STORM2K

Howard Dean is surging in New Hampshire according to John Zogby. He has cut John Kerry's lead from 9 points to 4 in just 1 day and appears to be surging, again according to John Zogby.

Dean's interview with Diane Sawyer, not to mention his affable and likable wife plus appearance on the David Letterman show have worked just like a charm for him, as Pres. Clinton's did in 1992 during the Flowers affair.

So if you're a republican, relax. Dean IS STILL GOING TO BE THE NOMINEE and get clobbered by Bush.

I am left-wing and can not believe Democrats prefer Dean over Kerry. Kerry is the only candidate with a PRAYER of beating Bush, but the democrats want to make a point, I guess. I hope they enjoy 3 or 4 Antonin Scalia clones being put on the Supreme Court.

But, anyway, to summarize: DEAN IS SURGING IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, CLOSING THE GAP AND ONCE AGAIN APPEARS HEADED TO VICTORY.

The actual numbers are in a article at myway.com

Go Dean Go! ROFL!!

And heck yeah, let's get some decent judges on the Supreme Court!!!

Yeah we need more judges who know how to steal elections.

jason0509 wrote:Yeah we need more judges who know how to steal elections.

Gimme a break!

To tell ya the truth NH isn't very important in my opinion. Both Bush in 2000 and Clinton in 1992 did NOT win in NH. I think SC will be a better indicator of who wins and who loses the nomination. Edwards is the "frontrunner" in SC right now.

I don't think Dean is going to win the nomination personally. He's going to have to score big in the South and the post Iowa catastrophy will hurt him from now on out.

Dean won't win NH.

My prediction is:

1) Kerry
2) Edwards
3) Dean

Look familiar?

Kerry? I have a hard time taking any candidate seriously who resembles Herman Munster...

Dean...well, there's nothing I can say that hasn't already been beaten to ground.

Edwards? Too slick-looking, polished...reminds me of the Pi Kappa Alphas in college (we called them "blow-dried, Jaguar-driving, papa's-pocket boy's club" Greeks). And he doesn't appear to have a clue when one reads his website carefully.

Bill I told my Mother that very same thing today about Kerry. LOL!! She shuddered and said "Blech"

As for Edwards, he managed somehow to beat an incumbent in NC. The people in NC are wondering who this guy really isnow. He is a far left winger who has a hidden agenda but will tell you what you want to hear to get elected. RUN voters RUN from him.

Dean is too dangerous to run this country or handle situations like Sept. 11th. The only thing I have heard him say that he has done is he balanced a budget for 12 years. What did he cut to balance those budgets?Education? Police Force? Fire Depts? Health Care for that state? What? Who knows?

I think that whoever gets the nomination will lose, potentally badly to President Bush. Remember in 1984, polls showed Reagan would win against Mondale just by a bit, and Reagan won 49 states!!!

Of course, I respectfully disagree. Dean isn't surging...rising, yes...surging, lol, hardly!

Edwards is a far left liberal but campaigns as a moderate. You may get away with that in a state election but his voting record will hurt him in any national election... can you say Kennedy clone?

mf_dolphin wrote:Edwards is a far left liberal but campaigns as a moderate. You may get away with that in a state election but his voting record will hurt him in any national election... can you say Kennedy clone?

EXACTLY!!! Stick a fork in him. He is done. lol.

You guys wouldn't support any democrat, no matter how qualified or how decent.

The only bad thing you can think of saying about Pres. Clinton is that he had an affair. At the same time, he had this affair, he was creating unprecedented prosperity (1993 Budget plan which every SINGLE republican opposed led to 2.0% unemployment, 50 million new jobs, people moving from the welfare rolls to the work rolls in a record pace, unprecedented minimum wage increases, liberation of Kosovo and Bosnia, NAFTA, GATT, Environmental protection)

I would respectfully argue that most of you are Republican because of cultural biases. Most northerners and liberals are not ABORTION LOVING, GAY LOVING (absolutely nothing wrong with gays, though), PORNOGRAPHY LOVING, AFFAIR HAVING, TAX RAISING FOOLS.

I am liberal because of gun control, civil rights, environmental protection, minimum wage increases, responsible foreign policy, sound economic policy and caring for other human beings who are not in the top tax bracket.

I urge all of you to think WHY you support a president who is in the pocket of big businesses and special interests, the evangelical right, racists, etc.

I saw an interview with a southerner after Dean said "we have to appeal to the southern guys with guns and pickup trucks" so the news media went looking for this stereotypical southern guy and found him. You know what he said. "The democrats do things for all those other people."

That is a clearly racist statement. And if you recall in 1968 and 1972, Nixon changed republican fortunes by formulating his so-called "southern strategy" which was to become the party AGAINST Civil rights (nonsegregation, black voting rights.) I would argue that most southerners are staunchly republican for 1 issue and one issue ALONE, RACE. They moved away from the democratic party as soon as Johnson embraced the 1968 civil rights act. I'm sure that wasn't coincidental.

Now, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT:

I DON'T THINK MOST OF THE PEOPLE ON THIS FORUM ARE RACIST AT ALL. THE FAMED SOUTHERN HOSPITAITY IS EXCEPTIONAL AND I LOVE MOST OF YOU GUYS. THE CHAT ROOM IS TOTALLY AWESOME. EVERYBODY, EVEN RIGHT-WING REPUBLICANS ARE SO NICE TO ME, EVEN IF THEY DISAGREE.

But, clearly the south is republican based on the Race issue and other social issues.

And I'm sure no one will argue that northerners and westerners are more culturally accepting of differences than southerners.

Finally, that post about Hillary having a plane crash WAS not funny and I was quite offended. I ask each and every one of you to look at that post and say "Would I find that funny if it had said Air Force One Crashes or Bush crashes". I don't think so.


P.S: YOU know, I was wondering why I supported democrats earlier today but writing this post clarified things for me. It was very cathartic.

I am liberal because of gun control, civil rights, environmental protection, minimum wage increases, responsible foreign policy, sound economic policy and caring for other human beings who are not in the top tax bracket.

I am independant because of the following
1. Gun Control (I don't believe in it, to an extent)
2. civil rights (give me a break) ACLU and Affirmative action can go right out the window
3, environmental protection (how far are you willing to go to save the forest? are you willing to let a few hundred thousand people perish in the process?? How many jobs are you willing to eliminate because of this, how many wild fires are you going to permit to happen because you don't want to cut the precious trees (that are the only really re-newable resource we have)

Some of the others I can relate to, therefor I am not liberal, nor am I a conservative

I would not say just that one thing about Clinton. He was horrible at our National Security. He let Bin Laden slip through his fingers. He did nothing about the 93 WTC bombing. He did nothing about the USS Cole. He did nothing about the bombing of the US Embassy in Africa. And yes, he was too busy being a playboy and made a mockery of the Greatest House in the World.

And all you have to say about us in the South is that we are racists. When in fact we have morals and values. That is why I support Republicans. You can leave the 60's out of this debate because those days are over. You can't hold Republicans responsible today for back then. The IN thing to do back then was to be against segregation. Times have changed for the Republican Party and the Democratic Party is losing or sinking in a big deep hole.

Lindaloo wrote:I would not say just that one thing about Clinton. He was horrible at our National Security. He let Bin Laden slip through his fingers. He did nothing about the 93 WTC bombing. He did nothing about the USS Cole. He did nothing about the bombing of the US Embassy in Africa. And yes, he was too busy being a playboy and made a mockery of the Greatest House in the World.

And all you have to say about us in the South is that we are racists. When in fact we have morals and values. That is why I support Republicans. You can leave the 60's out of this debate because those days are over. You can't hold Republicans responsible today for back then. The IN thing to do back then was to be against segregation. Times have changed for the Republican Party and the Democratic Party is losing or sinking in a big deep hole.

Lindaloo you took the words out of my mouth. Great post!

PTrackerLA wrote:

Lindaloo wrote:I would not say just that one thing about Clinton. He was horrible at our National Security. He let Bin Laden slip through his fingers. He did nothing about the 93 WTC bombing. He did nothing about the USS Cole. He did nothing about the bombing of the US Embassy in Africa. And yes, he was too busy being a playboy and made a mockery of the Greatest House in the World.

And all you have to say about us in the South is that we are racists. When in fact we have morals and values. That is why I support Republicans. You can leave the 60's out of this debate because those days are over. You can't hold Republicans responsible today for back then. The IN thing to do back then was to be against segregation. Times have changed for the Republican Party and the Democratic Party is losing or sinking in a big deep hole.

Lindaloo you took the words out of my mouth. Great post!

Ditto here too!

Also, my being Republican has absolutely NOTHING to do with race. Democrats play the race card and keep racism alive...I don't give a flip what anyone's race is!!

It's pretty obvious to me that Jason doesn't know a thing about the south. For those of us that remember the whole desepregation era, the biggest riots were not in the south but the liberal north! Go figure The South of today is leaning more and more Republican because it's the party that still holds traditional American values dear. Pride in God, country and the family. What Jason also forgets to mention that the balanced budget was the work of the Republican Congress with support from conservative Democrats. You look up the notable esteemed congressmen that voted against it and I think you'll see our friend Mr Kennedy. Edwards and Kerry are just clones of him and therefore just as dangerous. The one Democratic candidate that I would consider is Lieberman. Unfortunately he's too far toward the center for the Democrats.

Here's what I really wanna know this election (and all that matters)...Who would the Supreme Court appoint President?