<p>well I was being sarcastic sorry it is hard to be clear online ;-0
I do believe that the middle of the country preferred to think that Bush was going to be tougher on terrorists, even though the areas that were attacked actually voted for Kerry.
I posted the link because I think we can't change our definition of "right" and "wrong" when it suits us.</p>
<p>So what do you all think of Senator Biden? Didn't he run once before and had some skeletons in the closet? He's definitely a straight shooter and has a great command of the issues.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>So what do you all think of Senator Biden? </p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Senators, as a group, are pretty unappealing lot. Vain. Pompous. Arrogant. Largest per capita users of hair spray and toupees in the country. Joe Biden is a quintessential Senator.</p>
<p>Politicians, as a group, are a pretty unappealing lot. Just like us lawyers :). Doesn't mean they are all bad. Obama, again. Inouye. McCain. I'm sure I can think of others if you give me time.</p>
<p>Xiggi notes,"In so many words, John Kerry simply blew it." Although I do agree with the statement, I don't agree totally with his reasoning. So what happened?</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Kerry was indeed running on a "I am not Bush" campaign. This is fine, but it wasn't enough. He didn't realize that, although many folks really didn't like Bush, they were reticent to dump a sitting president involved in a war without a good reason!</p></li>
<li><p>Kerry, had no specific policy that Americans could get their hands around. To this day, I still don't know what exactly Kerry would do. Interestingly, he could have easily beaten Bush if he:</p></li>
</ol>
<p>a. Focused very heavily on the huge deficit, which results in mortaging our children't lives. Kerry could have campained on balancing the budget!</p>
<p>b. Focused on specfic ways to overcome health insurance costs,which are out of control. Kerry could have recommended that there be malpractice caps and have tort reform in which the loser will pay the winners legal fees. This would drastically reduce litigation and thus medical costs. Instead, he campaigned as a liberal big government guy, espousing that the government should solve the problem with more government programs. One thing this country doesn't need is more government programs!</p>
<p>c. Focused on the control of Congress by the same party: Most people I know are very nervous about one party controlling all of Congress and the presidency at the same time. There is no check and balance. Kerry could have made a big deal about this, which I think would have persuaded many voters to vote for him</p>
<p>d. Focused more on the war: Kerry should have come out in no uncertain terms and noted that they don't like us in Iraq, and he will get us out of there asap and stop the dying, not to mention the financial hemmoraging.</p>
<ol>
<li>Kerry campaigned as a liberal by advocating more programs for government solution. Kerry, and most of the Democratic party, didn't realize that the country has changed. People are now more economically conservative and socially conservative. They don't want more government programs and thus higher taxes.For some reason both Gore and Kerry just didn't get it.</li>
</ol>
<p>4.Kerry didn't have a mechanism for feedback by voters. I tried to email him about these issues,but he had no contact email on his web site. There certainly was a contact url for donations and for people who want to render services, but none for ideas! </p>
<p>Bottom line: Bush didn't win, Kerry simply lost. It is too bad. He really could have won this election with the right advisors and with the right feedback.</p>
<p>" And a huge reason for the high costs is that we all cover the costs of that free health plan for the uninsured called the emergency room. It's a very expensive way to get coverage. Kerry wanted to cover some of those people."</p>
<p>Actually, it's a good thought, and many folks believe it, but it turns out to be false. A major study recently released out of Univ. of Ca examined emergency room visits at 85 major hospitals nationwide, and found that poor people and uninsured people were actually underrepresented in emergency room visits, without even accounting for the fact that they are also likely to be in poorer health. Overrepresented were the elderly, with insurance and especially those on Medicare (who often had no or little prescription drug coverage - conditions that might have been treated with drugs were often treated in other ways.)</p>
<p>Had he done his research instead of simply adopting a centrist position, Kerry would have discovered that coverage doesn't necessarily mean care, and that it is the private insurance system that is the problem (in terms of getting care, the other benefits of such a a system are arguable), not the solution.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>b. Kerry could have recommended that there be malpractice caps and have tort reform in which the loser will pay the winners legal fees. </p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>With John Edwards on the ticket? The John Edwards who reportedly earned $27 million in one year in his practice as a medical malpractice attorney? With the trial lawyers being one of Kerry's top two or three financial constituencies? That would be like Bush running on a platform of attacking the Texas oil industry.</p>
<p>I thought that Guliani showed tremendous leadership qualities after 9/11. In fact, his leadership made Bush's pail by comparison. I know that we all like to debate policies, but real leadership (providing a sense of hope and community in a time of fear) may be the most important quality of a president. Policy issues aside, this is the area where Clinton, Reagan, and Kennedy excelled.</p>
<p>Mini , do you have a link or resource for that study. </p>
<p>I contacted the Kerry campaign by e-mail and got an e-mail back. They had plenty of forums as well.</p>
<p>I saw Kerry in person at a rally and he did address the war and the deficit.</p>
<p>Patient, no offense taken :) Thanks for the clarification. And, I want to say that I have found this to be one of the most interesting and level-headed conversations on this topic I have found anywhere. Thank you all.</p>
<p>Taxguy - Kerry couldn't have campaigned on balancing the budget. Too many of his other programs required heavy spending. That was one thing that bothered me significantly.</p>
<p>OMG
My book group just emailed me - they are so collectively upset about the election that they are planning a drinking binge for this weekend!
This is a relatively conservative bookgroup, despite my efforts to get them to read topical material, we usually read things like " Of Human Bondage" and are currently reading "Kristin Lavransdatter" all of it !
I am one of the youngest at <cough- cough=""> while several were in college when Kennedy was shot which makes them practically ancient to me. ;-)</cough-></p>
<p>I admit that I didn't care that much about Kerry, but I voted for him cause he wasn't Bush.</p>
<p>I just read through this entire thread and I'm exhausted. Carolyn and Patient, last night you were discussing the NYTimes article about Bush and religion. Someone emailed me this link today and I think it's the one you were referencing:
<a href="http://yuricareport.com/Bush'sBody/BushAndEasyCertainty.html">http://yuricareport.com/Bush'sBody/BushAndEasyCertainty.html</a></p>
<p>Several times in the last 24 hours I've heard Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama as a possible 08 ticket. BTW, I live in the Heartland/Bible Belt, where it's not at all unusual for people you've just met to ask where you go to church.</p>
<p>I wish the Democrats could have found a better candidate. Many people I've talked with voted 'against' instead of 'for' a candidate.</p>
<p>The emergency room study newstory:</p>
<p>I've got the actual study sitting around here somewhere! (It was more interesting than the newsclip.) Interesting - I have just completed a study on folks below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level accessing treatment for chemical dependency, such treatment being by far the most cost-effective way of keeping folks out of emergency rooms. We found that folks with insurance (which, in our state, mandates CD treatment coverage) and who need treatment were far, far less likely to actually receive it if they had private insurance.</p>
<p>I like to call it "managed to care less".</p>
<p>(I e-mailed the Kerry campaign 3 times to see whether they had a position on closing the torture school in Fort Benning, Georgia. Kerry had repeatedly resisted efforts to close the torture school in the 90s. They never e-mailed me back.)</p>
<p>Carolyn, no kidding. I hit the link on the NYT site this morning for forums to discuss the election and it was appalling! I thought I would hear intelligent stuff there but it was all obscenities and vitriol being slung in both directions....I haven't looked at any other forums and don't plan to, as this is about all the discussion I can handle right now :)</p>
<p>Must run to work, but a friend just emailed me about a new Gallup poll out that says that 24% of those questioned are now afraid. Interesting to think about....how many were afraid before the election and are no longer?</p>
<p>Patient, I, for one, am still afraid. And my guy won. :)</p>
<p>Patient, now let's not caricature me too soon:</p>
<p>"You may be right that in fact 51% of the country wants to stay in Iraq and then invade systematically all other non-democratic countries, cut taxes and spending on social programs, outlaw abortion and gay unions (of any sort, by the way), drill in Alaska and further endanger our planet, and enforce their religious beliefs by allowing less separation between church and state. Of course, in the process of doing all that, we will no longer be democratic either, but....."</p>
<p>Like many moderates, and most Republicans, I favor cutting tax rates (which raises tax revenues and lowers the deficit), minimizing (not eliminating) social spending, and drilling in Alaska (big time). The rest of your list is anathema to me (excluding abortion as a special issue, and should be treated specially), and to most conservatives. The list strikes me as a caricature of a Conservative (seen from a Liberal viewpoint), and not too helpful since I don't think I espoused any of the inflammatory views you listed...</p>
<p>Okay, one more question for anyone. And I really wish some of you would answer that health insurance question. I'm asking this question because I think there is a disconnect between what I heard from Kerry and read and what many of you saw. I'm not going to waist my time defending him. I liked him but I also understand his downfalls. I obviously thought Bush had FAR more negatives. It seemed so obvious to me. </p>
<p>So here is my question. Where do you get your news? As you may know I think Fox is a problem in our society but I promise I won't ridicule or belittle you if you tell the truth. And if you think the media in general is liberal ( a view I obviously think is flawed) then please tell me if there is any mainstream media you do respect. I would agree that most reporters are probably liberal but I don't think any news organization is as systematically biased as Fox. I think the bigger problem is corporate conglomerates of news medias who are too focused on news entertainment and don't allocate enough money for in depth reporting. I also think this idea of balanced news is misleading. We always get two talking heads , one from the GOP and one from the dems and supposedly the facts are somewhere in the middle. It's fine when it's opinion but not for analysis. Fox completely and blatantly blurs the line... Brit Hume alternates between reporting and opinion.</p>
<p>Carolyn notes, "Taxguy - Kerry couldn't have campaigned on balancing the budget. Too many of his other programs required heavy spending. That was one thing that bothered me significantly"</p>
<p>That was certainly a problem. As the rest of my post noted, he should have backed off the expensive government programs.</p>
<p>Moreover, Interesteddad notes,"
With John Edwards on the ticket? The John Edwards who reportedly earned $27 million in one year in his practice as a medical malpractice attorney? With the trial lawyers being one of Kerry's top two or three financial constituencies? That would be like Bush running on a platform of attacking the Texas oil industry."</p>
<p>Response: Not necessarily so. He could have taken a position that would have been contrary to John Edward's position would be. He didn't. That was the point!</p>
<p>For news, I generally trust the Wall Street Journal, and I watch the News Hour with Jin Lehrer for my evening news. Much of my information comes from reading either the Internet starting with DrudgeReport and magazines such as the Economist.</p>
<p>Liz, I completely distrust CBS, CNN, and the New York Times because they tell outright lies, and because they very rarely report the news, but they always report their opinion of the news...the exact complaint that you have of Brit Hume.</p>
<p>I definitely see a leftward bias in the news. Also, I will share an opinion of mine: there is room in the rapidly fragmenting media for a news network to the right of Fox. Fox is in fact sort of center-right. They reverse the center-left of say, ABC, by pairing several handsome, articulate right-tilting speakers with some marginal lefties, and then selecting the topics to favor the right. But there is a market out there (I won't watch it, but it exists) for the couterpart to CBS/CNN where there isn't even the pretense of discussing the stories from the left's perception, and where the leading news stories would be:</p>
<ol>
<li>Should Kerry be prosecuted since he's a self-admitted War Criminal?</li>
<li>Should the US withdraw from NATO to show the French we're upset?</li>
<li>Should the US invade Syria before the WMDs are moved again?</li>
</ol>
<p>This sort of inflammatory and misleading red meat would find a (small) home in some of the red states, just like CBS and CNN are finding an shrinking home in the Blue states.</p>