Dean Takes Front-Runner Status Nationally for First Time

Gallup News Service ^ | December 9, 2003 | Frank Newport

[GeronL]

It looks like the wacked Dean will beat the wacked Clark and the wacked Kerry for the nomination

[samtheman]

Kerry below The Lieberclown. The big guy's going down.

[trebb]

I'm really surprised they show so many "conservatives" backing Geppy - all politicians have something screwed up in their heads, but from what i've seen, he is certifiable.

[bobjam]

I wonder how this compares to the dem primaries in 1972 and 1984...

[alloysteel]

Any person of conservative leanings who remains a Democrat has to be screwed up to begin with. So Gephardt is simply reflecting his constituency.

On an aside note, Democrats as a whole have fewer and fewer issues to run on, unless they switch way over to the other end, and accuse Bush of spending TOO much money on domestic programs, and not prosecuting the war on terrorism vigorously enough. They do this anyway, but unless they came up with a plan for spending LESS, and waging WOT in a spectacularly innovative manner, making premptive strikes in surprising places, they will have nothing.

[AmericanMade1776]

The Angry Candidate Celebrates.

[VasilyZaitsev]

Can Dean actually win next November?

Read forwarded message below...

---

2004 presidential elections, a pro-gun grassroots activist's dilemma?

A brief NRA-related history of gun-control politics played out here in our Nation's Capital:

1980, 1984 – NRA endorses Reagan for President. He wins landslide victories.

1988 – NRA endorses George H.W. Bush, Sr., after he becomes a member and makes certain pro-gun promises. Bush wins.

1989 – Bush bans importation of semi-auto (civilian model) AK-47s via Executive Order, enforced by the BATF, FBI, etc.

1992 – NRA does not endorse Bush. He loses.

1993 – Waco debacle. Brady Bill, endorsed by all living U.S. Presidents, passes Congress. Clinton signs into law.

1994 – So-called “Assault Weapons” Ban (semi-auto ban) passes Congress, gets signed into law. NRA launches all out effort to defeat politicians who supported ban. NRA plays decisive role in the historical election of a pro-gun, Republican Congress.

1996 – Clinton stages duck-huntin' photo-op; lies about support of “2nd Amendment”. NRA does not endorse Dole, due to his history of compromise with the moderates. Clinton wins 60% of gunowner vote; is re-elected.

2000 – Sen. Al Gore favors more “sensible” gun safety/control laws. Gov. Dubya Bush favors “enforcing current laws”. NRA mobilizes unprecedented, anti-Gore, grassroots efforts targeting key swing voter states with gun-owning union members (PA, OH, KY, AR, WV, TN, FL, etc.) and in support of pro-gun candidates. After secret meetings in Washington, Bush receives NRA endorsement about two weeks before election day. Bush wins 60% of gunowner vote, carrying critical swing states with lots of gun-owning union members.

2002 – Congressman Bob Ehrlich, a co-sponsor of the 1995 House Bill to repeal the 1994 federal assault weapons ban, receives the NRA's endorsement for Governor and goes on to win a decisive victory in the historically liberal, anti-gun, Democrat-dominated state of Maryland.

2004 – Presumptive Democrat presidential candidate, former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, proud of all his NRA “A” ratings and endorsements, has the SAME issue positions on gun-control as President Bush. Both have said they will sign the renewal of the 1994 so-called “Assault Weapons” Ban. Both favor bans on affordable guns - the so-called "Saturday Night Specials".

Soooo, just who will all those gun-owning Reagan Democrats, independents, union members, etc., who decisively supported Clinton over Dole in 1996, and Bush over Gore in 2000, be voting for next November?

-- A former NRA EVC (Election Volunteer Coordinator)

[j_k_l]

Soooo, just who will all those gun-owning Reagan Democrats, independents, union members, etc., who decisively supported Clinton over Dole in 1996, and Bush over Gore in 2000, be voting for next November?

They will vote for Dean (or a third party wackjob which is the same as voting for Dean) because they are knee-jerk, one issue morons.

The better question is...

Sooooo after cutting off their nose to spite their face in the previous elections, what body part will it be this time?

[VasilyZaitsev]

They will vote for Dean (or a third party wackjob which is the same as voting for Dean) because they are knee-jerk, one issue morons.

I'm sure the gun-owning union guys who delivered WV, KY, AR and TN for Bush would appreciate YOUR knee-jerk attitude towards American gunowners. /sarcasm off

It would be a shame if the GOP establishment secretly shared the same attitudes towards gunowners as you do. As previous Presidents have learned the hard way, the concerns of 8 million NRA members are NOT to be ridiculed or ignored.

[j_k_l]

So let’s profile the “perfect GOP candidate” according to a few of the conservative special interest groups:

He (Couldn’t be a She) would vow to destroy all abortion clinics, allow citizens to own personal nuclear assault weapons, close all government agencies, track and kill every illegal immigrant…(I think I can stop there because this guy is delusional if he believes that he is getting 10% of the vote).

Sometime being a rational adult requires seeing the big picture. Just because you may not get your way 100% of the time does not mean a temper tantrum is called for.

[VasilyZaitsev]

The better question is...
Sooooo after cutting off their nose to spite their face in the previous elections, what body part will it be this time?

NO. The "better question"(s) may be...

What did NRA members gain by working so hard to elect Dubya in 2000? Have any of the gun control laws passed during Clinton's two terms been repealed? Would the NRA be better off just ignoring the Presidential race and focus on keeping a pro-gun and/or Republican majority in Congress?

[j_k_l]

Would the NRA be better off just ignoring the Presidential race and focus on keeping a pro-gun and/or Republican majority in Congress?

I sure President Dean would see this and change his view towards guns. He would appoint only strict constitutionalist to the bench who then would support the NRA’s agenda.

Good thinking! That’s using the old noggin!

[VasilyZaitsev]

Sometime being a rational adult requires seeing the big picture. Just because you may not get your way 100% of the time does not mean a temper tantrum is called for.

Save your snide lecture for those "angry white male" devotees of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc. And keep in mind that as Ronald Reagan once said:

"Facts, they can be stubborn things"
(as listed in my original message above)

[1Old Pro]

Dean is a certified kook. W. will eat him for lunch.

[VasilyZaitsev]

Good thinking! That’s using the old noggin!

Thank you. And seeing as American voters have traditionally favored a "divided government" (Congress vs. the White House) MAYBE the NRA should do what the so-called "business community" has done historically...that is, hedge their bets between the two parties rather than be merely seen as a knee-jerk arm of the GOP.

[VasilyZaitsev]

I plan to vote for Bush, but, his willingness to sign any renewal of the 1994 so-called "Assault Weapons" Ban does not play well with the grassroots conservative activists who supported him in 2000, but, owe no loyalty to him or the GOP.

[1Old Pro]

I too am opposed to the so called assault weapons ban. However it appears that it might be a decision about that bill and a Dean/algor/McGovern total ban.

[j_k_l]

What did NRA members gain by working so hard to elect Dubya in 2000?

• Taxes have been lowered (they should be lowered more but I will take what I can get).
• We now control two countries in the Middle East that were a great threat to us. I might add that we did this with great precision and minimal casualties. (It is pretty amazing what our troops have done in a very short time).
• We have a president who has appointed judges to rule according to the constitution as opposed to writing laws from the bench (unfortunately some have been held hostage by the Dems but hopefully we will rectify that situation in ’04).
• Bush is far from perfect. His spending is ill advised to say the least but he is a dramatic improvement over Al Gore.
• Our country is headed in the right direction (it might be in first gear but at least it beats full speed in reverse as it was 4 years ago)

I honestly do not mean to come off as snide. I am simply stating things the way I see it. I respect your views even though I do not agree with them. 2004 is a critical election for all of us. There are issues that I hold near and dear that will not be addressed but I am going to fight hard to see this president get elected because I know that at the very least, the issues that I want in the forefront have a chance with him.

[j_k_l]

MAYBE the NRA should...hedge their bets between the two parties rather than be merely seen as a knee-jerk arm of the GOP.

The dems want nothing to do with the NRA. That is like saying...

MAYBE the Blacks should join the KKK