[wanderer78]

relaxi_cab, that's good to hear.

So what does everyone think of Kerry's new running mate?

[ceilirose]

I think it's a good choice for Kerry..a good balance. I had a chance to see Edwards speak earlier this year and he's impressive in person. All the stuff that the Conservatives/Republicans are spinning about him..the trial lawyer, ambulance chaser etc., etc. is just hilarious. My guess is that they're sweating this one out and they shouldn't underestimate Edwards nor Kerry.

I'll give credit to the Conservatives/Republicans who have gotten the mainstream press and American public to cringe in disdain at the mention of the word liberal. Come on..the greatest damage to this country in the last three years has been done by two right wing conservatives and their cronies in Congress. The Democrats/Liberals really need to ratchet up their PR machine and get their message out. The true radicals/extremists are sitting in the White House right now.

But I'm all for 'Johnny Sunshine' being the VP and can't wait to see him debate Cheney. Having two lawyers in the WH but be a good thing..they may actually feel the need to follow the laws of the country rather than find ways to get around them.

[summerbug]

Originally posted by ceilirose But I'm all for 'Johnny Sunshine' being the VP and can't wait to see him debate Cheney.

That will be an amusing debate. Too bad he can't debate Dubya. Talk about blowing someone out of the water!

I see only positives for Kerry in regards to Edwards - geography, attractive family, well spoken, stronger message, etc. Calling him liberal (which, like you, I don't understand how the negativity has been so cleverly attached to that word. Although, as Al Franken says, the right has well fed, well bred attack dogs ) and unaccomplished is laughable. As for the voters, I am sure he is appealing to the middle. Something rubs me weird and I can't put my finger on it...I guess it's the comparisons to Clinton's style. I don't see him in that calibur at all just yet. Maybe in a few years

[migamoo]

Originally posted by ceilirose Having two lawyers in the WH but be a good thing..they may actually feel the need to follow the laws of the country rather than find ways to get around them.

We can only hope.
I too am happy with the choice of Edwards. I definately think he might be able to swing some votes for Kerry. I know my mother was going to vote for Bush but when she found out Edwards is on the ticket, she started to think about voting for a democrat. She would have voted for Edwards in the primary, so let's hope other are going to be like her.

Ashley

[AuburnGrad]

Originally posted by ceilirose But I'm all for 'Johnny Sunshine' being the VP and can't wait to see him debate Cheney.

I will sit down with a bowl of popcorn and thoroughly enjoy myself.

Four years ago, the Democrat thread started in the midst of the election crisis. It saved my sanity. I may just stop by here more often in the next few months.

I am thrilled with Kerry's choice for VP. Before yesterday, I really did not know much about John Edwards. I've done some research in the last 24 + hours and love what I've read and heard.

Historically, VP choices most likely has not had much of an impact in the election of presidents, but I think the selection of Edwards could at least put a dent in it. I had my doubts about Kerry, but given the choice I certainly was not about to vote for Bush. Edwards has pushed me firmly into the Kerry camp. Edwards oozes charisma and seems very personable, is a terrific orator, seems to understand middle America (which is most important to me), and is a family man.

I'm almost somewhat disappointed the ticket does not read vice versa, but I won't go down that road.

[relaxi_cab]

I like Edwards too, he is a very good choice for Kerry, haha, two John's in the white house. have a nice day

[migamoo]

Originally posted by relaxi_cab haha, two John's in the white house. have a nice day

I like to call them John-John.

[Jerry D]

I like Edwards as well, and I think Kerry's choice of him really bolsters his candidacy.

[UnsilentMajorty]

I actually voted for Edwards in the Primary over Kerry

Originally posted by ceilirose I'll give credit to the Conservatives/Republicans who have gotten the mainstream press and American public to cringe in disdain at the mention of the word liberal. Come on..the greatest damage to this country in the last three years has been done by two right wing conservatives and their cronies in Congress. The Democrats/Liberals really need to ratchet up their PR machine and get their message out. The true radicals/extremists are sitting in the White House right now.

The problem is that the Republicans/Conservatives have basically twisted and manipulated the mainstream press to define the word "liberal" as a person who is some kind of "pot-smoking, drug-dealing, adulterous, welfare-taking, unpatriotic, non-military supporting, deadbeat-parent and Atheist" who hates his/her country, is a terrorist and would destroy it and everyone else the first chance they are given.

Wow. Generating negative connotations is "really" hard to do

I mean, I can get the same negative reaction about ANY group if I attach all of those unpleasant cliches to them as well

It's ironic in that liberal means "freely" or "(re)lax" -- The very things this nation was supposedly founded on: Freedom of Religion; Fredom of the Press; Freedom of Assembly; Freedom of Expression; etc.

The hypocracy of this administration amazes me.

They basically want to deny everyone else who is NOT them, or whom doesn't fall into what they consider to be a "true American", to either be "with us [them], or against us"... And if you are "against them" and their views, or express any disagreement with them they have no problem and every right (in their mind) to take away your freedoms in favor of their own.

That's not America, folks.

At least, the one I grew up in

-------

RE: Kerry and Edwards and Democratic Platform...

It will be interesting to see what both of them have to say (in debates and in general) about some of the hot button issues like the Economy; Jobs; Iraq; Foreign Trade; etc.

My only concern is that if they do get elected, the damage the Right has done while in office will be so immeasurable that Kerry and Edwards CAN'T fix a lot of it right away... But voters will demand this and when they don't deliver on this, those two will be voted out after only four years and possibly more Right Winger Extremeists will be voted in who will carry on where the current administration left off.

[migamoo]

Both Kerry and Edwards (as well as their wives) were on 60 Minutes tonight. Anyone watch? A couple of the questions were about each other, Iraq, and just a few general questions.

Ashley

[ceilirose]

I watched it and liked some things and disliked others but overall it was OK. My dislike was mostly with Leslie Stahl and her questions and attitude though.

Leslie Stahl admitted that the Republicans sent her a stack of papers outlining all the negative attributes of Kerry. Then she proceeded to ask him and Edwards the same old questions that are always asked... Kerry flip-flopping, his charisma or lack of it, not liking Edwards but picking him for V-P, etc. etc. Kerry sort of indicated that she was playing right along with the Republicans (which is true) by asking the same old stuff.

When they talked with the wives I liked Teresa Kerry's answer about her wealth. She pretty much said that Republicans never had a problem with her wealth when it involved her first husband who was a Republican so she doesn't understand why they do now.

The issue of their wealth came up again and Elizabeth Edwards said that they both voted against tax credits which would have benefited them. It was highlighting the point about how they thought of policy before personal gain.

The worst cheap shot was Stahl showing and making a point of how Teresa Kerry was fidgeting with Kerry as they figured out a way to hold hands and be comfortable. She actually said something like 'what's up with that.' I'm not sure what was up with her and CBS for even showing that..it was more like an outake then something in a finished segment.

Overall the four of them came off well - comfortable with each other, humorous when needed and serious when the occasion called for it.

[Uh Blah]

This is my first post in this political forum. I'll start out by saying I'm a registered Independent but I lean to the left on most issues. I'm only 25 & my first presidential vote was in 2000 for Gore. I wasn't too impressed with him but I felt the other choice was disaster. I have the election night on tape. I stayed up that night & early morning watching it live. I swear I was hallucinating the next day. lol I later taped parts of the recount too. Could it get any more embarrassing?

My conclusion after the whole 2000 debacle is that the electoral college must go. The idea that the President of the United States can be elected by a minority of the popular vote is a joke. By slicing the country up by states we are ignoring a large portion of the country. The portion that knows how there state is gonna vote so why show up to the polls at all. The candidates don't spend any time in states like mine (MA largely Dem). Instead they are in states like FL, OH & PA the ones with a diverse political landscape aka "swing states." So the notion that every vote counts is simply not true in a Presidential election. Not only is the electoral college out dated it also lends itself to coruption. I saw Fahrenheit 911 yesterday & I'm surprised to see no one commented on it yet. Anyway it began with the 2000 election & it just got me steamed when I was reminded that my 1st vote went to the guy with more votes yet he's not the President. And now we're in a theatre laughing at the very bafoon who did become President. I personally didn't laugh b/c I was too emabarrassed & it made me sick. Thank you

[Cress]

Yeah, it's frustrating. I'm in Texas, and I know there are pockets of us liberals in Texas, near the major cities, but I know that the state as a whole will go Republican in the electoral college. Why hasn't anybody changed this process by now?

Why can't they divide it up percentage wise, so that, if 25% of the state voted Democrat, then 25% of our electoral college votes would go Democrat?

[summerbug]

Originally posted by Cress Why can't they divide it up percentage wise, so that, if 25% of the state voted Democrat, then 25% of our electoral college votes would go Democrat?

Exactly! If 2000 taught us anything - one thing is that the Electoral College needs reformed. If you are in a state that is so predictable, as mine and yours are, then it would be nice to know that your vote actually counted. Well, other than the satisfaction of winning the popular vote

[relaxi_cab]

we have the same problem in Canada. WE have 308 ridings or sections and every party can put up a candidate in each riding, now if you live in Alberta like me, about 60% of the vote went conservative andd they won 26/28 seats, so 93% of the seats.

Nationally here are the standings:
-Liberal 135 seats (44%) but the popular vote was about 37%.
-Conservative 99 seats (32%) but the popular vote was 29%
-Bloc Quebecois have 54 seats (18%) but popular vote was 12%
-New Democrats (NDP) 19 seats (6%) but the popular vote was 15%
-and the Greens had zero seats but they got 3%

since the Bloc is concentrated in Quebec they win a majority ofthe Quebec seats but they do not recieve any other votes.
The NDP's support is spread out so they do not have enough support in concentrated areas, they barely ever recieve a majority of the votes in a riding. I hope that makes sense, and voting systems are flawed everywhere, somebody muist do something about that.