|
They were not very worred earlier on when someone else was the frontrunner, and sort of laughed the democrats off, but with most national polls of registered democrats, republican and independents showing Kerry being the only Democrat handily beating Bush almost twice the margins of error of those polls, they are considering the replacement of the candidate of their dreams with a candidate with a consistant record in congress.
Only Gephard, and Lieberman have as consistant political records, as when you looks at Dean, you see nothing in his campaign that can be backed up by his actions as Governor. Apparently the American people have picked up on this disconnect between Dean the cnadidate and Dean the Governor, because his unfavorable/favorable ratings show that the American Public just does not favor Howard Dean. In the Latest ARG polls for Wisconsin, he has a 20 percent favorable rating, and a 37 percent unfavorable rating. And this is the best rating he has in the upcoming primaries.In Tennessee 21 percent favorable 44 percent favorable. Al Sharpton has a more favorable rating in Tennessee than Dean.In Virginia his favorable rating is 22 percent unfavorable 47 percent. Kerry has the favorability rating in all of these states with Kerrys favorability rating exceeeding Deans unfavorable ratings by a considerable number of points, all over 50 percent.
Though I have great respect for the other candidates, Wesley Clark does have a history of republican support and also is not the Washington outsider he likes to portray himself as, because one fact that is true in Washington it that it is the lifers, the civil servants, from the highest to the lowerst levels who are the real control factor in Washington, to the degree that it used to drive John Kennedy so crazy that he used to state "I give orders and nothing happens" on a nearly daily basis. Clark followed the policies, whethre right or wrong, or Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, unquestioningly, and his conscience did not cause him to resign his commission. Granted, it am glad to have a guy like this on our side now, but his history as a Washington outsider just isnt correct, and he had part in making recommendations for many of the decisions that have led us to where we are now. It might be wise to wait a little while to see if the "new demcrat" suit fits him well befpre prpelling him into the White House.
Kucinich also, as a record that somewhat differs from his current statements a president, and the change, from anti-abortion, anti-gay marraige and civil union is too recent a change, again, to determine how well this change of opinion has set in.
Edwards alone of the rest of the candidates has a record that has been consistant all of the principals of the Democratic party. Just that he has not been around long enough to get an idea of how well he will stand by them, or how effective he will be at making sure that he can make lots of end runs around what will be a hostile House and Senate.
Since the public have not supported the other two cnadidates who have the longest running history of actually always supporting what they say they support and alway standing behind democratic party and progressive political positions, the only cnaiddate left who has consistantly stood by Democratic Party positions is Kerry. There are of course times when Kerry has had to compromise with Republicans to get part of what the Democratic Party wanted, rather than get none of it. But that is simply the nature of politics in Democratic Societies, both in America and around the world. In England, Parties that dont see eye to eye have to form coalition governments and make concessions in their party platforms. In America, we make compromises.
But the rest of the candidates who have served in elected office adn are still left standing, except for Edwards, havenot made those compromises out of political necessity. They have opposed democratic party policies and ideals out of their own volition. Not because they had to.
And this is what the Bush Administration fears most about Kerry, they are not going to be able to attack him on political inconsistancies. They are going to have to attack him on his consistancy to the basic ideology of the Democratic Party. the policies that balanced the budget in the 90's, created 22 million jobs, reduced poverty by ww percent. They will not be able to attack him on opposing regime change in Iraq, just his position on the appropriate way to do this. same thing with his stance on national security, they will not be3 able to attack him on non- support of theelements of the patriot act which have been very effective in stopping attacks planned on the U.S. over the last 2 years. Just his opposition to the Ashcroft Justice Departments abusive interpretation of exactly what that act allowed (Interpretations which the courts are now runling as excessive).Kerry has very few chinks in his political armor, so the attck will beon his stric adhereance to the ideals of the democratic party.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(921 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
