Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (7027)	12/5/2003 12:37:25 PM
From: American Spirit	Respond to of 10965

Whoever is behind Draft Gore, I may join them in a couple of months. But let's wait to see some votes actually cast. New Hampshire in particular has always almost surprised. Whatever the conventional wisdom, NH voters like to defy it. May be why they turned away from Kerry. Now maybe they'll turn back. Who knows? Dean covering up his gov papers doesn't look good for him. Makes him a hypocrite. He also made the mistake of saying Bush also hid his. Not true. Bush tried but was forced to open up the files.

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (7027)	12/6/2003 1:57:37 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10965

The Capital Report is first class. I particularly enjoy Alan Murray. You apparently don't have a clue what first class is. Frank Luntz, Peter Hart, Andrew Kohut, John Zogby, Bob Moore all sell their best work at high profit to the Parties and the candidates. The public is out of the loop. You are a fool if you think anything that comes out of an electronic screen on a wholly owned subsidiary of a prime war profiteer like GE is "first class". The only thing first class about it is is the propaganda values. Psyops is alive and well on CNBC, as it is on all other TV "media". Here's the latest thing that is publicly available from Bob Moore's shop. It isn't current, it isn't what Moore is sharing with Rove. It is what Rove wants Moore to share with a select public..... moore-info.com Howard Reagan? Friday, November 14, 2003 3:33 p.m. EST BEST OF THE WEB BY JAMES TARANTO In attempting to explain the Howard Dean phenomenon, commentators have analogized him to candidates past: Is he Jimmy Carter or George McGovern? The names of William Jennings Bryan, Alf Landon, Barry Goldwater and Michael Dukakis have all come up. But here's the unlikeliest comparison of all: Howard Dean as Ronald Reagan. David Reinhard, a columnist for the (Portland) Oregonian, reports on "the considered judgment of two respected Republican pollsters--Bob Moore and Hans Kaiser--from Portland's Moore Information." They think Dean is a more formidable candidate than the conventional wisdom allows: "Dean's appeal is closer to Ronald Reagan's than any other Democrat running today. . . . The Democratic party used to chuckle about Reagan and his gaffes, which they believed would marginalize him to the far-right dustbin of history. But when his opponents tried to attack him for some of his more outlandish statements, the folks in the middle simply ignored them. Voters . . . looked to the bigger picture, where they saw a man of conviction who cared about them and had solutions for their problems." Maybe we're missing something, but we don't see it. True, in 1980 Reagan successfully did what Dean is attempting now: He won the presidency by capitalizing on public anger. But Reagan was not an angry man; his optimism and confidence were an appealing contrast to the incumbent's dour malaise. What's more, there's no evidence that Americans outside the far left and the Democratic Party are angry at the incumbent today. At the risk of committing a conservative heresy, we'd say the recent Democrat who most resembled Reagan in 1980 was Bill Clinton in 1992. Like Jimmy Carter, the first President Bush had prompted public dissatisfaction that transcended ideology by seeming to govern ineffectually; and like Reagan, Clinton projected a certain optimism (his campaign theme song was "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow"). Like Reagan, Clinton was consistently underestimated by his partisan opponents. Dean, by contrast, combines the worst traits of 1992's two angry men: the ideological extremism of Pat Buchanan and the petulance of Ross Perot. Unless things go seriously wrong in America over the next year, this seems certain to be a losing combination. MARK MY WORDS: That is, of course, the exact same smarmy and superficial attitude that caused Dewey to lose to Truman in 1948. The author of this article, James Taranto, is a COMPLETE IDIOT, and I, for one, am extremely grateful of his blind spot. In all his meanderings, he fails to see the right comparison. Howard Dean is the Harry Truman of 2004. He's a feisty "man of the people". The Little Shrub is a callow shadow of Thomas Dewey, an arrogant SOB who dismissed America and sniffily drank martinis on his "campaign tour". It was a failed vacation. Hopefully, Little Shrub keeps listening to Taranto. I love it when idiots claven and cackle, like birds on a wire. They are about to be predated by a superior raptor.