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 #54: Great job - smear Kerry to defend Edwards [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
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-30-07 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
54. Great job - smear Kerry to defend Edwards
Those ads were produced by a 527 group. There was never any proof that John Kerry (or his campaign) had any prior knowledge of them or were connected to them - which I think would have been illegal. I have seen the posts that make a very weak case - they mention (1) that one person who worked for the 527 had previously worked on the Kerry campaign and some had been associated with Gephardt and (2) that some of the people who funded it had given money to the 527 also gave money to Gephardt and Kerry.

As to 1) wouldn't it be more convincing if they found someone who went from the 527 to Kerry's campaign or if the person returned to Kerry's campaign. There were some people, like Lahayne, who Kerry's people kicked out because they did not like how they operated.

2) The main person who gave money to Kerry and the 527 campaign was NJ Senator Toricelli, who also gave money to Gephardt and several other Democrats. He had a huge campaign fund and no future political viability. Looking at the list back in 2004 or 2005, there were even some people who gave early money to Dean and then to the 527. Kerry could not possibly control or even know about other contributions raised by others. At any rate, other than Toricelli, there were very few donors in common for Kerry - when you look at donations before February 2004. There were far more for other candidates - which is not to say that those candidates had anything to do with it. That 527 was a classic Anbody But (Dean) group. Dean was the front runner. He was polling far behind Bush - but so was generic Democrat at that point.

Kerry DID run on having better national security/ foreign policy credentials than Dean - and Edwards for that matter. He uncontestibly did have better credentials. Just as Dean stressed that he had executive experience and Kerry didn't. (Kerry was wise enough not to counter this with the fact that he actually did have executive experience - in starting and running a cookie company (that he sold, but is still in business and still makes some of his cookies) :) Every candidate runs on things they thing make them better. Edwards grew up lower middle class, Kerry and Dean didn't.

The CW in 2004 was that Kerry and Edwards benefited by running positive campaigns.
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