Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

New Dem 08 poll

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 » DU Groups » Democrats » John Kerry Group Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 08:26 PM
Original message
New Dem 08 poll
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
1.  A poll that follows name recognition. What a surprise!
(copy of my comment on GDP)

Wake me up when somebody who is not known to the whole country will be first. Then it may be meaningful. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. The person knocked a point off Clinton and 2 points off Kerry.
Wonder why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. You're right. Interesting.
It's a newbie, so hard to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Could be trying
to make Gore look better. Who knows!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. So, Kerry's at 14
Wow, at this point in '02, he was at 4%. Gee, he's in the top three. Sounds like a 'contender' to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Island Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. At this point in '02, who was the clear front runner?
I don't remember what I was paying attention to in '02, but I know it wasn't potential presidential candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Gore and Hillary Clinton
Serious, no shit, Gore and Hillary Clinton. AHm, how did that work out for them anyway? BTW, did I mention it's really really early in the cycle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. I think Gore is in near the same position
he really was pretty skittish about declaring that he definately wanted to run until he didn't. I think the Clintons thought it unwinable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wisteria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. I thought the same thing. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. I thought that was interesting too
Edited on Tue Jun-06-06 08:58 PM by karynnj
They did put the link - which makes it strange.

What I find interesting is that both Gore and Kerry are doing better than late last year and this year. It's interesting that Kerry is up. Gore has been on the cover of several magazines and has been pushed by more talking heads than anyone. Kerry has been treated as he has been since he lost.

Speaking of which, Beinhart was just on Scarborough talking about his book that only liberals can defeat terrorism. He said that liberals support port security, and working with other countries to find the terroists. He also said Muslems were more welcome here than in Europe because we're a more religious country. (I would say because we are a traditionally more heterogeneous society) But when Scarbough said what liberal would do that he said ...Al Gore. (Though he virtually stold words from the 2004 candidate.)

Differences from the beginning of the year:
1) Hillary clearly is down. 31% is still high though - but not the 40+ that she was at.
2) At the beginning of the year, Edwards was likely slightly higher than Kerry - but they were close. Now, Kerry seems to have the edge. This change may be just a fluke, but it was done as Edwards got press for N.O. and his hotel workers thing. What's interesting is that this was done with little positive press for Kerry.
3) None of the other candidates have caught fire at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I still believe
Edited on Tue Jun-06-06 09:20 PM by ProSense
Hillary Clinton is benefiting from the "woman president" idea. As time goes by and issues become the focus, her numbers will continue to drop. Given my belief that Clinton is left of Gore, her support will likely shift to Kerry, Edwards or Feingold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. I think you're right
It's also because it was stated constantly as inevitable. The other thing is that some in the media have always said what a fantastic Senator she is. I don't see that on CSPAN and I don't see her leading any major issues. (She was one of several people leading on SS)

I think that the "woman President" is part of it, but I think some women may eventually see that she is not competing as an independent woman, but partially as Clinton's wife. She is brilliant and could possibly have made it on her own - but that's not the way it happened. I also think that Bill is a double edged sword - he's charismatic and a huge draw, but theirs also Clinton fatigue.

The main thing though is the issues. I hestitate to disagree with Clinton, but I think he was wrong in what he told Kerry to do in 2004 and if Hillary is where he told her to go wrong now. It will be interesting to see what she will do with Kerry's resolution if it comes to a vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. It really is early
Edited on Tue Jun-06-06 09:37 PM by TayTay
Nobody is doing overt things, everything is like whispers about the high school prom. (Really, are you going with him? I heard that Mary is going with Jason and he's all wrong for her. You know, tbat sort of rumor type thing. It's actually kind of funny at this stage. I still think that nobody knows anything and it's all a giant game of musical chairs and the music is still playing.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Great analogy
It's even hard to speak of issues as they can easilly change. (One of the McLauglin group people when they did their predictions at the end last Sunday, predicted that Hillary would change her position on the war.

She has said so little that many non-DU people would likely not even remember her position by 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. That
Beinhart, Gore link is weird. I really don't think Gore will run, Beinhart could be setting up Biden. Thoughts!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. That really makes sense
I couldn't understand Gore. He did say he was more hawkish through his career and that he "voted right in 1991" (I disagree). He also said he was a centrist and would run as one - which is unlikely - that's not where is support is. So,I think you're right he has an agenda.

Given the emphasis on foreign policy - Biden is the likely person. Beinhart has likely not totally given up on the Neocon ideas - and I suspect that he might be where Biden is. (Dodd is also on the SFRC, but I have no idea where he stands.) I assume they like Kerry as little as they did in 2004. (It likely annoys them that he was right on so many things - where they disagreed. Kerry really is still the one who can really talk about terrorism. It's odd that 4 1/2 years after 911, few politicians or pundits are where Kerry was before it happened. (I just started "New War" and am amazed at how prescient he was.)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Interesting article on Beinhart:
Rose-Colored View of History
by Paul Campos

Snip...

But in the end it's not very interesting to point out that Bush administration dead-enders are willing to defend anything it does. (Hewitt in particular seems past praying for: If President Bush came out in favor of compulsory late-term abortions for the wives of NASCAR drivers, I wouldn't be surprised if Hewitt found something to praise in the proposal).

What's more interesting are the following comments from Peter Beinart, editor in chief of The New Republic. After noting that Americans can be as barbaric as anyone, Beinart argues that "what makes us an exceptional nation with the capacity to lead and inspire the world is our very recognition of that fact." While it's true "we are capable of Hadithas and My Lais," America is nevertheless almost unique among nations because, when we confront such atrocities, we are "capable of acknowledging what happened, bringing the killers to justice, and instituting changes that make it less likely to happen again."

What's disturbing about this claim is that illustrates how a person in a position of considerable public influence can simply concoct an imaginary past to suit the propaganda needs of the present war.

Consider three of the best-known atrocities committed by American troops during the Vietnam War. (I say best-known rather than well-known, since the vast majority of Americans have only heard of one of them at most. So much for our supposed national willingness to "acknowledge what happened.")

My Lai. Remarkably, Beinart invokes this massacre of between 200 and 500 Vietnamese villagers by American troops as an example of "bringing killers to justice." In fact, with one exception, none of the many soldiers and officers responsible for committing and covering up this mass murder were ever convicted of anything. The one exception, Lt. William Calley, was pardoned by President Nixon after spending three years under house arrest.

Snip...

That right-wing ideologues peddle jingoistic nonsense about American exceptionalism is only to be expected. That the editor of a prominent liberal magazine should do so as well helps explain how we've managed to entangle our troops in yet another nightmarish guerrilla war.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0606-35.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Great article
Campos is totally on target on the atrocities comment. If Beinhart were correct that when we do something wrong, we admit it and correct it, the entire SBVT thing wouldn't have happened. Kerry's honest comments would be accepted as what they were.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Exactly!
I love the title: Rose-Colored View of History
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whometense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. Dunno.
But TNR is soooooo wrongheaded, I was thinking as I leafed through the latest issue that they'll probably come out hard for Hillary the way they did for Lieberman, and get left at the starting gate once again.

They don't exactly have their finger on the pulse of the democratic voting public...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Another possibility
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whometense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. That certainly is a possibility.
He's way off my list, but he's nice and conservative and centrist, and that makes him a candidate for the coveted TNR endorsement. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. LOL! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
20. Will AL Gore endorse anyone and if so who
Gore has said several times that he is not running. No matter what he says no one has believed him. What I wonder is, if he really is not running, will he endorse someone else say a year from now.

Would an endorsement like that have any impact?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blaukraut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. I think he will endorse the candidate with the most environment
credentials. So far, that seems to be John Kerry. As to impact of the endorsement; It will probably carry more weight this time around than it did in 04, simply because so many people have hitched their hopeful-wagons to Gore at this time, and will follow his endorsement when they realize he isn't going to run, imho.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demdiva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-07-06 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #20
28. It won't be Hillary
Although I'd hope that if Al Gore isn't running this time (and I think he isn't) that he will wait and instead support whoever the nominee is. Last time he was a little to quick to jump on the Howard Dean bandwagon ... and he was a bit disrespectful not telling Joe ahead of time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
24. none of this really matters
what will matter the most is how the candidates do as the campaigning starts up. how they will do compared to others in debates and other appearances. there will be events where they speak one after the other. people will be able to compare. and of course good ole retail politics. just trying to convince voters one on one.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demdiva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-07-06 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. I agree
The only reasons polls matter at all right now is the fundraising impact ...but I guarantee one year from now these numbers will look very different. We have such short memories .... doesn't anyone remember HOWARD DEAN????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 16th 2024, 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » DU Groups » Democrats » John Kerry Group 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