Thanks for the reminder, Jaime. I had forgotten what we were debating

My question is: what's a "liberal democrat"? To many Republicans, thanks to simplistic talk radio chatter, a "liberal" and a "democrat" are one and the same.

I think a moderate Democrat can indeed unseat King George and his evil henchman Cheney AS LONG AS UNEMPLOYMENT NUMBERS ARE UP next November. Or there's a blinding snowstorm in all of the "red" states. And the Green Party doesn't field a candidate to segment the democratic voters.

I only see three "liberal" democrats in the lot; the rest are pretty moderate. The 3 liberals have no chance.

And if they are not?

I sure hope that Demorcrats do not hope or count on this as their argument is growing weaker as the unemployment numbers are shrinking.

This is the sad thing about the state o' the Democratic Party, they are hoping and praying [btw, this isn't directed at you AMF, just at the party in general ] that something goes wrong in the country, they need something to attack. Now that the economy [stupid] is fixed they only have Iraq to criticize, it's sad really.

CP

In general, this is what it takes to unseat a sitting President... something that the non-believers (the 24% in the middle) can be upset about. Just ask Carter (Iran, inflation), Bush I (bad economy), Ford (oil crisis, Nixon)... hmm... after that you have to go back reeeeeal far to find a sitting President that lost his re-election bid.

Conservpat,

I take issue with that statement. I am a democrat. I am not at all hoping that something goes wrong in this country. I am glad that there is good economic news because that helps all of us out.

But 4 more years of GWB is a very frightening prospect for me. He is my anti-candidate. I think he is the best argument for campaign finance reform that we have ever had. I hope that someone credible emerges from the democratic fray. I think there are some good possibilities in there, but I fear we will be faced with as poor a choice as we were in 2000 (and in 1992, and in 1988, and in 1996 and in 1984)

But don't expect me ever to be singing the praises of the Bush tax cut or the Bush version of the war on terror.

I feel a verse of the 'McCain would have been a good president' blues coming on.

Maybe I wasn't clear about what I said, the actual Democratic party, meaning its elected officials are hoping something goes wrong, I doubt that your average Dem voter would want something to go wrong, don't take it personaly.

CP

I don't take it personally from you Conservpat. I trust your integrity as a debater. But democratic voters critically evaluate the policies of the party and choose to support it. I am not looking to vote for someone who is rooting for bad things to happen to my country so he/she can become president of the USA. I think you are creating a false disconnect between a democratic voter (some of whom you will encounter here) and the party. I want a democrat in the white house because I believe it is what is best for the white house. I particularly dislike the policies of this republican president and would support almost anybody but him.

One month does not make one quarter. One quarter does not make a year. Economists agree that it takes 150,000 new (non farm)payroll jobs a month to keep up with new candidates looking for jobs. Then if it goes up to 200,000 a month like Treasury Secretary John Snow promised, I will concede to you. And John Snow promised 1 year of that.

The fat lady ain't sung yet.

I don;t think it is wise to set goals like John Snow has because if you don't reach that goal, you have just given your opponents something to attack you on.

If you ask me, as long as the job market keeps doing well, then Bush has a chance of survival in 2004 and the Dems will ultimatley fade away as a worthless party that can't even de-throne Bush!

You are very correct in your assessment of John Snows words.

I am very familiar with John Snow. The company I work for is a competitor of the CSX company,which John Snow was CEO. He pulled some sneaky under the table deals before he left CSX and became Treasury Secretary. He gets $1million per year in retirement from CSX because the Board added 10+ years to his years of service. To get that he slashed lots of jobs. I apologize if this is off the subject.

Anyway with the Treasury Secretary telling big ones like that, I don't believe Bush will get re-elected.

Hmmm.
IF I spoke for the Electoral College, 4 more years of Bush would easily allow me to place Howie Dean in office.
However, the EC works in strange ways, and it really matters more which campaign can bribe them more, not who the people vote for.
As such, I find it rather pointless to say what the threat of Bush is for four more years. I really don't think I care. It was the same situation back in the PRC.
(P.S. - I don't hate America, or anything. I just... am very disillusioned with what I thought at first was democracy, and learned the hard way, was not.)

I have generally voted Republican. But I have to admit that I have been very disappointed with Bush. I do not believe that he has ever justified the reasons for going into Iraq, and he does not have a real handle on the economy. With the deficit soaring and if it does not get under control this country will be in for some extremely rough times. I do not see Bush getting re-elected.

bear these things in mind about dr. dean, if for no other reason than to blur the lines of distinction between him & bush (hat-tip NewsMax mag):

• this gun-freak governor earned an "A" rating from the NRA for his support for the 2nd Ammendment, while the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence decried his "backward thinking" & said he was "wrong for the White House"
• this SUV driving governor - not wanting nuclear waste to vex his affluent white constituents - tried shipping it to the poor Hispanic border town of Sierra Blanca, TX.
• this budget balancing governor was accused by his state auditor of "cutting programs for the needy, things like wheelchairs & artificial limbs"
• this porn-fighting governor signed a law used to try to keep the ACLU from publishing information about sexuality on the 'net. ACLU condemned his "attack on the 1st Ammendment"
• this tough-talking (& non-PC) governor said that if welfare recipents "had any self-esteem, they'd be working". Liberals howled in outrage
• this crime-hating governor criticized bleeding heart judges, toughened sentencing, jammed prisons & suggested that execution of an innocent was an acceptable risk of capital punishment.
• this draft dodging governor, whose upper-crust Republican background, powerful father, & education at Yale didn't keep him from sliding into alcoholism, acts folksy but is out of touch w/ the average Amercan, critics complain

Where did you get this stuff, slashdot?

I am a liberal Democrat, and I'd be interested in reading it myself. You have used some pretty strong adjectives to color the information. Minus the adjectives, a few things I like, and quite a few more that I don't like.

Please provide a link to your source. Thanks.

when i ordered the Iraqi Most Wanted deck online, i received a trial subscription to NewsMax mag. In there was the bulleted list you read. As you, i was curious to see if it was true, or merely contextual. After 20 min, google pointed me to each one as accurate.

-the messenger

I think a lot of people are following that policy. I have a friend who has your statement on a bumper sticker. I see myself doing likewise. I will vote for Dean, Gephardt, or some of the other candidates. I don't know if I could vote for Clark. I would honestly vote for a third party progressive before I would cast a vote for him.

Right now I prefer Bush to any of the Democrats currently running. And of the Democrats who aren't running, who has the steel to fight the war on the terrorists? God help me, but ... it hurts to say this ... Hillary Clinton may the only one tough enough and smart enough. I don't agree with her politics, but she's pure ruthless Machiavellian where it counts.

I have met more than one person like yourself who shares your frustrations. I live in rock-ribbed conservative part of the country, and yet if you talk to people long enough, they will tell you that they have some serious doubts about the war. Now, these people aren't organic eating, granola bar chewing, birkenstock wearing, latte sipping, Susan Sontag reading, The Nation subscribers. These are people who are "cowboys" to a "T" I even know national guardsmen(24 years of experience in one case) who believes the Iraq war could have been solved by other means. They don't advertise their disagreements, but I see a silent well-spring of frustration that could equate into more democratic votes in 2004. For further info, read this insightful article from The Village Voice: http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0349/perlstein.php