Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Stinky The Clown

(67,799 posts)
Fri Nov 2, 2012, 07:53 PM Nov 2012

2004 . . . . . . . 2012

There was a bottle of champagne in the Sparkly/Stinky refrigerator back then. The empty is now on a bookcase in my office, along with some other items that are there to remind me of bad times, not good.

But when we put that bottle in the fridge, it was with a great deal of hope after a long, hard fought, down in the mud campaign against a cadre of people who have no morals and for whom winning is everything.

The Obama 2012 campaign is much better run than was the Kerry 2004 campaign. Diametrically opposite. But at the fringes are some of the same players. Karl Rove and Stephani Cutter come quickly to mind. The states of Florida and Ohio were big then. And hard to predict. And they are now.

On balance, I feel lots better now, but still . . . . .

As much as ever - maybe more so - every vote in those battleground states will matter. Every vote.

I do NOT want another empty champagne bottle on my bookcase.

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
2004 . . . . . . . 2012 (Original Post) Stinky The Clown Nov 2012 OP
The differences are that we have so many advantages now that we didn't have in 2004 karynnj Nov 2012 #1
I was talking to one of my best friends about this very thing today and he said . . . Major Hogwash Nov 2012 #2

karynnj

(59,503 posts)
1. The differences are that we have so many advantages now that we didn't have in 2004
Fri Nov 2, 2012, 08:30 PM
Nov 2012

The biggest is that Obama is the incumbent President. This not only puts him in the role of President - and we saw this week how that helps, it means that people KNOW him and Michelle. It is far harder to redefine a person that everyone has seen up close for 4 years.

In 2004, the SBVT would have had NO impact if Kerry were the sitting President - just as it had no impact on his race in MA in 2008 where everyone knew him. In fact, that is why even if the Bush AWOL story were more mainstream, it would not have mattered. The NYT polled people in 2004 at the beginning of the Rather story. The result, of the people who in an early question said they would vote for Bush, NONE answered that they would change their vote if the charges were true. Those charges could have had a big effect in 2000 - but by 2004, the important thing was his time as President.

The other thing is that Obama has FAR more money, where Kerry had the same amount as Bush - but needed to stretch it over 13 weeks vs Bush's 8 - an unintended consequence of the McCain/Feingold rules that were implemented for the first time. (this plus the 527 ads that put out negative ads that the helped candidate could righteously deny that it had anything to do with them - even if they share a lawyer with Bush/Cheney.)

This year has been terrifying because there is an essentially limitless amount of money spent against us. In addition, the RW echo chamber is still there - and even parts of the media that were not clearly RW have treated Romney with kid gloves. Imagine if the story of cutting the fellow student's hair having been done by Obama 2008, Kerry or Gore. Do you think any media person would have excused it because they were young? Not to mention Gloria Bulger (CNN) actually speaking of the dangers that Mitt faced in France in 1968. Not to mention, there were some in 2004 who actually repeated RW criticisms that Kerry's injuries were not bad enough to deserve medals!

It looks like Obama will win -which will be incredible versus what was against him. But, a reflection should be made that it should not be this close given the fact that Romney is an awful candidate. The really scary thing is that we won't have the benefit of incumbency next time. (unless Hillary runs - who you can think of as a past incumbent to some degree.)

Major Hogwash

(17,656 posts)
2. I was talking to one of my best friends about this very thing today and he said . . .
Fri Nov 2, 2012, 09:23 PM
Nov 2012

. . . just imagine if Mitt Romney were black, and everything else stayed the same.
He stuck to the same kinds of stupid economic policies.
He kept the same stupid kind of foreign policies.
He said the same thing about not caring about 47% of the American voters.
He told the same amount of huge lies.
And all the superpacs spent the same amount of money against President Obama.

How do you think the mainstream media would have treated Romney then?

I said, I don't know, I hadn't thought of that before.

And he said -
They would have said, "Jesus Christ, that nigger's a big fucking liar."

But, since Romney is white . . they are keeping their mouths shut.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»2004 . . . . . . . 2012