Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
United States

Journal pudge's Journal: Dean 14

Journal by pudge

I think Dean's strategy comes down to waiting until Edwards drops out so he can say he finished second in some of the bigger states. :-)

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived.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

Dean More

Dean

Comments Filter:
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • I heard last night Dean said he would stay in it until Super Tuesday.

      And Dean seemed, by far, the most insincere candidate to me. Whether it was saying to Chris Matthews "I am against changing the right to work laws because I favor states' rights ... but I would sign the bill as President if it were given to me" or "I am against the death penalty because we can't be sure of guilt ... except in the cases of terrorism or harming a child," he is always flip-flopping and choosing positions based on what he th
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • I don't see that as inconsistant.

          It is. He bases his opposition to the change based on his view of the Constitutional rights the states have; that is what "states rights" means. So he is taking his view of the Constitution, his principles of rights, and saying, yeah, but if they ask nice, that all goes out the window. He takes an oath to uphold the Constitution, and he admitted quite plainly he would not do that.

          I see an argument for this being merely an attempt at a populist compromised Death Penalt

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
            Comment removed based on user account deletion
            • States rights are not simply a constitutional issue, and to define it in such terms and then describe someone as being inconsistant (sic) is the worst kind of sophesty (sic).

              In this case, it IS a Constitutional issue. The federal government has no legal right to tell the states how to handle right to work.

              I pointed out that that argument was highly unlikely for obvious reasons

              I stated what was simply true: he is against the death penalty because of a *principle*. He makes exceptions for reasons that

              • The basis is that in a Republic, the leaders are expected to have and follow principles, not follow the illogical and inconsistent whims of the electorate. That's the whole point of a Republic, to have leaders that can rise above that.

                Correct. If we elect a "leader" who mearly did what the majority WANTED him to do, we would be a democracy -- at least by proxy. Why not just replace the office with a populist vote on every issue?

                There are MANY pitfalls in democracy and I for one am glad I don't live in

              • Comment removed based on user account deletion
                • It is frequently common for people to be put in the situation of finding a lesser evil.

                  Not when there is an overriding principle involved, no. The only time you compromise on a principle is when the alternative is worse. What would be worse here? It's not like he is making death penalty policy, there's no reason to compromise to achieve a common goal. If it is as you say, that he is compromising, then he is the worst negotiator ever, because he is compromising on a proposal that doesn't exist.

                  Same th
                  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
                    • There is no "overriding principle" here, by definition.

                      You're wrong. The principle is "we don't know if they are really guilty." This person commits a crime he says overrides that principle? That's illogical, because we have already established *we don't know if they are really guilty.* It is logically necessary that this principle be overriding, or else it has no value at all.

                      No, I asked for an example of him changing his mind - ie where he believed one thing one day, and flipped to believing the o

    • Kind of wierd, for most of last year it was "Dean's going to win, unless Clark runs, in which case it could be either of them."

      I chalk it up to the democrats coming to their senses. Dean was an extreme candidate and appealed to the extreme left. After the 2000 election, those extremists are coming out of the wood-works.

      While it was probably a coincidence that things dramatically turned around for him the moment Gore endorced him, I thought it was interesting nonetheless. Is it me or did Gore sound li

      • I chalk it up to the democrats coming to their senses.

        I'd agree. Dean was popular, but too many Democrats realized he can't beat George Bush. In Tennesese last week, Democrat voters' two biggest concerns where electing somebody who can beat Bush and the economy. Thus, Dean finished horribly.

        Last year, I was in the same group as pretty much everyone else, thinking Dean would easily win the primary, and then lose horribly to Bush. But I think enough people heard an entire year of "Remember McGovern
        • What I'd be interested to see is who Democrats *really* want be president. I know are voting for Kerry right now, but deep down, do they wish they could vote for Dean?

          That's why I asked the question in a previous journal entry [slashdot.org], and the answer most people gave for liking Dean was either 1. the war and 2. he could beat Bush (of course, I had nothing remotely rsembling a representative sample). Well, it's been proven that Dean had the same views on the war resolution that Kerry did -- they both favored the

Slashdot Top Deals

"It's my cookie file and if I come up with something that's lame and I like it, it goes in." -- karl (Karl Lehenbauer)

Close