I Think I Lost Two to Bush Tonight

[DoveTurnedHawk]

I am really depressed. I was having drinks tonight with two die-hard Clark supporters who had previously been Republicans.

Our entire leadership group (including the two of them) had been discussing moving over to Kerry. So it was with some shock that I heard they were not sure about that, and that moreover they were thinking about voting for Bush. (!)

I was utterly shocked. We discussed the issues, specifically affirmative action. She said, "I think Bush is really comfortable with race, look at his cabinet, there are so many people of color. I don't think that's true for Kerry."

Utterly. Flabbergasted. I was so blindsided. I told them Kerry had a pristine voting record with the NAACP, and despite Bush's elite tokens, he was vehemently against affirmative action for ordinary Americans.

She didn't believe me. She asked me what specific bills Kerry had supported that were pro-affirmative action. I couldn't tell her, I could only point to his voting record with the NAACP and the obvious truism that Democrats are pro-affirmative action and Republicans are anti-.

That wasn't good enough for her. She kept pressing me for specific bills, which I told her I couldn't give her. When I told her she should try to educate herself on the issues if she didn't believe me, she said I was alienating her.

This is a good friend, who I fought with side-by-side in innumerable Clark events.

I just didn't know what to say. Her friend was nodding along with her, so I have little doubt what her viewpoint was.

I mean, what the fuck. How the fuck can anyone think that George W. Bush is better on race issues than John F. Kerry?

I am so pissed at myself for not being able to convince them.

DTH

[alittlelark]

1. Damn, that's depressing!!!

What if Clark was Sec. of State? Would that change their minds? Ask. E-mail them a list of sites explaining the TRUE positions of the candidates.

[DannyRed]

2. If you have the chance

come back to the discussion.

Make it clear that the failing was YOURS, and not Kerry's.

And come back armed to the teeth with facts, bills, vote records, and initiative.

Lay it out.

Come back with *SPECIFIC* endorsements from various quarters...especially if you can find some from less liberal institutions or groups.

Use the Kerry website, use the DNC website.

I support Dean, but I honestly wish you the best in your attempts....

[MurikanDemocrat]

3. Bummer

Got this off his website. Not sure how to hunt down specific bills.

Preserve Affirmative Action

John Kerry believes in an America where we take common sense steps to ensure that our schools and workplaces reflect the full face of America. He has consistently opposed efforts in the Senate to undermine or eliminate affirmative action programs and supports programs that seek to enhance diversity, for example, by fostering the growth of minority small businesses.


Eliminate Racial Profiling

John Kerry believes that the practice of racial profiling should be prohibited and that remedies should be established for its victims. It is more important than ever that the nation’s laws are enforced without resort to discrimination.
John Kerry received a 100 percent rating from the National Association of the Advancement of Colored People and the Human Rights Campaign for his work in support of civil rights during the 107th Congress.


http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/civilrights/

[TruthIsAll]

24. Bush and the NAACP? He never met with them....

www.theadvertiser.com/news/html/05DE12F5-1193-4543-8DA6-E41FEA63CF89.shtml


LAFAYETTE — As President Bush met Monday with the National Urban League, local members of the NAACP said they weren’t surprised that Bush has yet to meet with the oldest civil rights organization in the country.

Bush met with the civil rights group during his presidential campaign but has declined invitations extended to him in 2001 and 2002 by national NAACP President Kweisi Mfume.

On Monday, Bush addressed unemployment issues in Pittsburgh with the National Urban League, a group that represents black Americans.

Local NAACP members expressed their disappointment that Bush has not made more time to meet with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People or other minority groups


more...

[bearfartinthewoods]

52. i :lost two as well and i wish there were some specific issue is could use

to recover them. it's my idiotic brother in law and probably his wife. they "like" bush. they say they "trust him where it matters"

these are dems....he has never voted for a pubbie before but he doesn not like or trust kerry and he does bush. how in the hell do i fight that?

[BootinUp]

55. You suppose this

is the result of the War on Terra, Iraq War, or something else?

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

5. I Am Absolutely Important

If you want to disempower yourself, that is your choice, but I am an advocate for Kerry, and accordingly it is my job to do my best to convince people to support him.

Kerry has a 100% rating from the NAACP. His support of affirmative action is strong. Please do not even try to claim that he is worse than Bush on this issue.

Anyone knowledgeable on this subject, who prefers affirmative action, should support Kerry. These two did not. That is my failing, as much as theirs.

DTH

[Leilani]

26. Don't blame yourself!

Those 2 didn't want to be convinced.

Wes Clark is the kind of Dem that Republicans will vote for. They don't care about specifics. Because Clark was a 4 star General & in the military for 34 years, he's acceptable to them. That's 1 of the reasons I supported Clark: I knew he could get Indy & Repub votes.

Kerry, on the other hand, is a Massachusetts Liberal, & that won't fly with those groups. Nothing against Kerry, I think Clark was more liberal on certain issues. But it's an image thing; a stereotype.

I have talked to Indys & Repubs & they won't go for Kerry. My son is a socially liberal Indy & we had a 2 hr discussion yesterday, & he told me he would never vote for Kerry.

That's just the way it is.

[BootinUp]

30. Leilani is right

Thats the only explanation.

[JVS]

6. Seems perfectly normal for a first person narrative of a conversation

I could not imagine asking someone to tell the story of what they discussed at the bar without using I plenty of times

[WillyBrandt]

10. What do you mean "this isn't a personal attack"?

It sure sounds like one

[boxster]

47. Prefacing it with "this isn't a personal attack" is usually a tipoff.

It's like saying, "I don't mean to bash "

You know what is following is usually a bash.

[MurikanDemocrat]

18. I just read his post again

He was giving a personal account of his observations. First person was the appropriate tense. Writing it in third person would have sounded ridiculous.

I think it's commendable to have Democrats like this that take this much personal responsibility in the support of candidates and carrying their message and understanding the issues they stand for.

DoveTurnedHawk IS important.

Geeze.

[loudnclear]

76. Wonder if Kerry picked Clark as running mate would they change their minds

If these people can pick Bush under any circumstances, i say they are lost causes. Don't waste your time on them but be better prepared for similar views from others.

[Zhade]

25. You must feel pretty unimportant, to attack DTH.

You shouldn't let yourself feel that way, if only so you don't lash out with obnoxious comments that do no one any amount of good.

[Lefta Dissenter]

51. Ouch!

If every one of us would take it as our 'mission' to help non-Dems to realize 'the error of their ways,' we might actually WIN the upcoming general election.

I (yes, that's MEEEEEE) consider it a small feather in my cap that my Republican brother-in-law is still voting for Clark tomorrow! I figure if he discovers that god doesn't strike him dead for completing that arrow next to the name of a Democrat, it won't hurt so much next time. And yes, I would claim a little credit for this, since I insisted that my b-i-l come to hear Clark speak when he was in Racine.

If I can convince this guy to consider himself an Independent, rather than a Republican, he might actually begin to compare the actual candidates and their stands on the issues, rather than just automatically voting Repub.

Don't give up, DTH. You may have further opportunities to talk with these people once the campaign gets onto a more steady roll.

[La_Serpiente]

7. What about the Civil Rights Act of 1991?

http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/laws/majorlaw/civil91.htm

It has the House Co-sponsors, but I am still looking for the Senate ones. *Couldn't find the Senate Co-sponsors

Found more things

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?vote_id=2867&can_id=S0421103

Vote to override President Reagan's March 16 veto, of the bill to provide broad coverage of four civil rights laws by making clear that, if one entity of an institution receives federal funds, the entire institution must abide by the anti-discrimination laws.

S 557: A bill to restore the broad scope of coverage and to clarify the application of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Vote to override President Reagan's March 16 veto, of the bill to provide broad coverage of four civil rights laws by making clear that, if one entity of an institution receives federal funds, the entire institution must abide by the anti-discrimination laws. The bill would overturn a ruling by the Supreme Court in Grove City College v. Bell and applied to Title IX of the 1972 Education Act which barred discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs, and three other laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, age or handicap. A “nay” was a vote supporting the president's position.
(Bill sponsored by Kennedy)
Veto overridden 73-24: R 21-24; D 52-0 on 03/22/1988. A two-thirds majority of those present and voting <65 in this case> of both houses is required to override a veto.

[JohnyCanuck]

8. But Dubya received such a warm welcome at the MLK memorial

When we learned that the president was going to visit that day," said Yoo, "I personally thought that was the story, that the president was coming to lay a wreath on King's birthday."

Orange and Lowery next appeared together the following Monday at a weekly luncheon for the Georgia Coalition for the People's Agenda, a nonprofit organization chaired by Lowery. Orange set the record straight and stated emphatically that he and Lowery had nothing to do with Bush's decision to visit Atlanta. Further, Orange voiced his own personal opposition to Bush's planned visit, and pointed out that the year before on King's birthday, Bush basically sounded the death knell for affirmative action.

"This man is trying to turn back the clock on me," Orange said to attendees at the luncheon. "We can't let Bush and Condoleezza Rice and all these warmongers come down here and coattail off of Martin Luther King." After the luncheon I met with Dr. Lowery and discussed how we might counter the impression that Bush was coming to Atlanta by invitation. Lowery instructed GCPA media liaison David Stokes to call the King Center and ask if it had extended the invitation to Bush. Stokes hung up the phone and said, "He invited himself."

<snip>

The cacophony that greeted the President and sustained itself for the duration of his wreath-laying ceremony was impressive to experience. The chant of the day was "Move Bush! Get out the way! Get out the way! Get out the way," an adaptation of a tune by local product Ludacris (what y'all know about that ATL style?). The protest itself was beautifully diverse, and carried a communal vibe that was a pure joy to be a part of. I was proud to be from Atlanta. For some reason, Atlanta Police decided not to imitate police in Miami and Portland, where freedom of speech and assembly, two of the fundamental rights which make us Americans, apparently no longer exist. And Bush, a man who came to office through the electronic disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of mostly black voters in Florida, was shown that he could not pull off a cheap photo-op here in the cradle of the Civil Rights Movement. There'd be no plastic turkey moments in our town that day, we made sure of it.

http://www.guerrillanews.com/media/doc3903.html

Yup, Dubya loves those colord folk so much he had his brother Jeb make sure they got taken off the voter rolls just so they would not have to be bothered with the hassle of casting a vote.

In the days following the <2000> presidential election, there were so many stories of African Americans erased from voter rolls you might think they were targeted by some kind of racial computer program. They were.

I have a copy of it: two silvery CD-ROM disks right out of the office computers of Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris. Once decoded and fed into a database, they make for interesting, if chilling, reading. They tell us how our president was elected - and it wasn't by the voters.

Here's how it worked: Mostly, the disks contain data on Florida citizens - 57,700 of them. In the months leading up to the November 2000 balloting, Florida Secretary of State Harris, in coordination with Governor Jeb Bush, ordered local elections supervisors to purge these 57,700 from voter registries. In Harris's computers, they are named as felons who have no right to vote in Florida.

<snip>

You may suspect something's wrong with the list. You'd be right. At least 90.2 percent of those on this "scrub" list, targeted to lose their civil rights, are innocent. Notably, over half - about 54 percent - are Black and Hispanic voters. Overwhelmingly, it is a list of Democrats.

From Greg Palast's "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy."
http://eces.org/articles/000175.php

[eileen_d]

9. Here's a useful index to Kerry's voting record

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=S0421103

It has categories such as Civil Rights and Employment and Affirmative Action.
(Edit: Now that I've looked at some of what's there, it's far from complete, but I've found it handy in other situations.)

There are also links to interest group ratings, with similar categories:
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=S0421103

You can look up similar information for Bush and the other candidates.

Good luck DTH. :hug:

[bigtree]

11. Here are some bills that I feel apply to minorities that Kerry worked on

There are alot of the bills that he worked on here:
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?vote_id=1609&can_id=S0421103




Bill Number: S 1173
Issue: Employment and Affirmative Action
Date: 03/06/1998
Sponsor: Tabling motion introduced by Chafee, R-RI; amendment introduced by McConnell, R-KY.

Roll Call Number: 0023
Tabling motion passed
Full Member List


Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.

Vote to table, or kill, an amendment to repeal the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program, which requires no less than 10% of highway construction projects funded by the federal government to be contracted to 'disadvantaged business enterprises'. Disadvantaged business enterprises are defined as those owned and controlled by racial minorities and women.

S 1173: Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act

Vote to table, or kill, an amendment to a substitute amendment to repeal the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program, which requires no less than 10% of highway construction projects funded by the federal government to be contracted to 'disadvantaged business enterprises'. Disadvantaged business enterprises are defined as those owned and controlled by racial minorities and women. The DBE Program would be replaced by the 'Emerging Business Enterprise Program', which would require states, among other things, to conduct general outreach programs to enable emerging businesses to compete for federal highway contracts, to provide targeted outreach to and recruitment of women and minority-owned emerging businesses, and to provide technical assistance.
Tabling motion introduced by Chafee, R-RI; amendment introduced by McConnell, R-KY.
(Tabling motion passed 58-37 on 3/6/98)

Bill Status:
Bill Number: S 1173 - 105th Congress (1997-98)
No passage votes were taken on this bill, never became law. HR 2400 passed instead.

Bill Status:
Bill Number: HR 2400 - 105th Congress (1997-98)
House Passage Vote: 04/01/98 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Passage Vote: 04/02/98 - Outcome: Passed
House Conference Report Vote: 05/22/98 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Conference Report Vote: 05/22/98 - Outcome: Passed
Presidential Action: Signed on 06/09/98
Public Law Number: 105-178 112 Stat. 107


Bill Number: HR 1854
Issue: Employment and Affirmative Action
Date: 07/20/1995
Sponsor: Gramm, R-TX


Roll Call Number: 0317
Rejected
Full Member List


Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.

Amendment to ban affirmative action hiring with legislative branch funds.

HR 1854: Fiscal 1996 Legislative Branch Appropriations

Vote on an amendment to disallow any funds in the Legislative Appropriations bill from being used to award any Federal contract, or to require or encourage the award of any subcontract, if the contract is being awarded on the basis of the race, color, national origin, or gender of the contractor or subcontractor.
Amendment introduced by Gramm, R-TX.
(Rejected 36-61 on 7/20/95)

Bill Status:
Bill Number: HR 1854 - 104th Congress (1995-96)
House Passage Vote: 06/22/95 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Passage Vote: 07/20/95 - Outcome: Passed by Voice Vote
House Conference Report Vote: 09/06/95 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Conference Report Vote: 09/22/95 - Outcome: Passed
Presidential Action: Vetoed on 10/03/95
No further action was taken on this bill, never became law.


Bill Number: S 1956
Issue: Welfare and Poverty Issues
Date: 07/19/1996
Sponsor: Motion introduced by Wellstone, D-MN.


Roll Call Number: 0210
Motion to waive rejected
Full Member List


Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.

Vote on a procedural motion to allow consideration of an amendment to require the Secretary of HHS to make recommendations for legislation if the Secretary determines that the welfare bill has increased the national child poverty rate.

S 1956: The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act

Vote on a procedural motion to waive the Budget Act of 1974 to allow consideration of an amendment that would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to report to Congress by January of 1999 on whether the national child poverty rate for fiscal year 1998 is higher than it would have otherwise been had this bill not been implemented. If the Secretary determines that the bill has increased national child poverty, the amendment would require the Secretary to make recommendations for legislation to halt the increase, and require that the legislation be introduced in Congress and be given expedited consideration.
Motion introduced by Wellstone, D-MN.
(Motion to waive rejected 46-50 on 7/19/96)

Bill Status:
Bill Number: S 1956 - 104th Congress (1995-96)
No passage votes were taken on this bill, never became law. HR 3734 passed instead.

Bill Status:
Bill Number: HR 3734 - 104th Congress (1995-96)
House Passage Vote: 07/18/96 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Passage Vote: 07/23/96 - Outcome: Passed
House Conference Report Vote: 07/31/96 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Conference Report Vote: 08/01/96 - Outcome: Passed
Presidential Action: Signed on 08/22/96
Public Law Number: 104-193 110 Stat. 2105

Under Age Mothers



Bill Number: S 1956
Issue: Welfare and Poverty Issues
Date: 07/19/1996
Sponsor: Faircloth, R-NC


Roll Call Number: 0206
Amendment rejected
Full Member List


Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.

Vote on an amendment to prohibit states from using federal money to provide cash welfare to any underage mother who is living with an adult relative who has been receiving welfare for three years.

S 1956: The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act

Vote on an amendment to prohibit federal block grant funds from being used by a state to provide cash welfare assistance to any underage mother who is living with a parent, guardian or other adult relative who has been receiving welfare for three years.
Amendment introduced by Faircloth, R-NC.
(Amendment rejected 21-77 on 7/19/96)

Bill Status:
Bill Number: S 1956 - 104th Congress (1995-96)
No passage votes were taken on this bill, never became law. HR 3734 passed instead.

Bill Status:
Bill Number: HR 3734 - 104th Congress (1995-96)
House Passage Vote: 07/18/96 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Passage Vote: 07/23/96 - Outcome: Passed
House Conference Report Vote: 07/31/96 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Conference Report Vote: 08/01/96 - Outcome: Passed
Presidential Action: Signed on 08/22/96
Public Law Number: 104-193 110 Stat. 2105


Bill Number: S 1956
Issue: Welfare and Poverty Issues
Date: 07/23/1996
Sponsor: Lugar, R-IN, motion to table Harkin, D-IA, amendment.


Roll Call Number: 0213
Tabling motion agreed to
Full Member List


Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.

Vote to table an amendment to delete a program for school breakfast program startups.

S 1956: The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act

Vote on a motion to table, or kill, an amendment that would delete the provisions in the bill that eliminate the School Breakfast Startup and Expansion Program, a program that makes startup grants for initiating or expanding school breakfast or summer food programs.
Lugar, R-IN, motion to table Harkin, D-IA, amendment.
(Tabling motion agreed to 56-43 on 7/23/96)

Bill Status:
Bill Number: S 1956 - 104th Congress (1995-96)
No passage votes were taken on this bill, never became law. HR 3734 passed instead.

Bill Status:
Bill Number: HR 3734 - 104th Congress (1995-96)
House Passage Vote: 07/18/96 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Passage Vote: 07/23/96 - Outcome: Passed
House Conference Report Vote: 07/31/96 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Conference Report Vote: 08/01/96 - Outcome: Passed
Presidential Action: Signed on 08/22/96
Public Law Number: 104-193 110 Stat. 2105


Bill Number: HR 4603
Issue: Welfare and Poverty Issues
Date: 07/21/1994
Sponsor: Specter, R-PA, motion to table Gramm, R-TX, amendment.


Roll Call Number: 0223
Passed
Full Member List


Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.

Kill a plan to bar the Legal Services Corp., which provides legal aid to the poor, from challenging any state or federal welfare reform legislation.

HR 4603 (Fiscal 1995 Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations);
Motion to table;
7/21/94

Outcome: Passed 56-44

Congressional Quarterly Number: 1994 - S223

Specter, R-PA, motion to table Gramm, R-TX, amendment.

Bill Status:
Bill Number: HR 4603 - 103rd Congress (1993-94)
House Passage Vote: 06/27/94 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Passage Vote: 07/22/94 - Outcome: Passed by Voice Vote
House Conference Report Vote: 08/18/94 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Conference Report Vote: 08/19/94 - Outcome: Passed
Presidential Action: Signed on 08/26/94
Public Law Number: 103-317 108 Stat. 1724

Hate Crimes-Cloture



Bill Number: S 625
Issue: Social Issues
Date: 06/11/2002
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Kennedy, D-MA


Roll Call Number: 147
Motion rejected
Full Member List


Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.

Vote on a motion to invoke cloture on a bill that would expand the definition of hate crimes to incorporate acts committed because of a victim's sex, sexual orientation or disability and permit the federal government to help states prosecute hate crimes even if no federally protected action was implicated.

S625 Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001
Vote on a motion to invoke cloture, on a bill that would expand the definition of hate crimes to incorporate acts committed because of a victim's sex, sexual orientation or disability and permit the federal government to help states prosecute hate crimes even if no federally protected action was implicated. If the cloture motion is agreed to, debate will be limited and a vote will occur. If the cloture motion is rejected debate could continue indefinitely and instead the bill is usually set aside
Note: Three-fifths of the Senate, or 60 members, is required to invoke cloture.

(Bill sponsored by Kennedy, D-MA)
Motion rejected 54-43: R 4-42; D 49-1; I 1-0 on 06/11/2002.

Bill Number: S 625-107th Congress (2001-2002)

For further status information, call the Voter's Research Hotline at 1-888-VOTE-SMART (1-888-868-3762)


Juvenile Justice--Cloture



Bill Number: HR 1501
Issue: Social Issues
Date: 07/28/1999
Sponsor: Motion introduced by Lott, R-MS, Bill introduced by McCollum, R-FL


Roll Call Number: 0228
Motion passed
Full Member List


Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.

Vote on a motion to invoke cloture for the bill providing funding for the Juvenile Justice Bill.

HR 1501: Consequences for Juvenile Offenders Act of 1999

Vote on a motion to invoke cloture, which limits the debate, on a substitute amendment that would grant funding for programs designed at reducing violence among youth. The amendment of the Senate passed version of this bill contains several gun control provisions.
Motion introduced by Lott, R-MS, Bill introduced by McCollum, R-FL
(Motion passed 77-22 on 7/28/99)

Bill Status: (As of 12/08/1999)
Bill Number: HR 1501 - 106th Congress (1999-2000)
House Passage Vote: 06/17/1999 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Passage Vote: 07/28/1999 - Outcome: Passed
No further action has been taken on this bill.
For further status information call the Voter's Research Hotline at 1-888-VOTE-SMART (1-888-868-3762)


Fiscal 1999 Budget Resolution - Child Care Funding



Bill Number: S Con Res 86
Issue: Family and Children Issues
Date: 03/31/1998
Sponsor: Motion introduced by Dodd, D-CT; original resolution introduced by Domenici, R-NM.


Roll Call Number: 0052
Motion rejected; 3/5th vote required
Full Member List


Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.

Vote to allow consideration of an amendment to create a reserve fund to improve the affordability, availability and quality of child care.

S Con Res 86: Budget Resolution FY 1999-2003

Vote on a procedural motion to waive the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to allow consideration of an amendment to create a deficit-neutral* reserve fund to improve the affordability, availability and quality of child care.
<*Deficit-neutral is a principle that means a program will not affect the size of the deficit.>
Motion introduced by Dodd, D-CT; original resolution introduced by Domenici, R-NM.
(Motion rejected 50-48 on 3/31/98; 3/5th vote required)

Bill Status:
Bill Number: S Con Res 86 - 105th Congress (1997-98)
Senate Passage Vote: 04/02/98 - Outcome: Passed
No further action was taken on this bill. H Con Res 284 passed instead.

Bill Status:
Bill Number: H Con Res 284 - 105th Congress (1997-98)
House Passage Vote: 06/05/98 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Passage Vote: 06/15/98 - Outcome: Passed
Bill referred to a conference committee on 06/15/98
No further action was taken on this bill. Concurrent Resolutions do not become law. H Con Res 284 would have served as a blueprint for the Fiscal 1999 Budget.

[still_one]

12. Sorry

but obviously your friends have been living on another planet. The last judge, pickering, he appointed shows where his real feelings lie.

If your friends were going to vote for Clark and now they are voting for Bush, I would like to know their reasons, especially since Clark endorsed Kerry.

Clark was pro choice, Bush is not, and if Bush wins he will insure it.

Bush lied about Iraq, Clark said we should have never gone into Iraq, and he would have moved heaven and earth to get bin Laden, and Al queada.

Clark wanted to give tax breaks to the middle class, not to the ones who do not need it.

I could go on and on, but do they have any idea what Clark stood for verses Bush?

Just go to his web site!!!

If they say they want Bush, then I believe they should have never supported Clark.

[countmyvote4real]

13. If Affirmative Action is their real issue, why aren't they voting for Al

Sharpton?

I don't know them. They're your friends. Maybe they're bleeding heart compassionate conservatives. If that's the case, how did they ever end up supporting Clark? Something seems fishy here.

They would dump * for Clark, but not follow or recognize Clark's endorsement of Kerry.

And why aren't their CC hearts bleeding for ALL the innocent lives lost in the * lie about this war? What about the deficit and Medicare?

Just curious, how do they react if you say blow job?

[DoveTurnedHawk]

15. "Fishy" Huh?

These two are California Republicans, which is to say pretty moderate. They supported Clark because they felt he had character and integrity and gravitas and competence, and also knew he was mostly non-partisan for most of his career.

They don't know anything about Kerry except that he's a lifelong Democratic partisan.

The bottom line is that they don't trust Kerry. I just can't believe they're pegging AA as an issue where there's any close call at all.

DTH

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

40. Let's face it

Clark was the ONE Democratic candidate that gave moderate republicans the courage to break out of the lock step of the Rove control machine.

Now that he's been marginalized by the press & the DNC and is no longer running they have fallen back in line...because keeping people in line and "looking out for the party", (the country be damnded) is what Rove & his croneys are expert at doing.

Not your fault...

[boxster]

48. That is kind of funny.

Anyone who has really paid attention to Bush's three years in office would realize that he's about as anti-AA as they come. It seems like a strange issue to try to use as justification for voting for Bush.

Is it possible that they're just messing with you?

[Paschall]

14. Some info that may help

This is from the 2000 campaign. Kerry...

Voted YES on setting aside 10% of highway funds for minorities & women.
Vote to table, or kill, an amendment to repeal the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise {DBE} Program, which requires no less than 10% of highway construction projects funded by the federal government to be contracted to 'disadvantaged business enterprises'
Bill S.1173; vote number 1998-23 on Mar 6, 1998

Voted NO on ending special funding for minority & women-owned business.
This legislation would have abolished a program that helps businesses owned by women or minorities compete for federally funded transportation.
Status: Cloture Motion Rejected Y)48; N)52
Reference: Motion to invoke cloture; Bill S.1173; vote number 1997-275 on Oct 23, 1997

Voted NO on prohibiting same-sex marriage.
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA): Vote to prohibit marriage between members of the same sex in federal law, and provide that no state is required to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. Define 'marriage' as 'between one man and one woman
Bill HR 3396; vote number 1996-280 on Sep 10, 1996

Voted YES on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation.
Would have prohibited job discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Status: Bill Defeated Y)49; N)50; NV)1
Reference: Employment Non-Discrimination Act; Bill S. 2056; vote number 1996-281 on Sep 10, 1996

Voted NO on banning affirmative action hiring with federal funds.
Vote to disallow any funds in the Legislative Appropriations bill from being used to award, require, or encourage any Federal contract, if the contract is being awarded on the basis of the race, color, national origin, or gender of the contractor.
Bill HR 1854; vote number 1995-317 on Jul 20, 1995

SOURCE (links to the individual bills available here): http://www.issues2000.org/Domestic/John_Kerry_Civil_Rights.htm

[jpgray]

16. Based on your report, I think they are looking for an excuse to go Bush

They don't like Kerry for whatever reason, and that's that. They may COME to like him in time, but your story leads me to believe they prefer Bush on intangibles and randomly picked an issue to justify it. If they were all for Clark, it seems like intangibles would be the only way they could then switch to BUSH. :shrug:

edit: As far as AA issues, you could always bring up Bush's Pickering appointment on MLK's birthday. Also, bigtree has provided many links to relevant bills above.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

17. You Might Be Right

Still so goddamn frustrating, though.

:grr:

DTH

[HootieMcBoob]

53. intangibles

that was one of the big reasons for my support of Clark. I thought he would appeal to a lot of people for just this very reason.

These people sound like they really didn't take a good look at Clark's positions.

[NV1962]

19. Bookmarked!

Cheer up DTH, you can't win in-depth battles unless you're armed to the teeth - with knowledge. Given the recent turn of events regarding Clark's bid, I wouldn't be too harsh; I'm learning about Kerry's record as I go, too.

On the plus side: this thread has provided very valuable pointers to Kerry's record on AA-related issues.

Dang... There really ought to be a "rapid response team" of Kerry supporter specialists to turn to... Maybe worth a separate thread.

[bigtree]

20. Here's the program that he spoke of in the debate last night

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=341287

[Old and In the Way]

21. Hey, you win a few, lose a few. Their loss, ultimately.

Yeah, I guess if you needed a deluded reason to vote for Bush, that would work. Also, he has nice names on the legislation that serves his agenda. "No Child Left Behind""Healthy Forests", etc.

[drfemoe]

22. Well errrmm

What was Clark's position on AA? Did he have this issue *right* in their minds? What was it?

[La_Serpiente]

23. I know he filed an amicus brief

in support of Affirmative Action in the Lee vs. Bollinger SCOTUS decision.

[drfemoe]

28. I think Clark's civil rights

issue for gays in the military was similar to Dean's?

"Serving in the Military – Governor Dean opposes the military’s current “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. He believes gays and lesbians should be able to serve their country proudly and openly."

He inspires me ... ** no copyright on following material **

...There are no black concerns or white concerns or Hispanic concerns in America. There are only human concerns.

Every time a politician uses the word "quota," it's because he'd rather not talk about the real reasons that we've lost almost 3 million jobs.

Every time a politician complains about affirmative action in our universities, it's because he'd rather not talk about the real problems with education in America - like the fact that here in South Carolina, only 15% of African Americans have a post-high school degree.

When education is suffering in lower-income areas, it means that we will all pay for more prisons and face more crime in the future.

When families lack health insurance and are forced to go to the emergency room when they need a doctor, medical care becomes more expensive for each of us.

When wealth is concentrated at the very top, when the middle class is shrinking and the gap between rich and poor grows as wide as it has been since the Gilded Age of the 19^th Century, our economy cannot sustain itself.

When wages become stagnant for the majority of Americans, as they have been for the past two decades, we will never feel as though we are getting ahead.

When we have the highest level of personal debt in American history, we are selling off our future, in order to barely keep our heads above water today.

Today, Americans are working harder, for less money, with more debt, and less time to spend with our families and communities.

In the year 2003, in the United States, over 12 million children live in poverty. Nearly 8 million of them are white. And no matter what race they are, too many of them will live in poverty all their lives.

And yesterday, there were 3,000 more children without health care - children of all races. By the end of today, there will 3,000 more. And by the end of tomorrow, there will be 3,000 more on top of that.

America can do better than this. ...

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/cg/index.html?type=news&id=10881&security=1&news_iv_ctrl=1321

[spooky3]

34. And the * administration opposed AA in both Michigan cases.

[NV1962]

27. Thanks for asking

See for yourself:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-01-21-dinkins-clark_x.htm

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=15172&CFID=7975769&CFTOKEN=28445278

http://www.draftclark2004.com/issues.asp

Unfortunately, I can't find an active link to an MSNBC article published on June 13, last year, but he's quite widely quoted from that article with the following statement:

* "I’m in favor of the principle of affirmative action. Whether is the right plan or not, and whether that should be 10 points, not 20 points, whether it should be, let’s say, an income level cutoff there at which you don’t get the points if you’re above a certain income, you can tool with the plan. But what you can’t have is you can’t have a society in which we’re not acknowledging that there is a problem in this society with racial discrimination. There is, there has been and the reason so many of us filed is we saw the benefits of affirmative action in the United States armed forces. It was essential in restoring the integrity and the effectiveness of the armed forces."


He has a strong record on AA and EO within the US Army. In October last year, he wrote the following Op-Ed:
http://clark04.com/articles/010/

[drfemoe]

29. This is a good observation from workingforchange ..

..."In his 2001 book, Waging Modern War, he explains his liberal stance simply but effectively. "I grew up in an armed forces that treated everyone as a valued member of the team. Everyone got health care, and the army cared about the education of everyone’s family members. It wasn’t the attitude that you find in some places, where people are fending for themselves and the safety net doesn’t work." ...

and this from clark04 ..
..."My commitment to affirmative action is based on my belief in all that unites mankind. But I am also committed to affirmative action because it works. Our president, on the other hand, seems unable to pull himself away from his right wing advisors long enough to examine the facts. The Bush Administration argued against affirmative action in the Michigan case. And they've done everything possible to undermine diversity, not promote it. I think Mr. Bush should head down the hall and talk with National Security Advisor Condi Rice, or speak with General Colin Powell, both of whom have testified to their support of affirmative action. " ...

[Spirochete]

31. Seems to me

they were just looking for any excuse to vote for Bush.

[Adjoran]

32. A lot of Clark's appeal

wasn't on the basis of his policies, but his character.

There was a pretty significant draft movement for Clark before anyone knew his positions on most issues. A large portion of his supporters were less ideological, and politically independent.

[bowens43]

37. Another huge negative for Clark.

We are in the midst of an ideological war. The country is more divided now then any time since the civil war. We are at turning point. Ideology , ours or theirs, will be the biggest causality of the 2004 election.

[DemCam]

72. Why, why, why?

Do we continue to play into this black/white thinking that GWBush has so eloquently and constantly beat us over the head with?

It does not have to be us or them...unless we play right into it. We couldn't seem to find a middle ground if it dropped into our laps...which it did with Clark.

But...our paranoid little brains just chose to step up on the ideological high horse...yet again...and believe all sorts of nefarious lies.

We don't have to fall into this trap...but in order not to...we do have to learn to compromise where it is possible. And there is a lot that is possible.

And necessary or we have 2004 all over again.

[mikehiggins]

33. There are many GOP leaning folks who supported Clark

because he gave them an out. With Clark they didn't have to just vote for Dubya again BUT they didn't have to vote for a Yankee liberal from Taxachussets to do that.

Many traditional Republicans are horrified at what Bush has done to their lifelong traditions of fiscal responsibility and isolationism. Clark represented something they could understand. His liberalism, just like his running as a Democrat, were things they could rationalize away.

Kerry? Same old, same old.

We will lose a lot more of those GOP/Indy types from the Clark camp before this is done. Just another negative consequence of the collapsed primary schedule. Like many marriages, it seemed like a good idea at the time. So it goes.

[bowens43]

36. We certainly don't need republican votes to win the election.

If we did , the war would already be lost. I don't understand how anyone who leans even slightly to left could see bring republicans into our party as a good thing.

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

41. ??

So Democrats don't NEED NOBODY?

Maybe that's why we keep loosing. :shrug:

[boxster]

45. Because there aren't enough Democrats in America to win the GE.

We need crossover votes, and we need independent votes. If you think we can win this election with nothing but Democrats voting for our nominee in November, you're mistaken.

[Beaker]

78. Bullshit.

If an election had 100% turnout, the Repugs would be crushed and they know it. voter apathy is their best friend...why do you think they worked so hard to 'scrub' the voter rolls in Florida before the 2000 election?

[Nadienne]

82. Voter Apathy

Thomas Jefferson once said: "If once the people become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I and Congress and Aseemblies, Judges and Governors, shall all become wolves."

[boxster]

93. Well, do you suppose we'll ever have 100% turnout?

And, do you honestly think the only people who voted for Gore in 2000 were Democrats?

Funny, you call my post bullshit, but you base yours on two completely unrealistic (and frankly, impossible) expectations.

We will not win if the only people who vote for our candidate are Democrats.

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[boxster]

96. 75% turnout is no more likely than your previous claim based on 100%

75% isn't going to happen, so we actually have to consider reality here and not fantasyland. We need swing voters and we need independents. That is a fact of life.

If you believe otherwise, please provide proof of your assertions:

1) there are enough Democrats to win an election if only Democrats vote for our candidate

2) that 75% turnout is in any way, shape, or form likely in any presidential election.

[Doctor_J]

84. However

as you can see from the other posts, many Dems trust Bush more than JFK. Why, I can't explain. But they do.

[BootinUp]

91. this is right

They don't trust politicians in general, but our party has taken a beating over the last 10 years especially from the repugs and the media, mostly the RW cable tv and radio stuff. Right or wrong that is where Clinton cost us.

[bowens43]

35. More evidence that Clark is not someone we want on the ticket.

Like I have said all along, Clark on the ticket would move the party further to the right. It would bring in right wingers and drive out those on the left. The moderates would become the left of the party.

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

42. Yep...polarization is so much more fun

It would be a crying shame to actually bring people together when it's so much more entertaining to have us at each other's throats.

Who in their right mind would want a candidate on the ticket who appeals to Americans in general (no pun intended) rather than to just one side or another of the warring factions.

After all, if we all came together who would we have to demonize??

:crazy:

[Lefta Dissenter]

54. Pam,

thank you for posting this. Is it ok if I just sign my name onto it, as well? Otherwise, I might have to write what I actually am feeling right now, and then I'm sure I'd be blessed with a Mod Spanking because I am not feeling nearly the restraint that you are exhibiting! :nuke: :spank:


edited for a better attempt at clarity

[boxster]

44. Evidence?

In case you didn't notice, they're voting for Bush because of Kerry, not because of Clark.

How long are you going to feed this personal hatred of Clark? He's out of the race, and this posting had nothing to do with him.

[Auntie Bush]

62. BS

[DoveTurnedHawk]

66. When Is It Time to Stop Bashing Clark?

I just don't understand it.

He's out of the race, you know.

DTH

[Beaker]

79. Did you ever actually LISTEN to anything Clark said?

it certainly doesn't sound like it, based on your assessment.
it sounds like you might have heard "General", and then just tuned everything else out.

[anti-NAFTA]

38. Why do they care so much about affirmative action?

That makes absolutely no sense to me. Is that their deciding issue? If so, why are they voting 'puke?

[AP]

57. They don't. They're really talking about class, not race, but Americans

don't know how to talk about class, so they're using race as a proxy.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

64. Nope; One is Mexican American, the Other Is Multiracial

AA is an important issue to them. I find your presumption here somewhat surprising, AP.

DTH

[AP]

68. Then it's worse: they DO care about race and think a NE blueblood who said

a decade ago that AA should go because it made white people upset is not going to as good on race as a guy who looks like he'd be as comfortable at a barbecue as he is in the oval office (even though he derides AA as a "quota" system).

[DoveTurnedHawk]

70. Now You're Hitting the Nail on the Head

I think that's the only possible reason (although they weren't taking Kerry to task for that comment, they were just ignorant of his stances).

Fucking. Scary.

DTH

[BootinUp]

80. I figured they were minorities

Another sign of the democratic party problems.

[AP]

83. I presumed that if they liked Bush at all, they couldn't be.

This class/race issue for Kerry might be much I worse than I suspected.

[BootinUp]

90. That is what so many democrats don't realize

They just don't trust the democratic party. I think the outsider thing for Clark was what attracted them. Its not the AA issue in itself, its the constant hammering our party has taken on a range of issues from the big money control of the media. Mexican American, could be catholic?

[dd123]

39. I see quite a few Clark and Dean supporters going over to Bush.

A lot of them aren't Democrats so they feel no loyalty to the party. Clark and Dean were outsiders so their messages were gaining traction with independents and greens.

Kerry is establishment Democrat and part of the group that is disenfranchising these newcomers to the party. They are now drifting back to their natural state, which is not Democrat.

[boxster]

46. Wrong.

Perhaps you should review postings of the Clark supporters on this board. We're certainly not Republicans.

While you're at it, take a few minutes to review his stances on the issues. He's more liberal than several of the other candidates who entered this race.

Don't lump us in with the small, but vocal, group of disgruntled Dean supporters who don't want to vote for anyone but Dean, either. The vast, vast majority of Clark supporters have been ABB from the beginning.

[DemCam]

73. Amen

[Lefta Dissenter]

60. Disenfranchising potential Democratic voters

yeah, that's a good plan for winning the upcoming GE.

By the way, your generalization is incredibly ill-informed. I'm not going to go into my 'credentials' as a Democrat, since many on this board have read them enough times, but last night, when we had dinner with our departing Clark Staffer and a group of die-hard Clark supporters, there wasn't one Republican in the bunch! Imagine that! :shrug:

If you have any interest in actually winning the upcoming election, then perhaps you should educate yourself a bit on where Clark, Dean and all of the other candidates (past and present) stand on the issues. That way when you encounter ex-supporters who are considering a switch to bush, you could actually inform them as to how Kerry's positions might be similar to the candidate they had supported.

Or is it your goal to keep the Democratic party so pure that you have no interest in attracting new voters in order to win back the White House? :eyes:

[tinanator]

43. oh please, Bush couldnt wait to "hang" MLK's portrait

there isnt a leg for that klansman to stand on, and anyone dumb enough to think differently...

[Solomon]

49. Stop wasting your time Dove. The affirmative action thing is just an

excuse. Logic doesn't apply here and your friends are pretending that it does.

[BootinUp]

But there is still the question

of why they supported Clark and not Kerry.

I think they were looking for a way out an excuse like you say. But this is the type of anecdotal evidence I always expected, as far as Clark appealing to more crossover votes.

The image of the northeastern liberal as trashed by the repugs the last 30 years is going to be hard to overcome.

[boxster]

50. I'd have to agree.

AA seems like a senseless issue to try to use to justify voting for Bush.

[AP]

56. This is, essentially, the class issue, and Bush will do better than Kerry.

Kerry is much wealthier than Bush, he is from NE, and he looks and talks like a blue blood.

These two won't be the only ones who go with Bush over Kerry based on sentiments like these.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

65. It's Not at All About Class; See Post #64 (eom)

DTH

[AP]

69. It's about race AND class, and it's even worse for Kerry than I

suspected.

[snoochie]

58. Thanks for sharing - you gave us all a GREAT real-life reason why

we should NOT be courting these fickle swing voters!

We have millions of disenfranchised people who will not be inspired by status quo candidates. Let's try reaching out to them, instead!

[DoveTurnedHawk]

67. There Are Just Not Enough Pure Democratic Votes to Elect a President

The number of self-described Independents has been increasing for decades, while self-described Democrats and, to a lesser extent, self-described Republicans have decreased.

DTH

[snoochie]

71. Actually I was thinking about the poor

Those that don't even bother to vote because... well it's pretty obvious, really.

[Nadienne]

75. I was registered Independent

Unsatisfied with Democrats, certainly not a Republican, not quite Green enough to be Green... There is no middle ground between Democrat and Republican. Independents are either further left or further right.

on edit: re-registered as a Democrat to vote in caucus.

[liberalmike27]

59. Unfortunate, But...

You are going to see a lot of this kind of defection, and to the Green Party by some Dean people, perhaps some Clark people too.

We've been disrespected by the media, which is bad, but even more so the DLC and some Democrats took an active role in using Karl Rove tricks against our candidates. I suppose they may have though what they were doing was a good thing, but sometimes best intentions are fraught with unintended results. The unintended result of DLC meddling is, they are going to lose some votes.

It's going to have to be close for me to vote for Kerry, and since I'm living in Alabama, I suspect it won't be close.

Kerry should think about grabbing Dean as his VP candidate, at least he won't lose a massive group of Green Party supporters within our ranks.

[Donna Zen]

61. Sorry to hear that but you are not alone:

While I don't understand the reasoning of your friends, I've lost plenty of people who I'd talked into Clark including:

rep sister who was anti-war...now sees no difference. ditto sister and brother in law.

born agains willing to cross the line because of the war: at least 6 of these

retired military and their families: of the ones I've talked to 7

The entire janitorial staff where I work--they think any "masshole" will take their guns away and raise their taxes. Also, they were never strong in their opinions about the war, but they didn't like bush. They like Kerry less.

Two Indy Nadar voters who basically think that both parties stink.

Of the last two groups, Clark appeal was that he was seen as "outside" Washington.

I live in rural Maine which is a very different place than your hometown. These folks don't follow the news, unless it's Faux. Also included are relatives from the south. The teachers I work with are unhappy about Kerry's support of NCLB and his proposed changes which don't go far enough, but have no where else to go.

Yep_it is tough out here. The DNC would seem to be thinking "west" for the vp, thereby ignoring the South. While no one expects the Dems to do much in the South, by giving the monkey a lock on the region, the GOPpers will be able to avoid campaigning on the cultural issues that scare the rest of the country. We will see if they can rehabilitate him enough to grab the 7% "sweet spot." I'm just trying to hold on to a rookie Dem rep.

[BootinUp]

77. damn, you may have written our epitaph

it was a very nicely written one though. :)

[Leilani]

94. I agree completely...that's what I've found

We are political junkies..we know every candidate...his positions..the nuances between them.

The average voter knows none of this; they vote on image, & what they
PERCEIVE to be the truth about a candidate. This truth comes mostly from the media. A candidate gets a certain stereotype assigned to him, & it has little to do with facts.

Clark is perceived as a non professional pol, moderate, Southern roots, strong on defense, "patriotic", the kind of candidate an Indy or Repub can vote for.

Kerry is perceived to be long time pol, Washington insider, tax & spend liberal from Mass. Rich, beyond average person's comprehension.
How many houses? 5 or 8? War hero, but hung out with Jane Fonda.

Some people will vote with no more info than the above.

We have to hope Shrub has alienated enough people by Nov. Also, the biggest thing he had going was people thought he was a nice guy & they trusted him. Let's hope the trust is gone. God knows he never earned that trust & has been proven countless times to be untrustworthy.

[DemExpat]

63. Bummer, DTH, but if Clark is the VP they might be back....

:shrug:

DemEx

[HuskerDem]

74. What about a Kerry/Clark ticket?

Did you bring that up? Might that keep them?

[Beaker]

81. The DLC has their hearts and sights set on Kerry/Edwards

nt

[West Coast Democrat]

85. With Clark on the Ticket, We Can Win Many Independents

I don't doubt that. As your friends what they'd do if Clark were in the VP slot.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

86. I Did Ask That, They'd Support the Ticket

If Clark was VP or promised SecState.

The thing is, I want them active for Kerry NOW, not sidelined until late-July.

I guess I took this really personally because these are friends of mine who I'd been together with in the trenches for Clark, and I was so upset that they'd actually consider voting for Bush.

DTH

[mdmc]

88. I'd give up on them

If the think Bush is pro aa because of some tokens, you can't sway them. If Clark can't keep em on our side with his endorsement, I'd just assume they can't be swayed.

Perhaps compare Kerry to Dean (and remind them - Hell, Dean IS better than Bush on aa, and he has never had a minority in any of his cabinets!).

There are better organizers and better ways to get votes for Kerry. Let these lost chick vote w.

[Doctor_J]

87. Get used to it

We had a chance to change the whole political dialog for a generation, but pissed it away.

Kerry might even get elected. But he will have no coattails, and will be under attack from the Congress and media for his entire term. We'll have weekly rumors of drug trafficking, affairs with farm animals, STD's, murders, arrests, none of which are true, but will serve to distract Joe Six-pack, Joe Giant-flag-on-the-car, Joe NASCAR, and Joe Heartland from realizing that the GOP cares not a damn about anything but his vote.

Sorry folks, we missed our chance. Hopefully we can win the WH and hold off Rove for 4 years, but a chance at beating him back is now gone.

[BootinUp]

92. your trying to make me

change my avatar back!
;)

[philgoblue]

89. Kerry on Diversity at Debate

His reply on diversity was basically that "a friend took me down to Harlem once and we helped some gang kids stay out of jail." Great, another limo-liberal who can't really relate to common people. He justs steps out of the limo and helps the poor folks. He equates Blackness with criminality. Great (sarcasm)!
I can't blame your Clark supporters. Kerry is a loser, why can't people see that? He has no other appeal other than he won New Hampshire and was once ahead of Bush in the polls (not any more) even though he was from neighboring Mass.
Of course, Edwards didn't get to answer that question, but he talks about RACE to every audience (not just Black or Latino ones). He talks about it inpersonal and MORAL ways (the way Dems used to).