Free of charge, I hereby offer my consulting services to the Democratic party. Following is my advice on how to win Presidential elections, in 2008 & beyond:

Please! No more candidates from New England!
My apologies to those Blunderites who are from New England or who enjoy their semi-annual pilgrimage there for the Church concerts. I've been to Maine twice myself & enjoyed it. The fact is, however, that to the Deep South, the Midwest, & the so-called Heartland of America, New England is like another planet. This message board is dominated by folks who live in the Northeast. Kerry connected with us, & we wrongly assumed that he had also connected with the rest of the country, but this simply wasn't true.

Kerry did a commercial where he concluded by saying, "America will not waver [against terrorism], & neither will I." He pronounced "neither" as NYE-ther rather than NEE-ther. People don't talk like that, dammit!

Stop running away from the "liberal" tag.
which every Democratic candidate since after McGovern has been doing. Several times during the debates, Bush called Kerry a iberal, once saying that The National Review chose Kerry as the most liberal senator. Kerry didn't directly answer him. Wouldn't the following have been a great answer?

"Yes, I'm a liberal. SO WHAT? Liberal wasn't a dirty word in this country until 1952, when, after 20 years of Democratic Presidents, you Republicans began to campaign based on the 'isms'---socialism, liebralism, & communism. Conservatives cannot take credit for anything in our laws today that is truly good. Social Security, Medicare, the abolition of slavery, womens' right to vote, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Rights Amendment, the Americans With Disabilities Act, Family & Medical Leave---all would be considered liberal ideas if first introduced in a political climate like we have today. What will conservatism take credit for? The new regulations limiting overtime pay?"

Would it really kill you guys to have a candidate who is a man of religion?
Not somebody who would act contrary to the separation of church & state, mind you, just somebody who is a man of faith & who is open about it & comfortable talking about it. A lot of voters seem to have the need to know that their candidate has some moral foundation that they can identify with. No Democratic candidate has done this since Carter, & what has happened since then? Now the words "conservative" & "Republican" have come to be synonimous with "moral," & by implication, "liberal" & "Democrat" with "immoral." Along these same lines.....

...if the Republicans insist on campaigning based on their faith, don't be so deferential--point it out when their policies are contrary to their faith.
When Kerry was asked about his faith in the town hall debate, he told of his youth spent as an altar boy, praised Bush's religious faith, & then said that he couldn't impose his religious beliefs on those who didn't share them. That's fine, but suppose he went on to say the following:

"I know that my pro-choice stand does not square with the teachings of the Church, but NEE-ther does President Bush's stand on capital punishment & war. Remember that Pope John Paul II recently decried the ever-increasing gap between the rich & the poor. President Bush has contributed mightily to that gap with his 25% tax cut on dividends, which is why I would repeal it. Jesus once said that employers owe their workers a good wage & a pension. It's in the Bible. How does this square with the President undercutting labor unions, or restricting overtime pay?

"Mr. President, I remember your father's Vice President speaking out against the offensive & distasteful programming on television. I believe he was right to do so. However, in 4 years, I haven't heard you or Mr.Cheney do this. Could this be because among the major networks, FOX has some of the most offensive programming, & they now own a cable conservative news network that promotes your agenda? When one is moral, he is moral all the time, not just when it suits him politically."

Stop appearing on stage with movie stars & rock stars!
It hurts you a lot more than it helps you! Fans of the Boss might enjoy seeing him on stage, but the rest of the country doesn't wanna believe that he's a trusted advisor!

Hey Joe, Do you think Edwards will have a chance?? (He kinda has the right way of talking and I think with the way he looks he could pass for a Born Again Preacher) I'm being serious! What do you all think!! Or is it too late cos he's already shown his true blue colors?? I don't think a woman or a black man will have a chance for a while yet (you all know why). So who else is there?
Help me out here!

I agree with every one of Joe's points. Yankee vs. Southern: When I tell people here that I like western Mass., they almost invariably say, well, yes, I've heard it's pretty in the fall, but how can you stand being around those people? It's quite a revelation to them that I think the people there are, on the whole, very nice. That yankees are rude, unfriendly, and look down on southerners is a belief that's mixed into the baby formula here. It wasn't helped by the migration of the 80s; many people were forced to come south for jobs and came prepared to hate it here, so they were extremely vocal about what's wrong here. (There's plenty, so they said a lot.) They brought with them (or it seemed that they did) higher housing prices, horrible traffic, a faster pace of life, and less civility in public. Oh--and baseball. We sort of had baseball before, but it was the yankee influx that made GW's first success, when his friends bought him the Arlington team and the newcomers actually went to baseball--not football--games. The thing is, though, it's not just New England. The entire northeast is mistrusted. And many people here make little or no distinction between the northeast and the midwest.

Religion? Absolutely. I groaned every time when Kerry reluctantly mentioned his religion , almost as an afterthought. He was clearly uncomfortable. I can understand that, absolutely, but it hurt the campaign a lot.

Joe, I think your most important point is "point it out when their policies are contrary to their faith." I don't know how Dems can pull this off; obviously they didn't this time, because when Bush et al. did something horrendous, they just lied and said they didn't, and the press said, okay, you didn't, or okay, it's not your fault, and it just went away as an issue. With media ownership firmly in R pockets, how does that change? ...

And I'd add to that, we've got four years (three, really) to get people to see that Dems can and do have high moral standards (even if they dump the garbage now and then) and that those standards are about what really matters most.

If the creative types and stars want to help, they need to quit posturing and get these issues into the mainstream through their crafts--put them, subtly, into TV and movie and book plots, song lyrics, whatever--in the whole spectrum, not just middlebrow stuff, but in sitcoms, romantic fiction, whatever. Not just in 'chick flicks' but in action movies.

Louise, I liked what I saw of Edwards, but that "trial lawyer" label is a big liability unless people can be made to see beyond the smoke and mirrors the Rs use to make people think that having the ability to sue a corporation or a doctor that's hurt you is a bad thing. The Dems all but ignored that. There's a mental disconnect between people's indignation when corporations hurt people and their perception that trial lawyers are all evil. We need someone who thinks like Howard Dean and looks and sounds like Karl Rove.

What I think the Dems need to do: Quit thinking 'they' need to do something--it's WE. For my own small part, I'm not going to avoid talking about current events and politics with people at work anymore. I'm not going to 'soapbox' (much) but just try, in conversation, to get people to open their eyes to what's really happening. And we can't wait until campaign time rolls around again to be active. Our local Dem headquarters is a mess--disorganized, dysfunctional. That can't be fixed during an election year; it's in the off years that they need volunteers to straighten things up. So my sister (retired) is going to get involved in that mundane but so important work.

It's 'fun' to march and protest, but a whole bunch of us need to do the less exciting grunt work--talk at work, write calm letters to the editor, organize, attend church or synagogue if you have an affiliation, and talk to people there. Sing REAL LOUD.

Stepping off soapbox.

I agree generally with your assessments here, my comments

If you go with a religious man be sure he is Christian preferably with a not quite but potentially hidden link to fundamentalist sects although he quite clearly is in favor of separation of Church and State as long as the Ten Commandments and Under God remain special considerations!


America does not want to see Jewish candidates whether they range from from unorthodox to orthodox!
No Muslims Please
Nor American Indians (Unless it is really really diluted blood, remember Fred Harris, Oh sorry Arlo!)

He can be from New England as long as he does not appear to have any intelligence whatsoever. Mispronunciation is an acceptable way of handling this! You just can’t trust a man with intelligence because his critical assessments and potential self doubt may lead him astray and appear wishy washy on his decision making! You must control the wishy washy factor!

Guns and Gun Control! By far the most important of all issues that Democrats need to deal with. In the constitutional hierarchy the right to own and shoot any kind of gun from a Red Ranger BB gun to the most incredible assault weapon that man has ever created (I personally don’t know guns that well, so use your imagination) is numero uno, el supremo. Nobody cares about the right to talk unless they can be armed if they don’t like what you say! And, I might add, I have personally been informed many times that my brain is incapable of assessing the words in the constitution because it is plain as day that this was the intention of the Founding Fathers. (Caveat, this right does not apply to Muslims or American Indians, however, it may be acceptable for Jews upon a per case analysis)

On the Issue of Founding Fathers Jefferson good, Paine bad nuff said!

But other than that I think you pretty much hit it on the head!

PSBeaty: Yah, it's sick, that appearance has to be considered over substance. But there it is: It's a popularity contest and the people who swung it this time are still arguing that creationism should be in science texts. (It's in today's news--Georgia.) The alternative for Greens and Dems to getting actively smarter about politics is (and it's looking better and better) to be SparkyDon's newest neighbor. I'm just naive enough to take "Patriot's Dream" and "Back by Popular Demand" to heart, so I'll stay here and work harder and sing louder.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by louise:

Hey Joe, Do you think Edwards will have a chance??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm more of a concerned citizen than an expert, but my take is that Edwards is too much of a lightweight (not enough experience in government---it didn't hurt Bush in 2000, but it'll hurt a Democrat) & it'll too soon after the 2004 losing ticket.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by louise:

I don't think a woman or a black man will have a chance for a while yet (you all know why). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think a woman has a chance if she's Hillary Clinton. Friends told me recently that the 2004 election showed that she's "too liberal" to win, etc., but never count out the Clintons! Bill wasn't supposed to win in '92, Bill wasn't supposed to be reelected, Hillary wasn't supposed to be elected to the Senate...but look at what happened.

Like 'em or not, the Clintons know more about the political game than anybody in the country---what will play in Peoria, what to say to who, what favors to call in from who, etc.---and the amazing thing is, Bill & Hillary were probably like this when they were 14 years old, but they had to wait until they were of age to run for anything!

Seriously, the Democratic Party will continue to lose close elections for the foreseeable future unless:

1. Democrats need to deal with gun control as an issue. They need an acceptable finality. Compromise is tough if you are at all like me on this issue but IT HAS TO BE CONCLUDED, NULLIFIED AS AN ISSUE. I’ll bet thirty percent of that red zone truly believed that the election of John Kerry would result in attempts to eliminate the possession and traffic of guns in America. These people are more passionate about this issue than freedom of speech. I mentioned an election add that included a father, a son and a gun in the very first post I ever made in the Arlo zone. “Get up off your belly son what are you doing.” The reply, “I am hunting like John Kerry.” Blah blah blah blah……. The Republicans own this issue! The Democrats need to make it go away! In a close election it is overwhelmingly important!!!
2. Religion. The Rainbow Coalition of the Democratic Party is not acceptable in the Religious “Community” in America. Personally, I think these people need to read and understand the commandments and scriptures instead of insisting that they are posted on Government land. In the local Newspaper (not a member of the ubiquitous liberal press I keep hearing about) they posed this question of the readers just prior to the election: Is it acceptable for Churches to endorse candidates and issues and actively be involved in elections? I think they got the response they wanted: 80% overwhelmingly supporting the idea of politics from the pulpit to keep our nation morally in tune, 20% saying it is absolutely wrong and it is not the business of churches to influence politics and 1 lone voice saying Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Assembly are covered in the Constitution. Again, if the election is close the Republicans own this issue! Since this is an area where basic human rights and liberty are at stake and compromise of any sort is not an option. But, arguments that will define a division of the Religious Zealots from the concerned believers need to be developed and pursued. I am an unrepentant atheist myself so they won’t listen to me but if you are a believer, Speak Out Now!!!
3. The Patriotic Factor! The ubiquitous liberal press (sarcasm if you are wondering) has overwhelming given the Republicans the Patriotic Factor. It is little things that have created the impression that Democrats don’t care if the country crumbles in the dust! I would say to the Republican masses in the weeks up to the election, “GW has made a mess in the Middle East and should be removed from office for the prison fiasco alone!” People did not disagree (important fact here) but they said they did not feel comfortable with putting Kerry in charge. One of the sound bites that I hate the most that contributes to this impression reoccurred Sunday when I was trying to relax and watch some football on TV. There in the middle of the battle for PA (football fans know what I am talking about) they showed a group of soldiers that had just returned from Iraq and were attending the game. Chris Collinsworth, a sports announcer not an objective news man, felt compelled to say, ”I grew up in the Vietnam era and these soldiers won’t have to put up with the way the veterans were treated when they returned from Vietnam.” Absolute Republican Propaganda crap that has become all too cliché primarily during sports events on the weekends. And it is directed at those who might question Bush or Militaristic Agenda’s in general. I cannot argue with the fact that people did stupid things during that era on both sides of that issue. BUT, I grew up then. I saw people scared. I saw people go over. I saw a mother sitting in a kitchen late a night with the lights off with tears in her eyes and a letter about a Fire Fight in Jungle thousands of miles away. I knew people who came back and they were welcomed and thanked for their sacrifice by people who did not want them to go over in the first place! I remember saying personally, Thank God your back and safe!!!!!!!!!!! And, I would appreciate it if people like Collinsworth would shut his F’n mouth and talk about the game on weekends. (It is the little things that make a difference).
4. Health Care, Health Care is the Democrats Bread and Butter. Everyone I know is freaking on Health Care. The Bush approach is to let Big Companies pull out of the arena of purchasing health care. I had Health America in PA and the company dumped it for AETNA, the saving plan. The Republican Pundits in the group were the ones that freaked the most. And, I just dealt with a dying parent, the system is designed to totally destroy any financial security to the point of killing them with worry on top of their illness. This election, THE DEMOCRATS DID NOT PRESENT A PLAN. NOT EVEN A BAD PLAN! NO PLAN! The Republicans just had to say we have a plan. And it was a moot point!
5. Hillary not a good choice. The Republicans are praying for that! (My Opinion).

I have ranted enough!

Collinsworth took too many blows to the head trying to cross the middle against the Steelers' secondary.

I'm still in two minds about Hillary. (boy I would have loved to have been at her commencement speech at Wellesley in'69 when she denounced Senator Edward Brooke's speech as erelevant!!)
She gave in on things that she felt very strongly about to "play the part" demanded of her to help Bill win both Gov and Pres. (I still cringe at that headband she wore on 60 mins. She probably ripped it of and set fire to it when she went off air!) But she's a smart woman and she will probably get my vote if she runs. She's just been bideing her time, I mean I don't think Bill ever would have been the Pres without her. He's smart ,except when he's thinking with other parts of his anatomy other than his brain, but I think she has more determination. But she's a woman and a Senator from N.Y. so those things are against her from the start especially when it comes to the "good ol boys" and the women who vote like their Daddy's and Husbands, though they might like the "stand by my man" thing. (but I really can't fathom how those womens brains work.) Hey we have gun control here big time (the red necks hate it) we all had to surrender our guns years ago and people are still handing them in. You can be licensed to have
a rifle in certain circumstances, farmers etc. We have very little gun crime.
Who do you think the Repubs will groom for '08? Are there any Dem possibles besids Hils, Eds and Obama?(too soon for him??)

I'm not of two minds about Hillary. My view is why not just hand them the next election? She's my senator. I'll vote for her for re-election. She's an OK senator and a very bright woman. Her whole mystique, however, is that her last name is Clinton. She's not Bill. She hasn't got his gift for commuinication. This is a woman who was cheated on and got blamed for it! That's anti-charisma. When it comes to Clintons I'll wait to see how Chelsea turns out. If I'm around when she's ready to run, she might have my vote.

For now, I just want to see the Dems develop backbone. I'm not totally against compromise, but that hasn't gotten us anywhere. I want to see populism, and yes, I agree on healthcare. I loved Kerry, but every time he said his plan would save us $1000 a year I winced. For people having problems paying for healthcare, that's a drop in the bucket and won't even make a start toward solving their problems.

Please don't misunderstand.

I like and respect Hillary and I have no particular issues myself with her running for President and I would in all probability vote for her (I like to claim i am independent but I always seem to turn away from the Republican ticket. I am proud I voted for Jimmy Carter, in my opinion the most decent and honest man to ever occupy that office). The Republicans have a running start against Hillary and their propaganda machine is already cranking it out.

I have very strong feelings on gun control and I think the stance the NRA has taken and its affect on the (predominately male but men are not alone here) gun-owning population is ludicrous. I have no issue with guns or gun ownership per se but enforcing responsibility in acquiring, owning and selling guns is way way past due!!

and

the Steelers look pretty good right now but I tend to wear purple on Sundays Joe!

I voted for Jimmy Carter too, both times, and I also believe he has been the most decent and honest man to occupy that office in my life time - and I think he has been the best ex-president we have had too - but the down side was that Billy Beer sucked - tasted like ___ well it wasn't good - nice can design tho -
as for Hillary - I would vote for her with what I know now - but it is true they are already gunning for her - they are mean and the truth means nothing to them - I would trust her to run this country better than "too many" others that have held or hold the office - a lot BETTER - and so could a lot of other people - a lot of other people !!!

Thanks for your thoughts. I hope Hillary makes it to the race in 2008. As I said she is good at adapting to want people want but only to a certain extent and I still think she got a hard row to hoe.
Hey guys! Give me some poop on this Alberto Gonzales the new AG.I don't know much about him and will do some reaserch on the net but I'd like some real poop from "THE PEOPLE"!!!!!!

Here's an article about him: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40219-2004Nov10_2.html

I think that fact that he was complicit in one of our contemporary disgraces should be a problem. Or that he's very close to an administration that has a few investigations that they'd be worried about if we still had democracy and all that stuff which is now so last century. It won't be a problem, however. We have to be busy worrying about those USSC appointments that will probably happen this time around.

I was just thankful the old AG was gone at first! Have to see how it plays!