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

Reply #66: You've changed your argument. [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
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-08 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #60
66. You've changed your argument.
Bush Daddy lost because he was centrist, now he lost because he was weak. Our candidates lost because they were centrist, now they lost because they were weak.

The losing candidate always looks weak, because they lost (though Gore won). If W or Reagan or Clinton had lost, they would look weak.

And yeah, Bush 04 and Reagan 84 ran as the candidate most appealing to the center. They both painted their opponents as too liberal, too extreme. Never mind how they governed--we were talking about campaigning. They ran as the candidate closest to the center. That's centrist.

Wikipedia's entry on Mondale in 84 (Wikipedia being just a summary of conventional interpretations): "Mondale ran a liberal campaign, supporting a nuclear freeze and the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). He spoke against what he considered to be unfairness in Reagan's economic policies and the need to reduce federal budget deficits." (Isn't that what you wanted?)

On Kerry in 2004: The Americans for Democratic Action, a prominent liberal organization, rates Kerry's voting record better than that of Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), causing Republican National Committee chairman Ed Gillespie to joke, "Who would have guessed it? Ted Kennedy is the conservative senator from Massachusetts."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -How many percentage points will Obama's FISA vote net him? jgraz  Jul-10-08 12:22 AM   #0 
  - Someone thinks this will gain him 15 points or more? Please explain.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:27 AM   #1 
  - Disruptive trolls from the other camp?  L0oniX   Jul-10-08 11:03 AM   #71 
     - YES! Tickling the underbelly of the beast begets strange bedfellows  Shoelace   Jul-11-08 02:15 AM   #120 
        - LOL  L0oniX   Jul-11-08 10:21 AM   #122 
  - This will probably hurt him if anything  BlueStater   Jul-10-08 12:30 AM   #2 
  - Misleading question, I think.  NYC_SKP   Jul-10-08 12:32 AM   #3 
  - Sorry, but if you think this will prevent one 527 ad, you're dreaming.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:40 AM   #8 
  - Sorry  Baltoman991   Jul-10-08 01:01 AM   #22 
     - McCain and 527's are two different things.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 01:02 AM   #25 
        - McCain didn't even vote on this bill.  NattPang   Jul-10-08 01:57 AM   #43 
        - How will 527s eat this up? Which 527s, for one thing, and what will they do?  thecatburgler   Jul-10-08 12:05 PM   #84 
           - Flip Flop  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:55 PM   #95 
  - Misleading, simplistic, disingenuous.  jobycom   Jul-10-08 12:48 AM   #16 
  - 3 out of 10.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:55 AM   #19 
  - Not true. The "centrist" candidate has won 10 out of 10 of the last elections.  jobycom   Jul-10-08 09:35 AM   #54 
     - Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 were not centrists  jgraz   Jul-10-08 09:59 AM   #58 
        - They ran as centrists.  jobycom   Jul-10-08 10:25 AM   #59 
           - Bush 04 and Reagan 84 ran as a centrists? How the hell do you figure that?  jgraz   Jul-10-08 10:30 AM   #60 
              - You've changed your argument.  jobycom   Jul-10-08 10:50 AM   #66 
                 - I did not. Centrist == Weak in American politics.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 11:15 AM   #73 
                    - Why don't you just define "centrist" as "Whatever I say it is?"  jobycom   Jul-10-08 01:26 PM   #97 
                       - Once again, reading comprehension is your key to success  jgraz   Jul-10-08 01:45 PM   #98 
  - Who the hell is he trying to appeal to?  BlueStater   Jul-10-08 01:01 AM   #24 
  - A constitutional scholar who can't persuade the electorate of the  Benhurst   Jul-10-08 03:16 AM   #50 
  - I'm not defending the bill. It sucks.  jobycom   Jul-10-08 10:37 AM   #61 
  - That's pretty fucking sad, if you ask me.  dbaker41   Jul-10-08 10:42 AM   #62 
     - No argument there.  jobycom   Jul-10-08 11:01 AM   #70 
  - "Purity freaks"???  Popol Vuh   Jul-10-08 12:46 PM   #92 
  - None. It wasn't meant to. It was meant to inoculate him from the "weak on terrorism" attack.  MercutioATC   Jul-10-08 12:33 AM   #4 
  - Yes  DarthDem   Jul-10-08 12:39 AM   #6 
  - Cool. Now he gets the "weak on principles" attack instead.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:42 AM   #11 
     - When was the last time  NattPang   Jul-10-08 01:01 AM   #23 
     - What. The. Fuck?  jgraz   Jul-10-08 01:03 AM   #26 
        - How are my posts  NattPang   Jul-10-08 01:06 AM   #29 
           - No, but common sense and ability to speak in complete sentences does.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 01:11 AM   #30 
              - If you remember the Patriot act, than you remember when your rights were taken away.  NattPang   Jul-10-08 01:28 AM   #35 
     - It Didn't  DarthDem   Jul-10-08 12:53 PM   #93 
  - So he gains NOTHING electorally? No votes? No uptick in the polls?  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:29 PM   #88 
  - You are being dishonest in your framing of this issue.  slick8790   Jul-10-08 12:36 AM   #5 
  - "shutting down a potential republican line of attack" ??? You're kidding, right?  depakid   Jul-10-08 12:39 AM   #7 
  - And, more importantly, immunized McSame from the same charge.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:42 AM   #9 
     - It was a lose/lose proposition for all concerned  depakid   Jul-10-08 12:51 AM   #17 
  - And that fact speaks volumes about the current state of the Democratic Party.  dbaker41   Jul-10-08 10:48 AM   #65 
  - Unless it translates into a positive electoral shift, it was BY DEFINITION politically stupid  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:23 PM   #87 
  - very few  cookie monster   Jul-10-08 12:42 AM   #10 
  - It was a strategic smooth move, nothing more nothing less.  AtomicKitten   Jul-10-08 12:42 AM   #12 
  - I predict this will turn out to be a strategic disaster.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:45 AM   #14 
     - I disagree. A flip-flopper calling someone else a flip-flopper falls flat.  AtomicKitten   Jul-10-08 12:53 AM   #18 
        - Wait, you just said exactly what I was saying.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:57 AM   #20 
           - How  Baltoman991   Jul-10-08 01:05 AM   #27 
              - Once again, reading comprehension is key to communication  jgraz   Jul-10-08 01:13 AM   #31 
                 - My comprehension  Baltoman991   Jul-10-08 01:17 AM   #32 
                    - botched: spoiled by poor work; bungled  jgraz   Jul-10-08 01:21 AM   #33 
                       - And thats  Baltoman991   Jul-10-08 01:28 AM   #34 
                       - yours is a whole lotta hyperbole  Lord Helmet   Jul-10-08 03:50 PM   #114 
  - His other moves have been a net gain, I don't get this but he's still our man  uponit7771   Jul-10-08 12:44 AM   #13 
  - This is not about whether he's still "our man"  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:47 AM   #15 
     - If you keep talking as you are  NattPang   Jul-10-08 01:46 AM   #39 
     - You may find this hard to believe, but media interest in my internet posts is somewhat low  jgraz   Jul-10-08 01:57 AM   #42 
        - We have been screwed for some time now, 7 years to be exact.  NattPang   Jul-10-08 02:09 AM   #44 
     - Bingo. Nail, meet Hammer. Bang. Whoop there it is.  dbaker41   Jul-10-08 10:50 AM   #67 
  - IMO Obama shouldn't have voted at all.  mwooldri   Jul-10-08 12:59 AM   #21 
  - Why couldn't he of just voted "Nay"?!?  BlueStater   Jul-10-08 01:05 AM   #28 
     - Does it change anything ?  NattPang   Jul-10-08 01:34 AM   #36 
        - The people who think this isn't a big deal are the ones not in touch with reality n/t  BlueStater   Jul-10-08 01:38 AM   #37 
        - Please tell me how that is?  NattPang   Jul-10-08 01:42 AM   #38 
           - You don't think the butchering of the Constitution is a big deal? n/t  BlueStater   Jul-10-08 01:47 AM   #40 
              - And do you truly think that  NattPang   Jul-10-08 01:56 AM   #41 
        - "The Bill of Rights was sold in 2001"  dbaker41   Jul-10-08 10:53 AM   #68 
  - I've joined the 'butt' voting bloc.  Swamp Rat   Jul-10-08 02:26 AM   #45 
  - Understandable. We're getting fucked from all sides these days.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 02:30 AM   #47 
     - Pass the K-Y  Swamp Rat   Jul-10-08 02:38 AM   #48 
  - .  jgraz   Jul-10-08 02:29 AM   #46 
  - Ow  Lilith Velkor   Jul-10-08 02:44 AM   #49 
  - Impossible to say. I think it helps his 'bipartisan pragmatist' cred, while weakening the  Occam Bandage   Jul-10-08 03:19 AM   #51 
  - How Much Further to the Right Will He Have to Go to Defend Himself Against Every Conceivable Attack  AndyTiedye   Jul-10-08 03:31 AM   #52 
     - It's kind of funny to watch everyone act as if the issue most pressing  Occam Bandage   Jul-10-08 03:43 AM   #53 
        - Believe it or not, some of us actually DO care about the rule of law  jgraz   Jul-10-08 09:54 AM   #56 
        - Passage of a law is not at odds with rule of law. Civil immunity is not, either.  Occam Bandage   Jul-10-08 11:20 AM   #74 
           - Wow. You don't really think that, do you?  jgraz   Jul-10-08 11:51 AM   #78 
              - Ah good. The courts should throw this out quickly, then, unless you're suggesting  Occam Bandage   Jul-10-08 12:01 PM   #81 
                 - I'm not suggesting it, I'm saying it outright.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:04 PM   #83 
        - Nice try. That's not even the worst part of the bill.  dbaker41   Jul-10-08 10:55 AM   #69 
           - What is, then? All I'm hearing about is telecom immunity, with the occasional  Occam Bandage   Jul-10-08 11:20 AM   #75 
              - You might want to switch off the teevee machine and actually read the bill.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 11:54 AM   #79 
                 - I'm asking him what he thinks the worst part of the bill is. I've read it.  Occam Bandage   Jul-10-08 12:00 PM   #80 
                    - The phrase "All I'm hearing about" leaves a different impression.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:02 PM   #82 
  - I don't think the vote helps him but it probably doesn't hurt him  terryter1   Jul-10-08 09:47 AM   #55 
  - Good thing he helped gut the 4th Amendment, then  jgraz   Jul-10-08 09:55 AM   #57 
  - What a stupid question.  yibbehobba   Jul-10-08 10:44 AM   #63 
  - Coming from you, that means a lot  jgraz   Jul-10-08 11:41 AM   #76 
  - Incorrect assumption, I think.  MGKrebs   Jul-10-08 10:46 AM   #64 
  - If the alternatives were worse, then he must have netted something positive out of this  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:33 PM   #90 
     - It didn't have to be about votes. Maybe he just thought he was doing the  MGKrebs   Jul-10-08 03:03 PM   #109 
        - A constitutional scholar thinking THIS bill was the "right thing"?  jgraz   Jul-10-08 03:44 PM   #111 
           - OK, so let's say he voted against it, and convinced enough others to also,  MGKrebs   Jul-10-08 03:55 PM   #115 
              - Are you saying you WANT to allow the govt to data-mine, or you want to prevent it?  jgraz   Jul-10-08 04:13 PM   #117 
  - It will lose him points in that some people will stay home  Milo_Bloom   Jul-10-08 11:10 AM   #72 
  - Not only no-shows, but decreased donations and volunteerism  jgraz   Jul-10-08 11:42 AM   #77 
  - Hey, you're being lauded on a PUMA site.  thecatburgler   Jul-10-08 12:10 PM   #85 
  - Why would I care what those fucking idiots think?  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:20 PM   #86 
  - Wasn't designed to win him votes. It's just a shield. We may see  wienerdoggie   Jul-10-08 12:31 PM   #89 
  - So, in other words, nobody knows  jgraz   Jul-10-08 12:41 PM   #91 
     - Well, we temporarily squooshed one article. It can bounce back.  wienerdoggie   Jul-10-08 12:59 PM   #96 
        - Really? FISA used to be viewed as a terrible law. Now it's the *good* side of the argument.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 01:47 PM   #99 
  - Won't make one bit of difference.  azmouse   Jul-10-08 12:53 PM   #94 
  - Then why would he purposely risk pissing off his base?  PassingFair   Jul-10-08 01:50 PM   #100 
     - Because we aren't his base.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 01:53 PM   #101 
  - Younger voters could see him as same ol' same ol' and opt out...  polichick   Jul-10-08 01:58 PM   #102 
  - Correction: young voters ARE seeing him as same ol' same ol' and they ARE opting out  jgraz   Jul-10-08 03:47 PM   #113 
  - I nets him ~5%  muryan   Jul-10-08 01:59 PM   #103 
  - That "strategy" lost elections in 2002 and 2004  depakid   Jul-10-08 02:05 PM   #104 
     - 9/11 lost us 2002  muryan   Jul-10-08 02:19 PM   #105 
        - No, the Dems chose to vote (over and over) with Republicans on issues like this to defray criticism  depakid   Jul-10-08 02:29 PM   #108 
           - But, but, what would george know?  nadinbrzezinski   Jul-10-08 04:00 PM   #116 
              - If you think independents  muryan   Jul-10-08 04:38 PM   #118 
                 - If you think that the social sciences don't explain peoples' behaviors  depakid   Jul-11-08 01:37 AM   #119 
                    - I never made that assertion  muryan   Jul-11-08 01:02 PM   #123 
  - Zero.  DFLforever   Jul-10-08 02:21 PM   #106 
  - This is going to get very, very sticky when the debates begin.  dailykoff   Jul-10-08 02:22 PM   #107 
  - Nailed it.  jgraz   Jul-10-08 03:44 PM   #112 
  - No change or a very small loss  last_texas_dem   Jul-10-08 03:05 PM   #110 
  - The rationalizations are sounding more and more desperate.  dailykoff   Jul-11-08 02:17 AM   #121 
 

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