Things crossing my mind about this election.

[Cleita]

Is is possible that this election was rigged by the DLC to position Hillary Clinton for a run in 2008? I mean were the other candidates shot down in the primaries to bring Kerry forward as the front runner because the DLC knew the Bushistas were going to try to cheat and Kerry wouldn't win by a wide enough of a margin to become President? :tinfoilhat:

I hope not, but yet I feel that we have to turn over all the stones to figure out what went wrong.

Putting on my abestos suit now.

[TexasSissy]

1. Absolutely not. No way. The DNC would not give up a chance to

take the W.H. on a chance of getting the W.H. four years from now, esp. with several S. Ct. Justice positions on the horizon.

I know where you're coming from, but there is no way they'd do this.

[pmbryant]

2. DLC couldn't rig anything to save their life

Evidence Joe Lieberman's performance during the primaries.

--Peter

[LisaLynne]

9. Unfortunately, very true.

On second thought, maybe it's not unfortunate ...

[LamedVov]

3. Why the dislike of Hillary

Hillary may very well be our nominee in 2008.

[Cleita]

6. Did I say I disliked her?

I like and admire Hillary very much and would have no problem casting a vote for her. I'm just questioning the fact that her supporters might have plotted something like this.

[StephanieMarie]

4. Send in corrections to the media.

Don't let them get away with talking about "Bush's victory" or dismissing the allegations of a stolen election. I just sent this in to AlterNet.org :

Why keep playing down the fraud? I just read your article on AlterNet, and I can’t believe my eyes. How can you view these charts and say that there was not nationwide, deliberate, coordinated fraud? The probability of the exit polls only being “off” in states with electronic ballots, and all “off” in Bush’s favor is less that one in a million. Look at New Hampshire! A 16% discrepancy? You can’t call that in the margin of error. There are millions of votes represented here – Kerry won both the popular vote and the electoral vote. That is the only logical conclusion. Open your eyes, then open your mind. Or have the Republican’s bought you too?

<inserted here are TruthIsAll's bar charts showing agreement between exit polls and vote count in paper ballot states, and complete disagreement (all in favor of shrub) in e-vote states>

[firebee]

5. Huh...

Honestly, I just don't see that as being valid. Campaigning Hillary against Bush would be like campaigning the Wicked Witch of the East against the Wizard of Oz. Hillary would make a great "Secretary of State", but I wouldn't run her in a Presidential election with her Arkansas energy scandals. We need someone pure... we need someone that can't be tied to any scandal.

We need to run Wesley Clark for President in 2008 with Barack Obama as Vice President. These are the two purest candidates we have. What kind of dirt can someone possibly dig up on Clark and Obama. I haven't heard of anything.

[Cleita]

7. Well, I wanted Howard Dean, but I didn't get him.

So don't be so sure Clark and Obama will come out on top in the primaries.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crunchy Frog]

12. Would you mind providing some sort of

documentations for those statements?

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crunchy Frog]

19. Nothing but repetition

of unsubstantiated slander, rumor and innuendo, most of the substantive charges you're making having been debunked multiple times here already.

Yes, he did appear at one minor local fundraiser very early in *'s first term, when he was being courted by both parties an in which he said things no different than many other Democrats were also saying, given that it was the "honeymoon period".

If you were to actually read the content of the speech, you would see that he was issuing an early critique and warning concerning *'s foreign policy direction.

[BootinUp]

21. Both of these claims and so called evidence

are nothing but political mud slinging in the heat of an election. The story about Chris Lehane could not be verified, in fact, the reporter that worked on it at MSNBC decided it was not reportable for lack of sufficient confirmation, it was at that point someone leaked it to Drudge. Lehane is an operative known for digging dirt, each campaign had their own "Lehanes". That you think it somehow reflects on Clark and yet the other candidates can employ similar tactics and operatives is basically a sign you don't have a clue how politics works. So lets recap, the story is completely unverified, and you certainly didn't link it to Clark in any meaningful way.

Clark's speaking engagements were part of his job. He was a paid consultant. Any nice things he said were balanced by the concerns he expressed as well. You might read his actual words instead of Shaheens talking points from when she would do just about anything she could to stop Clark's momentum in NH. Clark believes in calling them as he sees them, if that means praising some aspect of a republicans record, he has no regrets. Its that kind of honesty we need in elected officials. BTW, Clark was registered in Arkansas as undeclared party affiliation, he has voted for the Democratic candidate in the last 4 presidential elections.

Hope your having fun repeating the mud slinging from the primaries. :eyes:

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Crunchy Frog]

29. Nobody in the world is "pure"

but at the time, Clark was officially non-partisan, was making a living as a paid speaker, and was being courted by both parties to possibly run for office. He balanced it out by later giving a speech at a Democratic fundraiser.

It was an event that whose signifigance was hugely exagerated, both by his opponents in the primaries for obvious reasons, and by Karl Rove and the corporate media who, for some reason, couldn't wait to get him out of the running.

If it's "not the biggest deal in the world", why are you trying to make it such a big deal?

[BootinUp]

30. The original post about pureness

had to do with scandals. I don't call a democrat that has voted both ways and spoke at various political meetings a scandal, lol.

There are many possible candidates that would have a relatively scandal free background. What we need is someone who appeals to a broad cross section of America, who can define democratic values in a way that appeals to this wide group, who has a definite charasmatic quality, who would really return the party to an image of strength on National Defense. We do need someone like Clark on our side. He did amazingly well in grassroots fundraising having entered the race as late as he did, and he helped during this whole election cycle to bring down Bush's approval numbers by working his ass off.

[Jai4WKC08]

31. First off, you've got your dates switched

Shaheen made the remark about Clark's credentials in early January, as I recall... maybe late December. Definitely before the NH primary. And she said it in her capacity as John Kerry's NH campaign manager.

Funny, but she had nothing but great things to say about Clark at the NH J/J dinner on Oct 22nd this year, when she introduced his keynote address. Ain't politics great?

As crunchy and Jim have already pointed out, Clark's remarks to the Repub fundraiser are taken totally out of context. As they note, he was being courted by both parties. I would only add a few points:

1) The dinner occurred in early 2002, shortly after 9/11 and the beginning of the operation in Afghanistan. Would you like to see a quote of the praise Kerry had for Bush at that time? Or Dean or Edwards? Pretty much everyone was standing behind the President then. Only Clark had it used against him later.

2) And isn't it amazingly coincidental that it was the GOP who dug up the video of his speech and released it shortly after he threw his hat in the ring? Surely just in the interests of promoting truth and democracy, right?

3) The very next week after the Repub event, Clark spoke at a Democratic fund-raiser as well. No one ever produced a tape or transcript, but I'd bet his remarks about state Democrats were every bit as complimentary. Let's face it, after being away from home for almost 40 years, he was trying to reestablish contact with the community. No one, and I mean no one, goes to one of those things and trash-talks the hosts.

The claim that Lehane had shopped around the Kerry/intern rumor broke right after the TN/VA primaries, so it was mid- to late-February. I suppose that could count as last winter, barely. In any case, the charge against Lehane was debunked. It arose from a memo from an MSNBC reporter who later said he was just passing along a rumor he couldn't substantiate. Lehane had denied the charge from the get-go. And fwiw, the Drudge report that involved Clark himself in the allegation was proven by eye-witnesses to be a total fabrication.

As you can hopefully see, the Bush campaign contributed directly to the first allegation, and was completely behind the second. Why do you think they were attacking Clark so early? Why did the Kerry campaign feel no compunction about using what Rove provided? And why do you think the Repubs tried to drive a wedge between Clark and Kerry later? Hint: it wasn't to help our party.

Mostly, why are you repeating Bush/Rove party-lines about someone like Clark anyway?

[KurtNYC]

10. Not sure what the appeal of Hillary is?

She is female? Her last name is Clinton? I know the Right keeps saying she will run but that is usually part of their fundraising campaigns.

Hillary Rodham was in the Young Republicans btw.
She campaigned for Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater in 1964 and chaired the local chapter of the Young Republicans.

http://www.britannica.com/presidentsWebapp/article.do?articleID=9095812

[Cleita]

11. This is why I think the DLC likes her, because she is

left of center.

[UdoKier]

13. You're listening to too much Limbaugh

That's one of his pet theories - hell, he thinks the Clintons are behind EVERYTHING, but this is one of his faves.

[Cleita]

14. Wrong. I never listen to Limbaugh.

I couldn't subject my blood pressure to his rants. However, I'm just speculating, since I'm sure someone else will bring it up, and you have just proved that. Limbaugh has brought it up.

[UdoKier]

18. It really is a common theory on the right.

I was just throwing Limbaugh out as an example. I've heard numerous RW pundits say this - Matt Drudge is another.

I would take it with a grain of salt.

[hangloose]

15. If the country is still at "War" in 2008 it's unlikely that Hillary will

be selectable to be electable. Sorry I'm not chauvinist but I feel the majority of America won't trust a woman as the commanded and chief under those circumstances.

[m berst]

16. something is way, way off

I think we all feel that in our bones. We may not know what exactly is going on, but we know that something is terribly wrong.

I think that the "de-bunkers" are just grasping at straws because they are afraid to trust their intuition on this. If they can discredit this or that "conspiracy theory" they can re-assure themselves that things are more or less OK.

Every single sign is just screaming at us now that things are a long, long, way from OK.

Just because the vote count in a certain county can be "proven" to be not stolen as per someone else's guess about it, that does not mean that ruthless tyrants have not seized control of the country.

People can't - or won't - see the forest for the trees.

[rniel]

20. Just a conservative conspiracy theory

I bet they wake up at night in a cold sweat shouting out "AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!! HHHILLLLLAAARRRRYYYY, NO NO AHHHHHHHH!!"

[sangh0]

22. Then why isn't Dean saying something about this?

.

[sangh0]

23. Why isn't Michael Moore saying something about this?

.

[sangh0]

24. Why isn't Jimmy Carter complaining about this?

.

[sangh0]

25. Why would bush* help HIllary?

.

[Cleita]

26. Calm down.

I put this question out there, so it could be discredited. DU'ers are doing just fine shooting holes in this conspiracy theory. Freeper lurkers are getting educated. I don't think Hillary is going to run anyway. She seems to like being a Senator.

[sangh0]

27. ???

I'm not excited. I was asking questions as they came to me.