Front Office Football Central - View Single Post

Buccaneer · 02-04-2004, 08:04 PM

Sorry to be late in responding but I think you would understand. Just a few reactions to some of the posts here:

With Bush vs Kerry likely, I am predicting either a repeat of the Bush vs Dukakis election of 1988 or if something dramatic happens, closer to Bush vs Gore.

-----

Someone said that Kerry will have to (or will) run centrist. I won't understand why every single voter would not see through that charade. It is arguable that he had one of the most liberal voting record in the Senate. So running as a centrist, I see two conclusions:

1. What he voted on (or stood for) the past 20 years was an error because he really is a centrist. That's being a liar; or

2. He will stand on his voting record but fake being a centrist. That's being a fraud and a hypocrit.

Yes I know all candidates run centrist with some conservative/liberal flavorings. But in the case of Bush Jr., I would strongly argue that his results where more of a liberal Republican (with his record budget proposals and bigger govt). There were some conservative flavorings so I don't think you can claim strongly that he ran one way and presided another way. Clinton ended up like Bush Jr., imo (being all over the place) with Reagan and Carter being the only ones in recent memory presiding the way he campaigned.

-----

Too many people, imo, are pointing to Dean's downfall on his scream speech. I strongly disagree. At the first of the year, it was widespread belief among Democrats that he would self-destruct - it just became a matter of when, not if. Two weeks before Iowa, Dean was slipping badly and had already lost Iowa by then. It (scream speech) may have cost him some pct points in NH but I don't think it would have made that much of a difference by then.

-----

I find it very amusing to the critical remark of Kerry going up against a "political machine". One, you have an incumbant that does not have spend any money for the primaries. Don't you remember the 1996 election at all????? Second, the political machines (both for Rep and Dem) have always been there. It changes from election to election depending upon incumbancy and popularity but the Dems have a huge machine in some areas that the GOP cannot begin to match (think Big Labor, Big Media, Big Greens, etc.), and vice-versa (you know the usual list). That is why I am thinking that in many states, the election has already been decided (i.e., nothing will change the expected outcome).

-----

I didn't see anyone mention the FY 2005 Federal Budget. There were 20+ general categories. Did anyone pay attention to the pct increase/decrease???? There are those here (like NoMyths) that wants to make something called "fiscal responsibility" as an anti-Bush campaign theme. Okay, I would go along with that. Will you and others join me in declaring instead of a handful of categories going down in pct points, that all of them should (as a way of avoiding any drastic cuts in any one area)? Why propose a budget of $2.4t instead of $1.85t if you are so concerned with the budget deficit??? But I suspect that no way you (or Kerry or anyone else) would do that (regardless if the actual approval of such numbers falls with Congress instead of the president). I firmly believe that one should always submit a budget without a deficit by cutting spending and not raising any more taxes. But no one has the guts to do so and therefore, I don't want to hear anything about "fiscal responsibility" in this year's campaign.

-----

Since I am planning to vote Libertarian (it would be impossible for Kerry to win Colorado), I really won't have much personal emotional invested. I view this year's election as a great strategy game and you know I love strategy games.

02-04-2004, 08:04 PM	#52
Buccaneer Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Colorado	Sorry to be late in responding but I think you would understand. Just a few reactions to some of the posts here: With Bush vs Kerry likely, I am predicting either a repeat of the Bush vs Dukakis election of 1988 or if something dramatic happens, closer to Bush vs Gore. ----- Someone said that Kerry will have to (or will) run centrist. I won't understand why every single voter would not see through that charade. It is arguable that he had one of the most liberal voting record in the Senate. So running as a centrist, I see two conclusions: 1. What he voted on (or stood for) the past 20 years was an error because he really is a centrist. That's being a liar; or 2. He will stand on his voting record but fake being a centrist. That's being a fraud and a hypocrit. Yes I know all candidates run centrist with some conservative/liberal flavorings. But in the case of Bush Jr., I would strongly argue that his results where more of a liberal Republican (with his record budget proposals and bigger govt). There were some conservative flavorings so I don't think you can claim strongly that he ran one way and presided another way. Clinton ended up like Bush Jr., imo (being all over the place) with Reagan and Carter being the only ones in recent memory presiding the way he campaigned. ----- Too many people, imo, are pointing to Dean's downfall on his scream speech. I strongly disagree. At the first of the year, it was widespread belief among Democrats that he would self-destruct - it just became a matter of when, not if. Two weeks before Iowa, Dean was slipping badly and had already lost Iowa by then. It (scream speech) may have cost him some pct points in NH but I don't think it would have made that much of a difference by then. ----- I find it very amusing to the critical remark of Kerry going up against a "political machine". One, you have an incumbant that does not have spend any money for the primaries. Don't you remember the 1996 election at all????? Second, the political machines (both for Rep and Dem) have always been there. It changes from election to election depending upon incumbancy and popularity but the Dems have a huge machine in some areas that the GOP cannot begin to match (think Big Labor, Big Media, Big Greens, etc.), and vice-versa (you know the usual list). That is why I am thinking that in many states, the election has already been decided (i.e., nothing will change the expected outcome). ----- I didn't see anyone mention the FY 2005 Federal Budget. There were 20+ general categories. Did anyone pay attention to the pct increase/decrease???? There are those here (like NoMyths) that wants to make something called "fiscal responsibility" as an anti-Bush campaign theme. Okay, I would go along with that. Will you and others join me in declaring instead of a handful of categories going down in pct points, that all of them should (as a way of avoiding any drastic cuts in any one area)? Why propose a budget of $2.4t instead of $1.85t if you are so concerned with the budget deficit??? But I suspect that no way you (or Kerry or anyone else) would do that (regardless if the actual approval of such numbers falls with Congress instead of the president). I firmly believe that one should always submit a budget without a deficit by cutting spending and not raising any more taxes. But no one has the guts to do so and therefore, I don't want to hear anything about "fiscal responsibility" in this year's campaign. ----- Since I am planning to vote Libertarian (it would be impossible for Kerry to win Colorado), I really won't have much personal emotional invested. I view this year's election as a great strategy game and you know I love strategy games.