Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 22, 2004 Share Posted October 22, 2004 These are some of their party's big names...suprise suprise. Democrats for Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCow Posted October 22, 2004 Share Posted October 22, 2004 These are some of their party's big names...suprise suprise. Democrats for Bush. 80382[/snapback] Oh my Lord! Zell Miller! You're kidding me! Next thing you'll know he'll Keynote the Republican convention! Now Kerry will never win Georgia, Alabama and South Carolina! Kerry is billsfanone! Dick Morris! Oh, NO! Perhaps he'll do hatchet job commentary on Fox then Kerry will never get elected. I mean, Dick Morris, a man of impectable integrity and trust among all Americans. This is worse than a slap in the face from Jesus. Ed Koch. Say it ain't so!!! The man is still a political juggernaut, perhaps he can push Bush over the top in New York. The man always had a rock solid reputation as a yellow dog Democrat, who only every other election endorses a Republican. Wow, Randy Kelly. It just may appear as if he's not well respect in Minnesota but don't be fooled, this man can carry the state for Bush. I'm way too upset to talk about the betrayl of Democratic icons like Sarah Baxter and George McKelvey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 22, 2004 Author Share Posted October 22, 2004 Oh my Lord! Zell Miller! You're kidding me! Next thing you'll know he'll Keynote the Republican convention! Now Kerry will never win Georgia, Alabama and South Carolina! Kerry is billsfanone! Dick Morris! Oh, NO! Perhaps he'll do hatchet job commentary on Fox then Kerry will never get elected. I mean, Dick Morris, a man of impectable integrity and trust among all Americans. This is worse than a slap in the face from Jesus. Ed Koch. Say it ain't so!!! The man is still a political juggernaut, perhaps he can push Bush over the top in New York. The man always had a rock solid reputation as a yellow dog Democrat, who only every other election endorses a Republican. Wow, Randy Kelly. It just may appear as if he's not well respect in Minnesota but don't be fooled, this man can carry the state for Bush. I'm way too upset to talk about the betrayl of Democratic icons like Sarah Baxter and George McKelvey. 80402[/snapback] The point being that Kerry's lock on his OWN PARTY is hardly absolute. Witness the insurgency of Howard Dean. He had to change his whole campaign just to beat an unknown governor from a backwater state. Kerry will not win the general election. Not now, not ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted October 22, 2004 Share Posted October 22, 2004 And Bush's lock on his own party isn't 100% either. He's not even locked his family in, there's group of Bush relatives who have come out for Kerry. All that proves is that people aren't all lemmings like some folks claim. I'm a Democrat but I've crossed party lines many times and will do so again no doubt based on how my beliefs map to a candidate's. That doesn't mean anything except I try to vote my conscience instead of the party line. Zell Miller is a Republican in all but name. After he retires from the Senate I expect he'll make the switch official. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted October 22, 2004 Share Posted October 22, 2004 This just shows what a great country we live in. In a free democratic society we are allowed to vote and support whatever person we choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted October 22, 2004 Share Posted October 22, 2004 The point being that Kerry's lock on his OWN PARTY is hardly absolute. Witness the insurgency of Howard Dean. He had to change his whole campaign just to beat an unknown governor from a backwater state. Kerry will not win the general election. Not now, not ever. 80407[/snapback] "Insurgency" ???? Was McCain's campaign for the Presidency an "insurgency"? Don't be ridiculous. The primaries were for the purpose of figuring out who the party wanted as their candidate. Kerry had no right to it until he won it. Dean was no more an insurgent than Kerry was or any other candidate. The mere fact that every single democrat on the planet is not going to vote for Kerry is not very revealing especially when you look at the democrats you mentioned. Being a truly diverse party, democrats almost never act monolithically, each marching in lock step with the other. Republicans are the more disciplined party in terms of always singing the same tune. Remember Reagan's rule? "Thou shalt never speak ill of another republican." Democrats are not so fanatical when it comes to silencing dissent in their own party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 22, 2004 Author Share Posted October 22, 2004 "Insurgency" ???? Was McCain's campaign for the Presidency an "insurgency"? Don't be ridiculous. The primaries were for the purpose of figuring out who the party wanted as their candidate. Kerry had no right to it until he won it. Dean was no more an insurgent than Kerry was or any other candidate. The mere fact that every single democrat on the planet is not going to vote for Kerry is not very revealing especially when you look at the democrats you mentioned. Being a truly diverse party, democrats almost never act monolithically, each marching in lock step with the other. Republicans are the more disciplined party in terms of always singing the same tune. Remember Reagan's rule? "Thou shalt never speak ill of another republican." Democrats are not so fanatical when it comes to silencing dissent in their own party. 80629[/snapback] Oh? Then how do you explain Kerry's lurch to the left in Iowa? Prior to that primary, he was hardly the anti-war firebrand. Now look at him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 22, 2004 Share Posted October 22, 2004 "Insurgency" ???? Was McCain's campaign for the Presidency an "insurgency"? Don't be ridiculous. The primaries were for the purpose of figuring out who the party wanted as their candidate. Kerry had no right to it until he won it. Dean was no more an insurgent than Kerry was or any other candidate. The mere fact that every single democrat on the planet is not going to vote for Kerry is not very revealing especially when you look at the democrats you mentioned. Being a truly diverse party, democrats almost never act monolithically, each marching in lock step with the other. Republicans are the more disciplined party in terms of always singing the same tune. Remember Reagan's rule? "Thou shalt never speak ill of another republican." Democrats are not so fanatical when it comes to silencing dissent in their own party. 80629[/snapback] I think "insurgency" was just a particularly unfortunate typo, and he meant "resurgence" or "emergence" or some such. At least, that's the way I read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich in Ohio Posted October 22, 2004 Share Posted October 22, 2004 The point being that Kerry's lock on his OWN PARTY is hardly absolute. Witness the insurgency of Howard Dean. He had to change his whole campaign just to beat an unknown governor from a backwater state. Kerry will not win the general election. Not now, not ever. 80407[/snapback] Hey don't forget, kerry has a big supporter in algore.... oh wait I forgot, algore put his total support behind dean in the primaries....hmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted October 22, 2004 Share Posted October 22, 2004 Prior to that primary, he was hardly the anti-war firebrand. Now look at him. This should be a comfort to everyone who has doubts about if he would use force - since prior to the primaries he was for the war then we can be assured that after he is elected he can be himself again and defend the country as needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 22, 2004 Author Share Posted October 22, 2004 This should be a comfort to everyone who has doubts about if he would use force - since prior to the primaries he was for the war then we can be assured that after he is elected he can be himself again and defend the country as needed. 80642[/snapback] LOL assuming he doesn't change his mind AGAIN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 22, 2004 Author Share Posted October 22, 2004 I think "insurgency" was just a particularly unfortunate typo, and he meant "resurgence" or "emergence" or some such. At least, that's the way I read it. 80636[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts