Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: cyncooper
Let's think it over. Who were the main candidates when this started?

Joe Lie, John F'in Kerry, Gephardt, Breck Girl, Sharpton, Bob Graham, and Howard Dean.

So what happened?

Dean hooks up with Moveon. Who were they? Why, they were the group that formed to mobilize in defense of...Bill Clinton. Dean also went to meet with Hillary early on.

Mosley-Braun joined the campaign, to ensure Sharpton couldn't monopolize the black vote. She weakened whatever slim chance he had. Sharpton was taken care of.

What happened to Kerry? He had some former Gore staffers near the top of his campaign. The campaign floundered, and then they jumped ship. Kerry was taken care of.

What happened to Gephardt? Labor unions were supposed to be his bread-and-butter. But a few of the big ones, who were cozy with the Clintons, surprisingly moved to endorse Dean. Gephardt was taken care of.

How about Edwards? What was his best chance? Southern appeal. How about Graham? What was his best chance? Foreign policy. Suddenly, Wesley Clark jumps into the race. Edwards now has to compete with Clark in the South, and Graham realizes he won't be the main defense candidate for the Democrats. Edwards and Graham are taken care of.

And Joe Lieberman had his own ticket mate, Al Gore, endorse Dean.

Every opponent to Dean has been neutered by someone with ties to the Clintons.

Not once has Bill or Hillary said anything even remotely critical of Dean.

Looks like it might be one, big, happy family instead of the dysfunctional one which has been the conventional wisdom. And it is looking more and more like the one thing the Democrats wanted to avoid, namely a drawn out, bruising and competitive primary, will be completely avoided.

345 posted on 12/08/2003 3:15:52 PM PST by William McKinley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies ]


To: William McKinley
...By George, I think you got it!...couldn't agree more...the Clinton's have their slimey little hands all over this.
349 posted on 12/08/2003 3:19:34 PM PST by mystery-ak (GodSpeed, Mike.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
But, but, but if you are right, then Rush is wrong!

</sarcasm>
353 posted on 12/08/2003 3:20:35 PM PST by fishtank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
Now that's some good thinkin'.

BUMP!
354 posted on 12/08/2003 3:21:16 PM PST by prairiebreeze (President George W. Bush....most assuredly, MY President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
If Joe loses, and he will, he'll just go right back to the Senate.
355 posted on 12/08/2003 3:22:05 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
Excellent analysis.
359 posted on 12/08/2003 3:26:30 PM PST by Peach (The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
Not once has Bill or Hillary said anything even remotely critical of Dean.

Indirectly they both have criticized Dean's position on Iraq, if not Dean himself. But they don't care, for all the reasons you detailed, they have seen to it that no potentially electable candidate could build the support necessary to actually win the nomination. Gore endorsing Dean probably has both of the Clinton's laughing at how well things are working out for them and their 2008 plan.

363 posted on 12/08/2003 3:30:16 PM PST by Dolphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
Excellent analysis, it clearly shows just who's running the Democratic Party, a party in disarray. This endorsement can only help destroy it even further.
365 posted on 12/08/2003 3:32:23 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
The one thing the Democrats wanted to avoid, namely a drawn out, bruising and competitive primary, will be completely avoided.

The Clinton, McAuliffe, Clark (centrist) camp could have made a smokey back room deal with the Dean, Gore (looney left) camp. Even though the Clintons don't want Dean to win over Bush (because it kills Hillary's 2008 run), they are willing to play ball for some concessions.

They all agree to unite behind Dean now to avoid the bruising primaries, as you (William McKinley) said. But that doesn't mean they are all permanently in league, just that they cut a deal. Once the dust settles (Dean loses), they will be at each other's throats again (over control of the DNC).

366 posted on 12/08/2003 3:32:27 PM PST by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
Looks like it might be one, big, happy family instead of the dysfunctional one which has been the conventional wisdom. And it is looking more and more like the one thing the Democrats wanted to avoid, namely a drawn out, bruising and competitive primary, will be completely avoided.

You're assuming that the primaries and caucuses are mere formalities at this point. They're not. The only places where Dean is really getting blowout numbers is in New Hampshire. He's only in first within the margin of error in Iowa. Nationwide he's only getting 15% support and is tied with The Weasel.

ANYTHING can still happen in this clusterf*ck (®John Kerry). Gephardt still stands an excellent chance of winning Iowa. Any sort of weirdness could happen in South Carolina. Dean could simply peak too early (it's over two months before the first primary). Remember: In 2002, a guy named Bill Clinton barely even registered in Iowa, getting only 3%, and lost big time in New Hampshire to that powerhouse Paul Tsongas. Only after those humiliating defeats did The War Room get their act together and start racking up wins in state after state.

Those other candidates still want to win, especially Lieberman, Gephardt, Clark and Kerry. They're not going to roll over for Dean. They're going to fight, and fight mean.

367 posted on 12/08/2003 3:33:14 PM PST by Timesink (I'm not a big fan of electronic stuff, you know? Beeps ... beeps freak me out. They're bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
An interesting theory you got there...
369 posted on 12/08/2003 3:35:57 PM PST by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
Interesting theory. It is indeed clear to me that the Clintons want to set-up Howie for the nomination and then a shellacking in November, setting up Hildebeast in 2008. However, would Algore be on board with this?

It appears clear to me that at this point, the Clintons and Gore see President Bush as unbeatable in 2004; Hence, either tacitly or overtly, they will support Dean's nomination and look forward to seeing him go down in flames. The real question I have is what is Al Gore's angle in endorsing Dean at this point? Is he endorsing Dean because he harbors his own ambitions to take on Hildebeast in 2008? Is this payback to the Clintons and McAuliffe out of spite? Or is this part of a coordinated conspiracy with the Clintons to annoint Dean and help Hildebeast in '08?
400 posted on 12/08/2003 4:00:53 PM PST by larlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

To: William McKinley
Insightful post. I think you are right.
419 posted on 12/08/2003 4:21:43 PM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson