Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
United States

Journal pudge's Journal: Dean QuickHit 20

Journal by pudge

Dean's "I Have A Scream" speech is killing him. I won't say that what Dean said or did in that speech reflected any deficiency on his part, except for one: he does not know how to prevent himself from looking bad. It's not that what he said or did was wrong, but he appeared foolish to many people, and it is hurting him.

Not that I feel bad for him. I dislike him, and I've been predicting for months -- ever since I saw him on a major Meet the Press interview last summer -- that as more people saw more of him, as the races heated up, they would turn away. I just didn't imagine it would be over something so trivial.

OK, I guess I can't say this speech did him in: after all, he was slated to take 30% or more in Iowa, and only managed 18%, before The Scream. So he was already dropping, if you believe the many polls. Maybe Democrat voters are actually evaluating the man and his views and abilities, and not his scream.

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dean QuickHit More

Dean QuickHit

Comments Filter:
  • What seems clear is that Iowans were a little disenchanted with Dean from the moment he decided to focus on New Hampshire rather than Iowa. That's what I think led to the low Dean showing there.

    However in New Hampshire Dean was leading by quite a few points and has been slated to take NH without any trouble. Then the Speech. Now he's trailing Kerry by about 10 points. Granted, some of the Kerry surge can be attributed to his win in Iowa and a lot of Democrats are flocking to be with the winning team, b
    • Fan boys.

      Dean was cool. People want to be cool. But more important than being cool is being a winner. Kerry is a winner. Dean is not. Nothing succeeds like success.

    • What seems clear is that Iowans were a little disenchanted with Dean from the moment he decided to focus on New Hampshire rather than Iowa. That's what I think led to the low Dean showing there.

      I think it was less that and more of how a "caucus" works -- as opposed to a "primary". While Dean's numbers were dropping, his weak placement may be due more to the public nature of a caucus -- and people are quite vocal on who they support and why -- and this is done BEFORE a head-count. It's not uncommon for '

      • Wow, you have the most interesting political views I've ever seen. Voted for Nader, but really likes Lieberman, but since he probably won't make it, will vote for Bush.

        You sir, are a true independent. =)
        • Heh... I think you missed my point.

          Politcally, I'm mostly a centrist. I cast a vote for Nader in an effort NOT to get Nader elected but to provide the Green party with matching FEC funds as I feel there are issues they support which I feel deserve some time in the spotlight.

          Lieberman is a centrist, leaning left. Bush is all over the damn place -- not necessarily a BAD thing, but he's obviously not on the extreme right.

          I said I would vote for Lieberman over Bush -- and I will. The problem I see is tha
          • Aaah, thanks for clearing the Nader bit up. You know, hearing somebody say they voted for Nader and will vote for Bush is well...pretty unusual. But voting for a candidate just to give that party more exposure is a very sensible move.
            • Yeah... re-reading my original comment, I noticed a paragraph was missing. I must have cut it when editing and didn't do a good job proof reading. Shame on me.

              But voting for a candidate just to give that party more exposure is a very sensible move.

              I'd like to think so... Particularly when neither candidates back then did much for me. If I lived in almost any other state (Gore won CA by more than a million votes), I *may* have voted for Bush -- I'm honestly not sure. I am sure I wouldn't have voted fo

          • I'd lay a wager that Kerry will be and I will NOT vote for a Massachusetts democrat.

            I would vote for Kerry before anyone else on the Democrat side (except for *maybe* Clark; I don't know enough about him). While I disagree with his politics, he is not as far left as most of the others (except for Lieberman, of course), and he is respectable and has integrity. I lived in MA for many years, and I respect the man, despite my disagreements with him, sorta like how I respect Bill Bradley (though I do respect
            • I have a serious problem with Kerry. And Kennedy. And current and past MA govenors. And current and past MA state representatives. That problem is directly related to the "big dig". They pushed hard to get federal funding yet never attempted to lift a finger when that sucker went over budget... At least not until it was around $11 billion from an estimated $2 billion. What is it now? $14 billion?

              Thats $12 billion tax dollars -- the vast majority of which came from every other state in the union -- a
              • I don't blame you at all: even when I lived in MA, I was upset that MA was taking federal dollars for the Big Dig. I blame Kennedy primarily for that, as he was the big factor in it, but still, sure, be bitter, I won't stop you. :-)

                However, I blame "Congress" for this. There is an unwillingness to stand up to inappropriate spending, to saying "this is not what the federal government should be doing."

                What state are you from?
                • California. The wonderful state where a job earning you over $70k/year means you can afford a 1500 sq/ft house on a tiny piece of land! A "fixer-upper"! WOOT!

                  Back to the dig: I agree, Congress is to blame, also -- but there was hard lobbying by Kennedy AND Kerry in the Senate. When the "dig" hit the $3 billion barrier, they should have been calling for inquiries and putting a stop to the problems. Again, I feel (read: my opinion) they hold a higher degree of responsibility (and all representatives of
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • I think the main reason Kerry is gaining is that the Iowa win made him the obvious "Beat Dean" candidate.

        I think that's helping him, but who else would be the "frontrunner", if not Dean? People still don't know enough about Clark to trust him (at least, in large enough numbers), and Edwards is seen as the young and inexperienced one. That leaves Lieberman and Kerry.

        Remember, Kerry was the "frontrunner" before Dean started picking up steam last summer. The big three were always Lieberman, Kerry, and Ge

  • Infinite repeat (Score:2, Insightful)

    by jamie ( 78724 ) *
    I wandered downstairs to talk to Kirk today and he was channel-flipping. He landed on Fox News and we watched it in mute fascination for a few seconds.

    It was a story about J-Lo and Ben Affleck who have, it seems, broken up. The anchor, not without a bit of sarcastic humor, reported this tidbit, and then noted that there was a suitor who had expressed some interest in taking J-Lo on a romantic getaway...

    And then they played The Scream -- Dean was the suitor, get it? -- "...to Michigan, to Oregon, to Cali

  • A bit off topic, but I found this Dean quote during the debate regarding Iraq's WMD to be very interesting.

    "Iraq was not an imminent threat to the United States," Dean said. "It turned out they did not have the weapons of mass destruction that people thought they did, myself included. It turned out that much of what the president told us was not so."

    What in the world? Before the war, Dean and Bush believed Iraq had WMD. After the war, we found out they didn't. Yet Bush is somehow wrong and should

    • Re:Dean bashing (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Jhon ( 241832 )

      What in the world? Before the war, Dean and Bush believed Iraq had WMD. After the war, we found out they didn't. Yet Bush is somehow wrong and should be voted out, but Dean is right?

      I think Dean is suggesting that the information he (Dean) used to construct his opinion about WMDs came from the current administration. Dean (and many other foes of the current administration) like to say "Bush lied". Not necessarily the most intellectually honest position. I see it more as an intellegence failure which is

      • It's not like Dean and "intellectually honest" go hand-in-hand. Last night he once again reiterated the insanely obvious lie that the average tax for the bottom 60% of Americans (in terms of income) is somehow related to whether or not the middle class, effectively, got a tax cut. It makes no sense whatsoever to include poor people, and people who have no income, in a figure designed to show how much of a tax cut the middle class got. And hardly anyone is questioning him on this big fat honking lie.

Slashdot Top Deals

Kill Ugly Processor Architectures - Karl Lehenbauer

Close