You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I heard it on BBC News Hour this AM (radio)--the 2004 election... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Gloria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-25-03 03:41 PM
Original message
I heard it on BBC News Hour this AM (radio)--the 2004 election...
Advertisements [?]
Edited on Thu Dec-25-03 03:41 PM by Gloria
with Maggie (?) Comstock and Joe Lockhart.

Let's see what Ms. Comstock, a Bush political adviser in the past,( but who knows, she sounds like she's got the message programmed already) said:

First question was on security:
The BBC interviewer cited Bush's polls in the 60% range due to Saddam's capture. Comment passed by.
She linked terror to Saddam and no one challenged her, because she was racing along with her comments. Lockhart said events like this seem to pass quickly.

The election:
Comstock immediately mentioned 1) Dems raising taxes on people, esp. the middle class and 2) the liberals in party choosing the candidate during the primaries. I have not a clue what Lockhart said, because I was really listening hard to her spin. Note the first thing is the tax issue. The second is the use of the word "liberal." Those are the first two talking points that come to the GOP mind.

So I'm mulling all this over at 7:40 AM MT. The irony is almost too much. I wonder: if Dean is running such a great campaign positioning himself as anti-centrist Democrats, ie, being described as a liberal, from the Democratic wing of the part, a progressive, etc. etc.--why are people buying it when the way he is setting himself up for attacks in the general election will ultimately work against him....And FOR WHAT, if he's really a centrist anyway???

It's a lousy long term strategy for the general election. Possible results: disappointed supporters who finally figure out he's not as "liberal" as they thought; liberals like me who are fed up with the game he's playing and realize that Kucinich is the true liberal, but can't win...so feel more pragmatic and want Clark, who's pretty damned liberal or Kerry, and maybe even someone else; "mushy Democrats, those who wake up on October 22nd, 2004 and are confused and decided to stick with Bush because at least he's "darned right about fighting terror, why switch horses now?"; and the GOP, picking over all Dean's primary gaffes, largely of his own making, in addition to his tax policy and his positioning himself outside the "mainstream" Democratic party--a liberal in GOP terms.

Mind-boggling. So I get up and walk my dog. Much less complicated...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC