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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jack Hartmann who wrote (418)	1/31/2004 10:13:11 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Respond to of 81568

And Kerry goes to show that it does not take millions to get a start. Bush may sit on a mountain of cash. He may have all the money to flood the airwaves to advertise what he may want to adverrtise. But his advertisement cannot surpass the advertisement of widespread joblessness which is expected to remain steady or increase if the FED increases interest rates. And then you start to get the trickling in of US soldiers dying everyday in Iraq. Bush needs to fix that first before he starts to spend those millions. Similar to Deans who failed to make fundamental changes in his strategy. Kerry did so at the nick of time and he benefitted. For Dean and Bush it is too late.

To: Jack Hartmann who wrote (418)	2/1/2004 9:49:48 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Respond to of 81568

Kerry's Achilles' Heel In all likelihood, it appears that Senator John Kerry will become the democratic presidential nominee, barring a Kerry-like resurrection by the Dean campaign or multiple victories by the Edwards campaign next week. Senator Kerry seemingly matches up relatively well against President Bush and could have significant appeal to the moderate voting bloc, at least that was the thinking of primary voters in Iowa and New Hampshire earlier this month. Democrats point to Kerry’s distinguished military record and his “moderate” votes on NAFTA, welfare overhaul, and some tax policies, especially those dealing with investments, as evidence that Kerry has the military gravitas to lead and political views that are in touch with America. While Kerry’s 19-year voting record dating back to the Reagan years will be picked apart by the Bush campaign, assuming Kerry receives the democratic nod, there’s one vote and one issue that could be Kerry’s Achilles’ heel. In 1996, Senator John Kerry voted against the “Defense of Marriage Act”, which banned federal recognition of same-sex “marriages” and gave states the ability to refuse recognition of gay “marriages” from other states. Only 14 other senators, all of them democrats, joined Senator Kerry. This vote had virtually no political effect upon Kerry in his liberal home state of Massachusetts. It would also pose little problems for Kerry in New England during the presidential election. Recall that George W. Bush only received four electoral votes in New England, winning New Hampshire by less than 8,000 votes. While most New England, Upper Atlantic Coast, and West Coast voters, which represent a large majority of the democratic “Blue States”, will not look at Kerry negatively for this vote, it’s in the vitally important South and Midwest where this vote could crush the Kerry campaign. In the 2000 presidential election, George Bush received 211 of his 271 electoral votes, or nearly 80%, from states in the South or Midwest. Leading democratic strategists and presidential contenders have been emphatic in stating that whomever wins the democratic nomination must have a better showing in the South and Midwest than Al Gore did four years ago in order to recapture the White House. The problem for Kerry is that most of the voters in these states are moderately to deeply religious and are adamantly opposed to gay “marriage”. In an O’Leary Report/Zogby International poll conducted last month of likely voters from “Red” and “Blue” states, 70% of Red State voters stated that marriage should be confined to a man and woman. Furthermore, only 25% of Red State respondents supported the idea of civil unions. Senator Kerry has stated that he backs the concept of civil unions. In the Bible Belt, which encompasses many of the Red States, religion and its guidance on political/social issues tends to trump in importance any other issues in presidential elections and will likely do so again this year. Of course, chief among these issues is abortion, as democrats have lost thousands if not millions of votes over the past three decades in the Red States solely due to their pro-abortion stances. Voting against the “Defense of Marriage Act” was akin to voting against bans on abortions to voters in these states and it is sure to cost Kerry critical votes. (Incidentally, Senator Kerry’s record on abortion will also hurt him in the Red States, as he carries a 0% rating with the National Right to Life and voted against a ban upon partial-birth abortions on three occasions.) Social conservatives in these states, many of whom are democrats, see gay marriage and civil unions as an attack on the family. The same O’Leary/Zogby report found that only 10% of voters in Red States are single. Therefore, any issues that are deemed to influence the family, either positively or negatively, are likely to be key issues in these electorally valuable states. With a Kerry nomination, the Democratic Party will continue to fight an uphill battle in the South and among other Red State voters to overcome the perception that the Party is not religion and family friendly. While the War on Terror and the economy will be viewed as the kingpin issues of the presidential campaign, if the race is close, then gay marriage could be the tiebreaker issue in the Midwest and the South. If so, it could cost John Kerry the White House. zogby.com