Did anybody change their mind after tonights forum?

Just curious.

I am a Dean supporter but was impressed with Kerry. And, very turned off by Dennis Kucinich.

to be a breath of fresh air.

Dean is just too conservative for me.

Kerry is one step removed from the DLC.

Go Dennis!

Than Kucinich, even if you adjust for the votes for right to life, that Kucinich held. Kerry is the only candidate who remotely comes close to Wellstone in his record for liberal voting. Then Kucinich becomes second to Kerry in liberal voting record.

of Kerry's vote on the Iraq resolution. That was a poison vote.

Kerry said he would vote differently on Nafta today. Really?

Kucinich wanted to know if he'd UNDO Nafta if elected. Still waiting for the answer....

...but be very, very careful about this man. Not only is he a fetus-fetishist who has voted against the reproductive rights of women at every opportunity, he's also a social conservative who has voted in favor of an anti-flag burning amendment.

Just because he may be trying to sound like a labor rights Democrat right now doesn't mean he is one, or ever will be.

n/t

to the elitist belief that laborers must be really stupid because they so stauchly support him. Must be all those jobs he saved for them in Ohio that are clouding their judgement.

:shrug: Naw... I think I'd rather be very, very careful of you.

As a patriot who loves my country, I'm glad he voted in favor of the flag-burning amendment because I understand his reasons and agree with them. You can wipe your a** with it for all I care but I'll prefer his resolve to make the flag something worthy of respect again-a flag that will really mean something on LABOR day!

Go Kucinich!

But you cant force anyone to respect anything. The respect is either there or it isnt.

Making a law trying to do it only puts people in jail or collects revenue.

Kucinich is wrong on flag burning

He's not a "fetus-fetishist".*sigh* I've been over this one so many times it's getting boring. Kucinich has never denied that he has a record of voting PL on abortion issues. He's spoken honestly of his change in position and why he decided it was wise, and his voting record clearly shows that change to have started in early 2002 (March IIRC). At tha point he wasn't even speaking about running for President.

And so what about the flag-burning amendment? Cripes is that some sort of major issue for you? You're seriously going to complain about his vote on that when he's speaking up about 41 million people who have no health-care coverage, about how our Military members and Veterans are being ripped off to pay for an unjust and illegal war, and how we need to lead the world in striving for peace rather than conflict?

Jeez, I'M in favor of a flag burning amendment half the time! So I'm kooky and it bothers me, so what? Oust me from the Democratic party?

Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhh! That's the second one I miss!! Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Will they re-run it, do ya think?

Still a Deaniac

I believe they said 11pm EST

I know because that's when I saw it, but they're sure to run it again. It's too important an event for them not to repeat it several times.

Some of my best friends are Deaniacs ;) Really, honestly and right here at DU and there's never been a cross word between us- well, not yet.

As long as you research the issues you care about and make sure he's the best one out there who lines up with YOUR beliefs and will do the best job in YOUR estimation- then my hat will be off to you.

There's plenty of room in this primary!


On edit: Hope you get to catch it soon. It was interesting but not a real debate... The debates are when the games begin!

at least you have a job.

eom

Still am :)

He was a tab bit combative but it makes sense politically. The progressive vote is being divided between Dennis and Dean. Spelling out the differences between them only helps Dennis.

I think he did a good job tonite.

What's with that ? Who misspoke ?

...to ensure SS solvency, including retirement age. He didn't say, "I will raise the retirement age." He said that would be one consideration among many.

He's a forceful speaker, and he's trying to set himself apart from the others hence the attacks, but still, he's running for nomination of the Democratic party so hey, use what works. I you don't think they are going to start tearing limbs off one another in September you might want to look at the last ten or so primaries from either party.

Kucinish is smart enough to get a few bites in early. If (and when?) his candidacy crumbles he will have at least brought the other's policy decisions out in the open.

If the universe of politics has proven anything over the last 20 years, it's that as much as we complain about negative campaign tactics, they work (and all too well I might add). Why? Because it offers a simple easy to remember distinction between otherwise indistinguishable candidates.

I let it go because that's how modern politics is these days.

Also, do you think it's asymptomatic of Napoleon complex? I never realized he was so short until he was on stage with the others.

He looked like the teller at Gringots Bank.

"He looked like the teller at Gringots Bank."

Key please!

president. :D

Sadly, I think your assessment may be correct. Who does he want to win? Going negative against the most similar candidate on some of the most important issues? I hope he's not looking for a "provocateur." The manifestation of a Napoleon complex is probably similar to that of the egomania that drives Nader.
When a person grabs the podium, knowing that they won't accomplish anything but a vocal display, it's called grandstanding. That's all his campaign is and I find it very difficult to respect it when there is an important objective to accomplish. I am aligned with many of his ideas, but this unwillingness to be practical and cooperate in the most important objective (unseating this administration) really disappoints me.

and then after the after camera pulls back he looks like
a goddamn munchkin. I hope the DKers have a second choice
handy.

but Dean really didn't answer some questions, sorta skated around. Surprised that Kerry got such a good reception since he is 100% pro-NAFTA and pro-WTO.

Also didn't know that Sharpton and Kucinich has essentially the same one-payer national health insurance plan.Kucinich has been sooooo up front about this.

I think that, although some few may have been turned off by DK's aggressive stance tonight, that many have been waiting for someone to call on the other candidates for the truth!!

I have seen actual quotes where Dean wants to leave SS at the present ages scheduled, so that is NOT age 65,....for my birthdate in 1939, it is 65 and 7 months, for 1940 and later,it goes up to be even more than 65!! So Dean DOES need to explain himself. And Lieberman too, on the same issue!!

Mosely Braun...

Kerry beleives in a single payer plan, but has flat out stated that since there is no possibility of political support for it, it is best to get an immediate program in place, in order to deal with the crisis of 50 million people not having a program (the savings generated from his current plan directed to those who have no insurace or means to pay for it), and then move single plan for the whole country, if an examination of the plan that is initially instituted show weaknesses, or leaves too many people uninsured(one pool of money for all people in the nation, like medicare, only the benefit are better) Which is why Kerry's plan has been rated as the best plan that has an actual possibility of passing congress, and being funded. It has conmtingency plans for its contingency plans.

I don't think so, not after GW has been raping the Treasury for the past three years. Remember Al Gore had a reasonably well thought out plan to save SS during the 2000 campaign. Don't know how it would have worked after the surplus had been whittled down to more realistic levels, but it made infinitely more sense than raping the Treasury and hoping for the (snicker) best.

The way we're going, we'd all be lucky to retire at 70. At reduced benefits. That's reality, man. Maintaining the status quo will require some serious work all by itself, and if anybody can do it, it's Howard Dean.

might be ok if you have a job as a pencil pusher somewhere but if you work in a factory or a coal mine 70 is old.

That's a cute actuarial trick. Might as well make the retirement age 80. Think about how much less money you have to pay out.

Some folks on that dais looked like they never worked a day in their life.

i know guys who work construction an other hard manual work who's bodies are wearing out a 50. they're worried shitless that they won't be able to make it to 65, let alone 70. knees have a finite lifetime. and if you've spent 45 yrs. walking on roofs or straddling stringers, an extra 5 years is a very big deal.

some people say "just get a different job to hold you over until you can collect.

what job? they're carpenters. proud, hard working men with no other skills. what are they qualified to do? pump gas? all gas is self serve. load groceries? home many baggers are needed.

it's a much different situation for somebody who works with their body everyday than for someone who needs to work out in a gym because they sit behind a desk.

But I know Dean has a better chance....I'm a sucker for single-payer health care but I know it probably can't get passed. Both Braun and Kucinich support it. Kerry seemed strong on Healthcare...

I was very pleased that Kucinich got out that SS will be totally solvent until 2041...this is a little known fact and so many of the young folks have swallowed the Republican/Cato Institute propaganda line that SS is never going to be able to pay them when they retire....It won't if Bush has his way...

If they could stop republicans from raiding the trust fund. Johnson set up medicare, so that ifmedicare needed assistance, surpluses from Social Security could be moved between it and medicare, and Reagan decided to raid it for his war on the evil empire.

Intellectually they were all being dishonest at some point about this subject. So much could be saved in prevention that health care that the money should not even be an issue.

The Health Care of today, if administered correctly, would pay for itself from money saved on a single payer system and factoring cost / benefit analysis. A lot today heath care is a make work program that mainly benefits the wealthy. It is a damn shame the subject is framed so narrowly in a debate.

It's still Kucinich or Dean for me.

But it's so long until the election, plus I am committed to voting for whoever wins the Democratic nominations, that who I like most right now is pretty irrelevant.

It's a war of attrition.

and he was my #2 or #3 guy.

I am still for Dean all the way, but I think everyone did well, except for Kucinich goading the rest. If this is how Dean was perceived, now I understand people getting on him, but Dean never screeched at people.
Yuck on Kucinich.

I liked DK on C-span the other night in the town meeting forum but tonight he seemed rabid, even a little maniacal. Maybe it was the lights.

I was quite turned off, not by his message, but by his persona and his body language. Couldn't imagine watching him in a press conference

I can't see him appealing to America against Bush with the style he showed tonight.

I thougt we agreed to not start attacking each other until September.

Kerry hit Dean a week ago, about totally repraling the Bush tax cuts, where Kerry will only repeal those cuts to the millionaires. Liebeman last night about Dean anti-war statements (tonight5he tried to have it both ways, I am not a pacifist, but I was against the war), Kucinich tonight with Dean prior statements on Social Security retirement age. (said he would coninsider raising the returement age to 70 to Tim Russert about 7 months ago, changed that to 68 on Meet the Press, and now denied he said he was considering it at all). This is all probing Deans recent statements, and then letting the media compare what Dean said two months ago, to what he said tonight:

Mr. Russert: In 1995…you were asked how would you balance the budget…. "The way to balance the budget, Dean said, is for Congress to cut Social Security, move the retirement age to 70, cut defense, Medicare and veterans pensions, while the states cut almost everything else. 'It would be tough but we could do it,' he said." would no longer cut Social Security?

Dr. Dean: But you don't—no. I'm not ever going to cut Social Security benefits.

Mr. Russert: Would you raise retirement age to 70?

Dr. Dean: Social Security, I—the best way to balance Social Security budget right now… is to expand the amount of money that Social Security payroll taxes apply to. It's limited now to something like $80,000. You let that rise. I also would entertain taking the retirement age to 68. It's at 67 now. I would entertain that.

http://www.socialsecurity.org/dailys/07-02-03.html

All of the other democrats are going to begin probing Dean at such "debates" bringing up statements he has made, and letting the media remind the public that Dean has just contradicted something he said only a few months ago.

The media will simply remind the public of what the other candidates recently reminded them of about Deans past statements, and let the public begin to draw the conclusions that they are aiming the public to make about Dean.


Next thing, Gephardt will remind the public that Dean has recently given the same kind of statement about Universal Health Care that Lieberman made tonight about doing things incrementally. Notice, Dean didnt bring up that little statement tonight. But down the road, the press will be reminded.

"Liebeman last night about Dean anti-war statements (tonight5he tried to have it both ways, I am not a pacifist, but I was against the war).."

Having it both ways? Is it possible to be against one war but for others? Why are you uncapable of understanding this stance?

Sheez.

If you stuck around for the closing statement, you would have heard DK say he would stop PRIVATIZATION OF GOVERNMENT JOBS, and got tremendous applause.

He was a little too abrasive, but everyone has been trying to portray him as the "peace wimp," and he showed his fire and passion FOR ORDINARY WORKING FOLKS!!

Surprised Kerry came off so well, since he is soooooo much FOR NAFTA AND THE WTO,,,,can you say BLEEDING JOBS FROM AMERICA???

Nafta? HUH?
And then Kucinich asked him pointedly if he would UNDO Nafta if elected? Kerry didn't answer....but we know the answer don't we.

as living with NAFTA now proves necessary. NAFTA isn't all bad, it's just that you have to correct the parts that are troublesome without throwing away the whole treaty.

NAFTA is all bad. It is an Investors' Rights agreement. It meeds to be repealed!

because I thought he was pulling a dirty stunt...

i.e. only asking questions of people who had already had their tunr to speak...hence ensuring they couldnt respond....

until Dean pointed out they were supposed to have a chance to respond when mentioned by name...so it wasn't Dennis, the moderator effed up...

I though most of them didn't answer the questions they were asked...only Sharton and Mosley-Bruan seem to be....maybe Dean hit 50%....

Lieberman actually was booed at one point...

You can watch the debate on the net from the cspan site.

Thats what I'm doing right now actually.

11:11 PM

Welcome to DU, Prag_Idealist! :-)

although i still like Dean. Kucinich sounded shrill, desperate, and small-time. And Lieberman was, well, Lieberman.

The candidates I liked before, I still like. I still rank most of them the same way I did before, for the same reasons.

I don't know if Dennis' aggressive demeanor helped with undecided voters; it didn't make a difference with me. I've seen him, I've met and spoken to him, and he ranks first on the issues, on honesty, on integrity, and trustworthiness. Coming out swinging against his opponents doesn't change that.

Edwards moved up in my rankings. Kerry presented himself well; I don't like some of his positions. I've always liked Sharpton and Braun.

I thought Gephart and Graham did well for themselves, Dean made his supporters happy, and he lied on the air about his previous statement on the retirement age. Just 9 words, give or take a few. And Lieberman irritated me.

I didn't get to see the whole thing; I had an unexpected visitor that took a big segment right out of the middle, so I don't know what I may have missed!

But I was very impressed with Kerry and I vacillate between the two of them. I will have no problem voting for either. Kucinich was in rabid attack dog mode which IMHO was embarrassing for him as for Lieberman and the school vouchers. Boo....

I've always liked Kucinich for his frank FDR new-dealism. I don't really mind a little rabidity right now, he needs to stay in long enough to raise the profile of the NAFTA/WTO/CAFTA/FTAA issue. I'm pretty rabid about that myself.

I don't know why they call Dean negative, he's very positive, inspiring and realistic. And electable. And organized. Of course he's nowhere near as liberal as the media whores make out.

For sheer oratory I go for Al Sharpton.

Braun is a good speaker too. Hell, they're all miles above Smirk.

Kerry is quite impressive, although he sounded like he'd strained his voice. I'd cheerfully vote for him. Hell I'd vote for Lieberman altho' not my first choice by a long shot.

I've always liked Gep, but I think his time has passed. Edwards, his time is in the future. Graham, my first choice for Veep.

Just watched the rebroadcast here on the West Coast.

Some others switched positions...Kucinich was a turn off for me as well, and his anti-choice past already worried me. I do like Kerry, and Al Sharpton keeps going up in my estimation. Graham isn't bad, either, I think he's a good VP candidate. Didn't change positions on the others, really.

I like both of them the most for different reasons and will back either of them up enthusiastically for the nomination.

I was disappointed with Kucinich who confused passion with screeching and yelling. I literally was putting my fingers in my ears when he came on, and that was surprising. He needs to lose that attack mode persona because it does not fit him.

Lieberman has just solidified why I will not be voting for him if he gets the nomination. He is a Repug lite especially with the school vouchers. UGH.

1. I was more impressed by the entire gamut of candidates than I had been to date (except for Lieberman who came off as badly as he possibly could have short of throwing up on someone).

2. I like Kucinich's and Dean's positions and ideas even more than I did going in. (They were already my favorites.)

3. Though I still like him best, I am concerned that Kucinich's strident demeanor could hurt him. He definitely reflects my personal anger, but I wish he directed it more at Bushco and less at the other Democrats. Still, his hardcore pro-labor commitment is the best thing I heard tonight. I have serious doubts about his ultimate electability, but his ideas have to make it into the election campaign.

4. I also liked what Edwards and Kerry had to say.

5. I thought Moseley-Braun was not very effective, though I have always liked her.

6. Sharpton is no slouch. He has a strong message and he states it very well. His history would lead you to believe he is, well, almost clownish, but he's definitely not.

7. Dean and Kerry both look the most presidential, whatever that means.

Happy with the Dem candidates, absolutely.

I hope they just don't attack each other in an irreparable way. After the nomination they need to close ranks and walk forward, assertively. Together!

Sharpton outdid them all, I liked Braun. None of the rest of them impressed me in the slightest, and Sharpton and Braun are too liberal for my taste, and of course, totally un-electable.

In no particular order:

Dean: disappointing. I expected to see some fire out of him. I liked how he responded to Kucinich, but I didn't really see anything exceptional there. Maybe my expectations were too high.

Edwards: did he get a signed note from his parents to run in the election? He was the second-weakest of them all (Kucinich). I assume this is his warmup for later tries, but next to Dean, I was most disappointed by Edwards. He is not now, and he isn't likely to become, the next Clinton.

Lieberman: He did fine. He stuck to his guns and showed some guts, for which he deserves credit. This wasn't his audience, and he had to know that going in. WYSIWYG

Gephardt: Did better than I expected. Had some populist fire, but he comes across as an old-style Democrat, and the public at large doesn't want it.

Graham: Seemed to disappear. About on a level with Edwards.

Kucinich: Came out swinging. I thought he was horrid during the questioning, but the C-Span thing cut him off during his summation, where I have a feeling he did pretty well. Although I think he was downright caustic, this might have helped him by letting him stand out. Electoral behavior can be weird...

Braun: Easily the most charismatic person there, I thought. Came across as warm, and knows her policy. Too damn liberal for the mainstream.

Sharpton: I love the guy. Best line of the night: 'Damn non-union cab drivers' -- Sharpton, on why he was late to the forum. He really is a talented guy, but too liberal, and of course, his background kills him. But the best communicator there -- someone should hire Sharpton to help them write their speeches; he is awesome at turning a phrase. Too bad some of these guys can't get Sharpton to deliver their speeches for them.

Kerry: Scored points with me. Don't know what the thing with his voice was, but other than that, he looked good, and managed to say the 'wrong' things at times without getting booed.


Overall, I was disappointed with the level of the candidates. In '91 or so, I saw Clinton at a forum like this and knew he was the guy to beat -- he electrified people. That's hard to live up to, of course, but none of these guys struck me as anything more than run-of-the-mill pols, except Sharpton and Braun, and they aren't going anywhere. I don't watch TV, so maybe it's simply me being unfamiliar with what political candidates look like these days. All of them looked better than Bush when I saw his SotU address, so maybe I simply have too-high standards.

I agree this man seems to float in the background, but if you really listen to him he has some great ideas. The best of which is equalizing free trade and preventing outsourcing of jobs. But the man has very little charisma. Too bad.

but I thought that Gephardt was just excellent. He seemed to me to be the audience's favorite, followed closely by Sharpton. I have seen a few recent interviews with Gephardt and was quite impressed. He has the facts, a plan, and the enthusiasm. I can't imagine that no one else here noticed how well he did tonight.:shrug:

It was an AFL-CIO event, with an audience of AFL-CIO folks. He was playing in front of the home crowd, as it were.

At that, I thought he did well too, but being seen as belonging to the labor unions isn't a positive in today's environment.

As for Gen. Wesley Clark, is he running? I have admired him, recently, because he has had the courage to speak out against the Bush* administration and said that the White House told him to tell the press that Iraq was complicit in 9/11. Clark never did this because they never provided any evidence. I took that SelectSmart test and Gen. Wesley Clark configuered at the bottom of my list, behind even Bush*. So where does he stand? I would be prepared to support him if I knew his views.:shrug:

than he did. The best reception Gephardt will ever get is in front of a union crowd .. last night was his chance to score some points and move up in the polls, but I don't think he did any better than average.

seen interviews with him recently where I agreed with his message and admired his passion. He has put it all on the line for this run for the presidency. He is not runnng for his seat in Congress, which he has held for 27 years, and now holds the leadership position. It's all or nothing for him, at this point. This was the same as for Bob Dole and I have heard the comparison made that Gephardt is the Democratic Bob Dole.

If I felt that he could defeat George Bush*, I would vote for him tomorrow. He just may have the centrist appeal that could do this. Wouldn't you support anyone who could defeat George Bush*? I certainly would, Gephardt or anyone else whom I heard speak tonight.:shrug:

when Bush made the 48 hour declaration to Saddam thereby lending public bipartisan support of the war.

But you are right, if he was the one that won the primary I would vote in his favor.

ANY politician? I know I never have. He's the guy. And he wasn't going to let those other politicians on that stage get away with the same old evasive crap. He wanted to make sure the audience left with substantive information about where each stands.

Yes, Dennis takes it all VERY seriously and personally. Don't you?

It's fairly easy to go down the thread and determine whether someone is a Dean fan by looking at their reaction to Kucinich. Very amusing.
:evilgrin:

It's not Kucinich's sniping that bothered me (this is a political campaign, after all). But, it's really difficult to listen to him, he shouts everything and really puts everybody off.. and not in a good/effective way. Kucinich is the only candidate that I have a hard time watching/listening to ... like nails screeching across the chalkboard. I get the urge to change the channel when he comes on.

PASSION.

He actually cares enough to get 'loud'.

It's odd I know..we don't really see much caring, truth and honesty from most political figures.


TWL

A passionate speaker knows when to shout, like MLK for example. DK just really is more like nails on a chalkboard.. I get that cringing feeling.

I don't support Sharpton either, but he knows how to deliver a speech.

I liked Kerry. Dennis it was a given. Howard Dean was OK.
Sharpton could be more genuine seeming without the pimp hair do.

He has a huge head. I can't imagine what he would look like if he cut is hair. I am glad Kerry trimmed his down a little bit.

I'm for Kerry, but Edwards was impressive. It does bother me that the two leading candidates (Dean and Kerry) are both "old money" bluebloods -- they have no idea what its like to be middle class, everyday citizens. The Democratic Party is supposed to be the "party of the people", after all. When Edwards said something like "..the son of a millworker can be president..", it really struck a chord with me. Edwards doesn't have the experience or the resume to get my support at this point, but I like the fact that he's a moderate Democrat with humble roots.

I must be getting old...

A Socialist Democracy, with emphasis on the common good as opposed to a Capitalism with the weak facade of a Democratic Republic, is still a preference, but I am finding the juvenile pipedreams of the Left as unevolved as the rigid convention of the conservative establishment in today's political climate.

I thought they all held their own, although some did better than others. I really came away with a lot of respect for Sharpton. I liked what he said and how he said it.

Unfortunately, I did feel a little put off by Kucinich. I love what he stands for and have nothing against him personally, but I thought he was a little shrill last night at times.

That's just my impression; I don't mean to put him down. In fact, I liked his NAFTA challenge to the candidates. :evilgrin:

So, I went in with an open mind...and wether or not I support Dean has noting to do with my opinion on DK's maniacal behavior.

I am glad others thought he did well though.

I don't support DK because I don't think he's a realist. His plans are more 'dreams' and 'visions' they don't seem very comprehensive or well thought out ???


I would fully support ANY of these dems against Bush though. Lieberman included.

What's up with that whole, "I will repeal NAFTA, will YOU?!?" thing? Unless I am totally misunderstanding the way that such international agreements work, Dennis couldn't make NAFTA go away with the stroke of the presidential pen. He'd have to have congress lined up with him, would he not? Surprised he hasn't been called on that.

In general, wished Dean had been as fiery as I've seen him in the past. He did an awesome job of taking Joe Lieberman's ONLY good line away from him, just totally knocked the pins out from under Holy Joe. And I didn't mind his body-check of DK on the SS retirement age thing. He was perhaps being a bit disingenuous, but he saw an opening and he took his shot. Our candidate against Bush will need to be able to do that.

Sharpton is the best speaker by far. Too bad about Tawana Brawley.

Graham... man, he would make a darn fine VP, wouldn't he? Did it seem like Dean was flirting with him a bit on that front?

Was Edwards there? I don't remember.

Kucinich clearly has passion, but the man is cursed with an appearance and a voice that will turn off most voters who are unfamiliar with his positions before they even get a chance to hear him out. Despite the fact that he's right on most of the issues, I can actually imagine him appearing to "lose" in a debate with Bush.

Mosely-Braun... I probably was not as attentive to her as I should have been, just because it's a foregone conclusion that she hasn't got a chance. She's very measured and classy in her delivery though. I get the feeling I would like her personally if she was over for dinner.

I just can't deal with Kerry for some reason. This is my own personal bias, based not on any facts or voting records or position issues etc etc. I just think he's weird. I'm sorry, Kerry supporters! I'm sure he's a really good guy, and God knows I will vote for him with enthusiasm if he's the nominee. But I can't imagine Mr. and Mrs. America getting fired up about the guy. He comes off as a very informed, erudite mortician.