Why Was Tucker Wearing a Dean Button on Crossfire?

Is this part of the Repuke's strategy to get Dean nominated?

It's part of the strategy to not get Dean nominated.

on his bowtie.

I think Dean is a smokescreen...if they really wanted to run against him, they would not make it so obvious. I am not quite sure whom they really want...I think it could be Kerry they really want, but I don't know that for sure. If I had to guess, I'd guess Kerry because a) if they were afraid of him, why would they let him run unopposed for Senate in 2002 and amass a warchest when they knew he was likely to run for president? and b) why have they not picked apart his record yet and tried to paint him as an elitist Massachusetts liberal whose opposition to the death penalty puts him outside the mainstream? (BTW: I am against the death penalty, and I consider myself a Massachusetts liberal despite having moved to New Jersey when I was 2.) I just am afraid that they want Kerry to be our nominee because they want to paint him as Dukakis II. I personally think Dukakis would have made a great president, but I also don't want to lose 40 states.

Mousepads, Shoe Leather, and Hope

They do not realy want to run against Dean either. Anyone who comes on so dynamicly, from obscurity in a year can be intimidating to the *bush regime. They see the power of a population they are unable to control....the grassroots anger!

Can you imagine what he would do to Smirk?

Kerry has gone after Ollie North for the Contra-cocaine connection and got investigated by the FBI for his efforts. Kerry went after BCCI, which tied the Saudis and Pakistanis to global terrorism, international arms trafficking, money laundering and ever other kind of criminality — including that of George Herbert Walker Bush and a BIG CHUNK OF THE US CONGRESS AND ESTABLISHMENT. He did it as a US Senator, almost alone. Don't believe me, GOOGLE away.

BTW: Kerry is NO Dukakis. Some relevant political background: Weld was a popular two-term GOP governor and everybody (GOP-ish) picked him to beat Kerry. Read and learn about the times:

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/news/9610/29/mass.senate/index.shtml

http://www.bettercampaigns.org/cases/display.php?StudyID=4

Kerry beat the best the pukes had. They couldn't find anybody willing to even TRY in 2000.

Tucker would be crapping bow-ties were Kerry the Democratic nominee. Bush would be history. And all the PNAC traitors would be heading for Rev. Moon's Paraguayan redoubt.

Of course, with Ho-Ho the ex-governor ex-doctor ex-stockbroker with a back good enough to ski on and a most fiery attiude as the nominee, things would be very different. Four more years of Bushit, for one.

It was a hard campaign, certainly. But Kerry has not had to fight against a campaign of slime, fear and innuendo and I don't think he could handle such a campaign. Dean has done it and come out on top without stooping to the depths to do it.

who want to install their candidate instead of the people's choice ;-)

I wonder why Rove and crew tell us they want to run against Dean?

They perceive Dean as the weakest popular candidate to face in a general election. So they are attempting to influence the nomination or frame the debate on the Democratic side to best fit in with their campaign plans. There are a lot of flaws with this strategy, needless to say.

their other "strategies"?

..is winning. Give them enough rope and they hang themselves, the problem is avoiding getting hung in the process as well.

eom

That's a thread-ender if I've ever seen one.

Tucker knows only political junkies watch this program. So what are poltical junkies doing??-----just like here they are saying that the repukes are doing this because they are really afraid of Dean and trying to act like they are not. Could it be that Tucker wants you to think exactly that way so we DO vote for Dean thinking that he's the one they are afraid of when in reality the one they ARE afraid of IS NOT Dean (like Clark)?? That botton would be lost on the general public, but it sure could play with the minds of the political junkies, couldn't it???

Sometimes it seems that an awful lot of time and energy goes into figuring the psychological ramifications for Rove or Tucker or who the heck ever does this or that...

Perhaps we should just stick to concentrating on Democratic issues and how our candidates represent them.

I don't know what Tucker is trying to do...

:+

Probably not. :)

"...Republicans admit they underestimated Dem candidate"

http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20030908/5477666s.htm

Republican Party officials and political advisers to President Bush admit that they underestimated Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean and say they now consider him a formidable potential adversary.

--snip

''There is something going on there, and I tell you, if we don't pay attention . . . we're making a big mistake,'' says Tom Rath, a Republican strategist and Bush adviser in New Hampshire.

--snip

''He has a huge opportunity to take the nomination,'' says Bill Dal Col, who managed Steve Forbes' 2000 presidential campaign. ''Nobody anticipated this kind of energy behind his candidacy.''

MORE...

<snip>
"Few Republicans are cheering for Dean now. His fundraising -- he collected $7.6 million in the second quarter of the year, outdoing his eight rivals -- the appeal of his passionate attacks on Bush and his rise in the polls have revised their earlier opinions.

Republicans were surprised by Dean's success at using the Internet to organize supporters and raise money and his ability to galvanize the Bush-haters who are most likely to vote in Democratic primaries. They say Dean seems to be the only candidate having fun on the campaign trail, a quality that voters find appealing.

No top Republican Party, White House or Bush campaign official wanted to be identified talking about Dean, but he's as hot a topic inside the Bush camp as he is among his Democratic rivals."<snip>

I see bait.

Why does it matter?

i find him to be better than other right wingers like those on fox news. i find him to be VERY annoying many times, but i don't get a disgusting feeling from him as i get from sean hannity ,or some of the other whores on fox news.

he's the one guy that when Im walking down town I hope to see. Fight would ensue.

Can't stand the guy.

if you have heard sean hannity, then tucker would come across as way more tolerable. as annoying as tucker is, sean hannity is totally repulsive.

A person is always best served by not believing anything the repugs say.

Perhaps they want Dean, perhaps they want us to believe they want Dean so we give them someone else....

Perhaps they just want to cause disention nad controversy in Democratic ranks...

Who knows what their game is? The only thing sure is that to them it is a game.

"A person is always best served by not believing anything the repugs say."

Thanks

Tucker basically said, "I am a liar."

Should we believe him or not?

than actually having a coherent and valid argument. Sometime I really wonder how he can be on TV when all he does is make goofy "whaaaaa" faces and talking about everything is so ridiculous, but never actually present facts or thoughtful insight.

:)

Anyway, it's possibly to play along with the mem that they're pushing that Dean is some kind of unelectable McGovern.

<sarcasm>
Run away establishment Dems! Democrats who have an enthusiastic base must be ultra-liberal and very scary! Everyone knows that only ultra-liberals and extremists get enthusiastic about Democratic candidates.
</sarcasm>

Never mind that Dean is a passionate *centrist*. Nonetheless, IMHO, if McGovern had the well oiled and well funded campaign that Dean has, McGovern would have been President.

A Deanie who works in the same building ran into Tucker Carlson after coming back from the Dean rally this morning, and he gave Carlson the button. He said that Tucker doesn't really dislike Dean. In fact he probably knows it pisses off DLC-type Dems to see him advertising Dean.

But Fucker has said numerous times that he believes Dean would be the easiest opponent for Shrub to beat.

Draw your own conclusions.

DTH

to split the Democratic Party. And sorry to rain on your parade, Clarkies, but you're propagating GOP propaganda by pushing this incorrect mem.

My post 21:
It's possibly to play along with the mem that they're pushing that Dean is some kind of unelectable McGovern.

<sarcasm>
Run away establishment Dems! Democrats who have an enthusiastic base must be ultra-liberal and very scary! Everyone knows that only ultra-liberals and extremists get enthusiastic about Democratic candidates.
</sarcasm>

Never mind that Dean is a passionate *centrist*. Nonetheless, IMHO, if McGovern had the well oiled and well funded campaign that Dean has, McGovern would have been President.

Sorry if that doesn't fit into your paradigm. Doesn't make it any less true!

DTH

:crazy:

DTH

Bush team considers Dean formidable Republicans admit they underestimated Dem candidate

By Judy Keen
USA TODAY

WASHINGTON -- Republican Party officials and political advisers to President Bush admit that they underestimated Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean and say they now consider him a formidable potential adversary.

Some Bush allies say he reminds them of another insurgent candidate who once bedeviled Bush: Arizona Sen. John McCain. His wins in Republican primary elections in New Hampshire and Michigan rattled Bush's 2000 campaign.

''There is something going on there, and I tell you, if we don't pay attention . . . we're making a big mistake,'' says Tom Rath, a Republican strategist and Bush adviser in New Hampshire.
…
http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20030908/5477666s.htm
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=103020

While Clark has electoral advantages.

Clark has decent domestic credentials and incredible foreign policy credentials. Dean has excellent domestic credentials but no foreign policy credentials.

Bush will be able to crucify Dean with his immense war chest, but the charges just won't stick with Clark. Meanwhile, EVERY Dem will have a major advantage over Bush on domestic policy.

Clark is also a Southerner, and not just any Southerner, but a MILITARY Southerner, and the South respects the military more than any other region. Dean is a "New England Liberal" (even though he's not that liberal at all...the perception is that he is liberal, however).

Arkansas even has more electoral votes than Vermont.

This is a no brainer. All serious political observers understand this. That's why the Dean supporters are only able to splutter and talk about mythical fairy tales as a reason why their guy will somehow do better than Clark.

DTH

Dean's teflon comes from "the best-run campaign we’ve ever seen", according to the New Democrat Network's Simon Rosenberg and a whole bunch of fired up Dean supporeters.

Dean was governor of a rural state and, therefore, can sympathize with Southerners (who are mostly rural living folks). Remember that Dean is leading in Iowa, a rural state. He's also leading among union members.

Dean's A rating with the NRA and his stance of state's rights on federal gun control also help (and have helped) him with rural folks.

Clark can say he's from Arkansas, but he's never run for election there, so they know about as much as anyone else knows about him, thereby greatly lessening any perceved homestate advantages there.

NOW I remember! How funny! To contend that Southerners will prefer a New Englander perceived as liberal over a Southerner military man perceived as moderate, simply because Dean, a Doctor from Park Avenue, was the governor of a rural state. How quaint!

DTH

to rural people. He understands their problems. He worked with rural folks for 11 years as governor and 10 years before that as a physician, Lt. governor and state senator.

He's beating Gephardt in a rural state that Gephardt has been visiting for years now and is extremely well known in.

This quarter Dean will be campaigning in South Carolina, again:

CHARLESTON, S.C. - Vermont Gov. Howard Dean brought his surging presidential campaign back to South Carolina after months away on Friday, telling a crowd of mostly students at the College of Charleston they have a chance to take back America.
…
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/local/6928029.htm
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=53554

And Dean is behind both Edwards and Clark in SC.

DTH

And, Dean hasn't campaigned in SC for months. He is now though.

that Wes Clark may be the biggest threat to W, but Howard Dean is the biggest threat to the status quo establishment.

If Howard Dean wins, a lot of things will change.

This is the true risk to Bushies and their ilk.

Frankly, if Wes Clark wins, I don't see much real change in the way things are done.

The DLC and DNC are not treating Dean as a serious candidate. A few days ago on Crossfire Martin Frost(D) said he thought Dean was an "interesting" candidate but not one that he would endorse. I've heard other Democrats say the same thing.

The grassroots is kind of being dismissed by the powers that be as something not to be taken seriously. This is one reason I haven't donated any money to the DNC.

They cannot grasp the grassroots of the Dean campaign and are attempting retarded reverse psychology (sorry I have my major in Psych and social work, can see this bullshit a mile before it comes my way), to show people that Dean is beatable. They are wrong. Dean is quite formidable with the amount of supporters he has been able to amass, and should be taken quite seriously. I numnuts Carlson wants to stay in "denial" about Dean's power, well I say more power to him.

Dean's impressive poll numbers, especially his negatives, and his fiery, specific rhetoric, full of detailed plans for how he's going to 'empower the people,' have the Republicans so terrified that they are trying mis-mis-information in order to get Dean eliminated.

Carlson is also highly impressed by Dean's anger -- so much so, in fact, that he's now a card carrying member of Republicans for Dean.

What a pathetic joke of a candidate. The other side wants a piece of him so bad that they openly advertise for him. But his drones drone on.

:hi:

Speaking about pathetic candidacies. Clark's amateur campaign can't seem to get their stories straight about Clark's IWR position nor can they figure out how to file voter registration papers or presidential candidacy papers.

Clark's not ready for the major league and alot of folks think he's a pathetic joke of a Democrat (I don't, I just think he's not skilled enough to take on Bush*).

drone away, BillyBunter.

You're going to have to deal with Thugs believing Dean is their easiest opponent throughout the rest of the season.

DTH

cause a split in the party. I doubt it would be a large one, but any split would be large enough to lose the election legitimately.

Folks are already sceptical of him. Many people, including myself, think he's the DLC's last chance at a "stop Dean" candidate.

Fortunately for the Dean campaign the Clark campaign is a poorly run campaign.

As for the Dean is a neo-McGovern, I expect they'll keep trying to push it and you'll keep helping them, DTH. And then Dean will win.

The haters are going to have to suck on it, while the vast majority of Dems (i.e. those who are not extremists morons or Dean fanatics) hail the Clintons' and CBC's fair-minded comments. No endorsement necessary.

Please put your eggs in this basket, though. I will laugh my ass off when they break.

DTH

Clinton described Dean's accomplishments with health care in his home state and his proposal to promote a national health care plan with a modest price tag as “New Democrat” positions. He was referring to the moniker the Democratic Leadership Council puts on Democrats who can blend moderate ideas that appeal to swing voters with traditional Democratic themes.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/05/14/national2104EDT0848.DTL
http://www.sltrib.com/2003/May/05152003/nation_w/57021.asp

"My fellow Americans, some people have claimed Wes Clark is not a Democrat. I just want to tell you, that is nonsense. Wes Clark is a good man, and a great Democrat. He supports Democratic ideals, and Hillary and I both feel he would make a fantastic President, just like the rest of our candidates."

DTH

Except it isn't. My post had nothing to do with Clark. You are supporting a candidate who is such a fucking joke that the Republicans openly cheer him on. They make no attempt to disguise how badly they want to get at him. None. Zero. They never have, even back when he was an utter nobody.

My post was devoted to pointing out what a reeking piece of shit Dean is, not to advance Clark's chances. So attack Clark all you please. Dean will still be what he is: the Republicans' choice for the Democratic nomination. You can't sink lower than that.

And Clark is the anti-Christ.

Sincerely,
Shrill, Irrational Anti-Clarker

BillyBunter says:
Except it isn't. My post had nothing to do with Clark. You are supporting a candidate who is such a fucking joke that the Republicans openly cheer him on. They make no attempt to disguise how badly they want to get at him. None. Zero. They never have, even back when he was an utter nobody.

My post was devoted to pointing out what a reeking piece of shit Dean is, not to advance Clark's chances. So attack Clark all you please. Dean will still be what he is: the Republicans' choice for the Democratic nomination. You can't sink lower than that.

I'm not saying you're dumb, I'm just telling it like it is.

I'm also not attacking Dean, but it's clear to any cogent political observer that Dean has electoral disadvantages when compared to Clark. Sorry if that might throw you into a frothing rage.

DTH

is an electorial disadvantage. I'm sorry if that might throw you into a frothing rage. But, you need to deal with that and you need to deal with your and BB's Dean hate. Let go of your hate.

So far I've been right with all of my predictions, despite the doom-and-gloom predictions of the Dean Kool-Aid drinkers.

Clark's organization will end up being just fine. Dean will still be a New England "liberal" weak on foreign policy. Don't get me wrong, I actually think Dean is OK, but for his negativity which is a clear sign of desperation.

DTH, Much More Amused Than Outraged

While Clark is raising his second million, Dean will have aired new political ads throughout the country.

Tactically speaking, Dean had to throw out something negative at Clark to show some folks that being a general doesn't make someone impervious to political attacks just like being a medical doctor or a governor doesn't make someone impervious to political attacks. He needed to get back the spotlight and regain momentum. IMHO, Dean accomplished what he was trying to do.

Dean had to go negative because he was desperate, and because he realizes he can't compete with Clark in any other way.

Clark will have plenty of cash. The word on the knowledgeable street is that he raised millions here in LA Wednesday and Thursday. But I will be sure to pass along your genuine concerns to the Clark campaign.

DTH

Yes, tactically speaking. If I were Dean, I'd have taken a jab at him too. It did precisely what it was intended to do, IMHO. And it reflected the thoughts of many folks already supporting Dean.

As for Clark's first few millions:
Dean still on top of money race (NDN: "best-run campaign we’ve ever seen")
http://www.msnbc.com/news/974339.asp
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=52916

Come back to me in a bit. We'll see how the money situation is.

I'm very glad you admit that Dean went negative, and that he had to do so, however!

DTH

This was explained on the Dean blog
A Deanie who works in the same building ran into Tucker Carlson after coming back from the Dean rally this morning, and he gave Carlson the button. He said that Tucker doesn't really dislike Dean. In fact he probably knows it pisses off DLC-type Dems to see him advertising Dean.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=467192&mesg_id=467873&page=

You're wandering aimlessly back to about five posts ago, dear.

DTH

My post had nothing to do with Clark. You are supporting a candidate who is such a fucking joke that the Republicans openly cheer him on. They make no attempt to disguise how badly they want to get at him. None. Zero. They never have, even back when he was an utter nobody.

My post was devoted to pointing out what a reeking piece of shit Dean is, not to advance Clark's chances. So attack Clark all you please. Dean will still be what he is: the Republicans' choice for the Democratic nomination. You can't sink lower than that.

But you'll continue backing your Republican's Choice candidate.


Republican's Choice. Sounds like a brand of dog food. How sadly apropos.

Fine. Calling him a "reeking piece of shit"? Not acceptable. You've been alerted.

I've had it with this kind of revolting attack. Hope the mods have too. People who post things like this shouldn't be here.

the many with a tiny organization ;shut down his own websites
no clear vision
no money
single digits in any poll that matters
Accused of War Crimes
Oversaw a theater where Depleted Uranium ammo poisoned god knows how many
Was a Generral at the Pentagon when over three TRILLION went missing

and didn't know he was a democrat until last month
he's your leader all right
Damn the cliffs, forward march

Get yer lemming hat on tight, Billyboy!

You're so cute. :-)

Have fun with your "movement" while the rest of the party moves forward.

DTH

who continues to support Howard Dean: Republican's Choice.

"Cut. Paste. Dean. Forearms. Angry. Neck."

DTH

DTH

toilet bowl clean.

But it's interesting that you, as a Dean supporter, would choose Goldstein, one of the ultimate symbols of political fraud and manipulation, from which to draw inspiration. Goldstein was the straw man of Orwell's fictional Party, and here is Dean, the straw man of the Republican Party. Ordinarily, I'd find it funny. Apparently there's more going on with you than meets the eye: subconsciously, even you recognize Dean for the fraud that he is.

Trojan Horse: Wesley Clark's National Endowment for Democracy
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=460511

I'm not expecting much out of his amateur campaign or his Dean-hater followers, though. Clark's campaign needs to address this, somehow, but I'm afraid that his top-down campaign has decided to ignore instead of deal with.

want to run against. We both know who that is, though.

Your repeated attempts to change the topic to Clark only underscore the weakness of Dean, by the way.

I think most Republicans think that Dean will lose in a landslide to Bush*. I think that the smart and informed Republicans know that Dean may be the biggest danger to Bush.

If you follow the majority of Republicans, you'll almost always be wrong, BB.

But last I checked, about twice as many Dems believe Clark is a better bet against Bush compared to Dean, too.

Thanks for playing, though!

DTH

Clark's former occupation of "army general" isn't the teflon you think it is. Teflon comes from a strong campaign and a whole bunch of dedicated supporters.

Clark's initial candidacy affected those polls, but the polls will change and the national poll you speak of will change, also, as Dean ramps up the ads in many more states this quarter.

But I guess it's always easier to point to doom-and-gloom in the future, like you have with Clark's fundraising and other various and dire predictions.

Again, come back to me in a bit. I'm confident my punditry skills will prove superior to yours. ;-)

DTH

PS: I love how you're parroting me all the time. I recommend reading more books if you want to expand your creativity and vocabulary.

But I guess it's always easier to point to doom-and-gloom in the future, like you have with Republican's unfounded beliefes about Dean and other various and dire predictions.

Again, come back to me in a bit. I'm confident my punditry skills will prove superior to yours. ;-)

PS: Sometimes I like to use a debating style that highlights my opponent's hypocrisy and shrillness for others and focuses on facts over style by using their formatting in my response.

Very effective. In third grade, anyway.

DTH

and focuses it on the opinions that differ and facts. :)

Observers find it easier to follow to figure out where the differences are, my opponent can't say I didn't respond to some obscure thing that was mentioned and my opponent has more trouble changing the subject from something uncomfortable by running off on some tangent.

and I didn't much care for this one either....alert

that it is becomming increasinly obvious to even the habitual/casual (i.e. not hard core ideologue) Republican voter that Bush is incompetent and dangerous and that any reasonably moderate, responsible Democratic is a reasonable alternative. If this is the case Rove's hope to pin Dean as "too liberal" will fail and this country will have sane government again.

But I'll be damned if I spend a minute of my day wading into the cesspool of TC's head.

over the past couple of days showing Jeb Bush giving a very sarcastic view of Dean? Jeb was just over-the -top obnoxious, sneering, "What do I think of the democratic candidates? Oh, Dean, yeah, he's a great one. Just another angry democrat that has rallied other angry democrats..." Maybe I'm paraphrasing, but that surely is the jist of what he said and the tone. I think Tucker was wearing the button just to be a smart-ass. Hey, it's good publicity, IMO. People are seeing his name.

You people are going nuts over this. The story is that a Deanie who knows Carlson got back from a Dean rally and handed the button to Tucker, who wore it most likely for the irony and to confuse and piss people off. Just for fun, no doubt. This happened just before the show was taped, it's not a plot.

can try to insinuate that the repubs want Dean?

But Dean and the electoral map can only work with luck.

However, this election is too important for luck...
So I am going with the sure thing.

I'd Rather for my contributions to be a downpayment on a sure thing
than a gamble.