter it early enough.

[Ben Kenobi]

Isnt there a technical term for southerners supporting yankees?

Carpetbagger or somesuch?

Why not support one of your own boys?

[MRT144]

actually...pekka might be right... here. they are wastign so much time attackign this vietnam bullshti that they arent even talking about what vision kerry has. we already have seen bush's vision and it sucks.

[Ned]

MtG, citing the deficit as somehow being something that Kerry would fix by fiscal restraint, think back to the mid 90s. The balanced budget was forced on a reluctant Clinton by a Republican Congress lead by Newt Gingrich. Kerry has proposed so much new spending that even a Bush supporter might gag. Kerry has also promised to cut taxes on the middle class and cut the deficit while raising taxes on the upper middle class, the people who own small businesses and provide the bulk of jobs in the US. In order to fund all this new spending while cutting taxes on the middle class and while reducing the deficit, he would have to tax the upper middle class into forced equality, taking 95% of what they earn over $200k. That cannot be good for the economy. It seems, rather, a sure formula for a depression.

[SpencerH]

withdrawn

[Pekka]

MRT144, of course I'm right. THey should attack his issues now, and when Kerry becomes more aggresive towards the end attackign Bush's issues more and more, then they could attack his persona more. NOw, they have already wasted their bullets and will look weak when Kerry starts playing hard too. They have no reserves left, which means they have to pull up quickly scandals or any other 'wow look at this, did you know this!' type of BS information about Kerry, but it's a sign of breaking point of their own campagn. They are using their weight TOO early.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MRT144
actually...pekka might be right... here. they are wastign so much time attackign this vietnam bullshti that they arent even talking about what vision kerry has. we already have seen bush's vision and it sucks.

Kerry has vision?

[Pekka]

Yeah, and if you wouldn't be a hater you'd know what it is .

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Why is the Bush team responsible for what the Swift boat veterans group are saying? I seem to recall the denials from Dems when Moore came out with F911. Point of the matter is Bush and Co. have said they have not endorsed SBVAK, unlike Dems who gave credentials and legitamcy to Moore by giving him honored status at their convention.

[Drake Tungsten]

So wait, it would be intelligent to vote for a man he despises, who carries out policies he finds loathsome, becuase?

An intelligent person would judge both candidates independently based on their behavior and policies. Anyone who will vote for "anyone other than Bush" is not doing this.

If you can't stand either of them, don't vote for either of them.

Bush's utter and complete incompetence vis a vi post Saddam Iraq is more than enough to revoke any mandate he ever had.

If Bush were completely incompetent we would've had a civil war on our hands a long time ago.

[Drake Tungsten]

BTW, at all of you turning to Pekka for analysis of the American presidential election...

[GePap]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
An intelligent person would judge both candidates independently based on their behavior and policies. Anyone who will vote for "anyone other than Bush" is not doing this.

I have judged Bush utterly unacceptable. I find nothing objectionable in Kerry's legislative record. Hence, Bush <<< Kerry

If Bush were completely incompetent we would've had a civil war on our hands a long time ago.

Only if you assume Bush is the ONLY actor when it comes to Iraq. If he were, most certainly things would be worse. But others do have a hand in Iraq-they, not this admin. of errors, have prevented an even bigger mess.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
BTW, at all of you turning to Pekka for analysis of the American presidential election...

Well, then you should be ashamed his answers are more coherent than yours

[Drake Tungsten]

I have judged Bush utterly unacceptable. I find nothing objectionable in Kerry's legislative record. Hence, Bush <<< Kerry

That's fine. You've looked at Kerry's legislative record (or claimed to, at least) and find it to be acceptable to you. I may think you're deluded, but at least you've made a judgement based on the facts.

MtG, on the other hand, has just dismissed Kerry's legislative record as inconsequential. I can only imagine that this is because he finds Kerry's legislative record lacking (as any intelligent person would) and therefore can't place any importance on said record, lest he be forced to re-examine his "anyone but Bush" views. I have a problem with intellectual dishonesty like this. If you want to vote for anyone other than Bush, fine. Go right ahead, but don't play at objectivity and make specious claims like "Kerry's legislative record is irrelevant". Just admit to being a partisan hack and be done with it.

Only if you assume Bush is the ONLY actor when it comes to Iraq. If he were, most certainly things would be worse. But others do have a hand in Iraq-they, not this admin. of errors, have prevented an even bigger mess.

That's a BAM if I've ever heard one...