When Kerry wins 
it’s unlikely that the world will suddenly become perfect. While I seem to be a partisan Democrat, the fact of the matter is that I’m a centrist and a left-leaning moderate in most things… I just happen to hate George W. Bush with a passion that I’ve never felt in politics before. I’m a policy wonk-wannabe usually, and I am now working to return to those principles as the election gets closer.
On this note, I read something interesting from Brad DeLong describing the various issues that will still cause problems for the Democratic party when Kerry wins. I’ve found that his positions in the aggregate are most like mine of the various places I read, and I think the outsourcing debate has been handled poorly so far by the various people involved. Both the Republicans and Democrats underestimate the collective intelligence of American voters on this particular issue and revert to variations of protectionism as their rhetoric.
I’m going to write more on these issues once we’re settled into the new place after next week. For now, however, you can read the smarter commentary from DeLong.
July 29th, 2004 at 3:43 PM
Delong makes many relative points about the policies that will shape the next 10 to 15 years and affect the next century.
I do believe, and I know I will be immediately challenged for making this statement, but I do believe Delong makes one underlying misrepresentation in his post. He breaks everything down by parties.
In every party there are extremists. We see and hear about them every day and for some, they make the extreme part of their daily life in order to be noticed. Why? I don’t know and mostly, I don’t care. They are more annoying then productive.
What could have been pointed out in the DeLong post is that if the moderate Democrats (centrists) and the moderate Republicans (centrists) were to sit down at the table and have honest discussions about the economy, outsourcing and jobs growth, education, health care, social insurance/justice, and many other issues not mentioned in the DeLong post, the right decisions will be made that benefit everyone. We need to shed our party stances at the end of the day when good legislation that will benefit people and families stare you in the face. One party will not solve the problems, only a comprehensive compromise will start everything in the right direction.
The underlying tone of the Delong post if you read it a couple times is the same problem I have with many political figures, it is the idea of “us vs. them.” The idea that representing the party view is more important then representing the people and the families that elected politicians in the first place.
Almost all good politics is a fair and balanced compromise of all views. Delong had the opportunity to point that out because inherently I believe there are many good people on both sides of the poltical aisle who approach their duties in a responsible manner.
Do I blame DeLong? No. It is a feeling he gets from those few who constantly make the headlines and annoy/irk him to the core of his being. And it is a feeling he responds to when the partisan shots are made about Democrats and John Kerry from the far right.
Somewhere in the end, the good, honest decent men and women of both parties need to say enough is enough. It is time to do what is right and that starts by listening to everyone, hearing everyone (because I have learned that there is a difference between listening and hearing) and working to make sure everyone is represented.
Other then that, Delong does a good job pointing out the issues and the roadblocks.
July 30th, 2004 at 12:02 AM
I don’t think he’s breaking anything down by party at all. He’s not really talking about Republicans at all, either.
My interpretation is that he’s talking about what the future holds for a Kerry administration and a Democratic Congress (assuming one or both happen). The unity that has defined Kerry supporters will face some challenges as some problems do go against large constituencies.
I don’t know what your perspective is (you’re voting for Bush, right?), but the support behind Kerry is strong and surprisingly united. There is little vocal dissent on this side with supporters because so many people just want Bush gone. I’ve talked to many people in the past few months who, like me, are more involved and are more motivated behind a single candidate than they have been before, all because of the pathetic record that Bush has put together in the past 3 years.
This is the first year I’ve contributed to a political campaign. It’s the first election in which I actually identify with a party at all… party affiliation for me has mostly been nothing more than which primary I get to participate in. This year getting rid of Bush is priority number one because of the issues and because, quite frankly, he’s a terrible President and this is a terrible administration.
See, all of that is about party. The post I quoted looks beyond that… it simply focuses on the fact that once Bush is gone, a number of issues are going to need further debate and work… A Democratic win in November won’t necessarily mean everyone is thrilled with all issues.
July 30th, 2004 at 9:33 AM
First, I haven’t made up my mind for November. I will wait to see the debates and go from there.
In respect to your statement:
“I don’t think he’s breaking anything down by party at all. He’s not really talking about Republicans at all, either.”
DeLong states:
“Now let me hasten to say that even on these issues where the Democratic Party will have a very hard time making progress, the Republicans are worse. The current Republican Party is a sick joke: its idea of class-action reform is to eliminate corporate liability rather than to provide social insurance; its idea of health-care reform is to fatten the profits of pharmaceutical companies; its idea of educational reform is to pay our teachers less and demand more of them; and its idea of foreign policy is for us to stick our national head as far down the toilet as possible and flush repeatedly.”
He doesn’t say Bush sucks or the Bush administration, he says the “current Republican party is a sick joke.” and I think it does a disservice to the many good republicans at the local, state, and federal level who have proven their determination to do the right thing on behalf of their constituents.
I would say the same to a post that said the Democratic party is a sick joke because that would be a disservice to the many good democrats at the local, state, and federal level who have proven their determination to do the right thing on behalf of their constituents.
If you want to say you hate particular Republicans because of their record, free speech and debate is what makes democracy work. Will we always agree? No. But that is the one guarantee we have that other countries don’t; you don’t have too.
My point was that Delong makes many relative points about the policies that will shape the next 10 to 15 years and affect the next century.
He discusses the difficulties “the democrats” will face with issues when I read it to mean a democratic administration/kerry administration will have. But the last quote nailed home a blanket statement and I believe, once again, it is disingenious to make blanket statements about one party or the other.
It is counterproductive because inherently I believe there are many good people on both sides of the poltical aisle who approach their duties in a responsible manner.
That was my one point. One can read it to mean Bush v Kerry, but it doesn’t say that. The underlying theme is a simple “us v them” statememnt and it detracts a little from his original point which are the issues that will shape the next century… and his argument would have been stronger had it been straight forward about the administrations involved in the 2004 election. That’s all.
As far as overall unity for either candidate, I wouldn’t go as far as to say either of these two gentleman have the election won. Support in the Northeast for John Kerry is extremely strong and that shouldn’t surprise anyone. But remember when between the Appalachians and the Rockies, it is a different world. Liberal/Conservative, Left/Right, Wrong/Right are defined by a different set of criteria. The South is another interesting demographic to study in electoral politics as is the West coast. So declaring a winner right now is a hard thing to predict.
One other thing to point out is (and it will be interesting to see how polls show this week) that every time John Kerry speaks for himself, his numbers seem to go down. I didn’t know this until listening to some of the commentary on Tuesday night from Scott Harshbarger (D-Massachusetts) about the feeling that Kerry has an aloof aura about him… harshbargers words, not mine. So it will be interesting to see how the post speech exit numbers from last night show up in the weekend polls.
John Kerry needed to hit a home run last night…once again, not my words, but commentary from Boston TV commentary… having missed over half of the speech because of prior committments for my own campaign, I don’t know if he did. I still need to read/hear it.
But exit polls will be interesting to study.
July 30th, 2004 at 9:37 AM
can we get spell check… I don’t know how to type, so inherently, I make many spelling errors…. sorry about the ones above
July 30th, 2004 at 11:21 AM
my browser spell checks for me… not sure if there’s a good way to put spell check in the server side.
I missed the paragraph you quoted above, or, more specifically, took it to mean Republicans at the national level. I don’t think he’s talking about local anyones and is more talking about policies put forth by the national office holders for both parties. He’s absolutely right in terms of the legislation proposed by the likes of DeLay, Frist, and Bush.
I think you’re parsing that sentence too closely… the bulk of what he writes is that there are still issues that neither party has good answers for. He thinks that a Dems will be better, though.
I happen to think he’s right, of course.
Nice blanket statement there, btw, about Kerry… “every time John Kerry speaks for himself, his numbers seems to go down.” Got anything to back that up? It seems to me that he’s been campaigning and running more positive ads than Bush, and he appears in most of his bio ads talking. He also has been speaking around the country non-stop. And he’s leading in most polls.
July 30th, 2004 at 11:28 AM
And look at that… the latest Zogby poll shows no drop for Kerry and a 3 point drop for Bush:
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews848.html
July 30th, 2004 at 11:30 AM
Remember, I stating that the blanket statement was made by a news team covering the DNC. It was a blanket statement made on NECN during coverage of the Democratic National Convention… I wish I had news items to back it up right now.
Apparently, and according to NECN, every time Kerry speaks for himself his numbers go down but when the party builders (ie: clinton, obama, edwards, etc…) speak on his behalf, his numbers go up.
They were referncing the “engagability” of the candidate and the people stumping for him. Apparently, and in their opinion, Kerry comes across as aloof and removed… while others come across as more engaging and charismatic…
Like I said, it was an interesting statement that I had not heard until this week. So I will try and find anything I can for you on this but I am looking for myself as well.
This weekend, I will pay attention to the blips and jumps in certain polls to see if there is any validity to the statement.
July 30th, 2004 at 11:40 AM
Riddle me this batman? John Kerry is on a crusade against outsourcing as he said in his speech, yet the Heinz corporation outsources more jobs then most companies in the US.
Also, he made a statement about body armor and investment in intelligence and defnse… yet his statements are inconsistent with the facts that he voted against body armor for our troops and he has voted against the military and intelligence spending every year for twenty years.
I don’t bring this up to ridicule him. If he felt the money was a waste, then vote against it. That is his job.
I only bring it up because he challenges people to judge him on his record early in his speech and then in later text, his statements are inconsistent with voting record.
And trust me… I know many a politician on both sides of the aisle does this… BUT
wasn’t Gary Hart in 1986/1987 who said “I have nothing to hide, my life is an open book.” and the press ruined his career for it?
Why would say I judge me by my record, yet, make statements contrary to the record as 30 minutes later… doesn’t that lend oneself to attack?
And these issues don’t weigh on my decision too much in November, but for many of the masses in America, they will.
July 30th, 2004 at 11:43 AM
This is too funny:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&u=/nm/20040729/pl_nm/campaign_jobs_dc_1&printer=1
Bush campaign staff making dumb statements when the microphone is hot…
July 30th, 2004 at 11:44 AM
funny in a sad sort of way
July 30th, 2004 at 11:59 AM
Doug, come on? You can’t come up with anything better than that?
Heinz-Kerry has no control over the Heinz corp. Kerry for sure has no control over Heinz corp. They outsource more jobs than “most companies?” What are most companies and how many jobs do they outsource?
Next, as for the body armor nonsense… once again you’re regurgitating Bush campaign talking points. Again, I’ll give you Spinsanity’s evaluation of these claims: http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_03_14_archive.html#107961467061936787
Go do some research before spreading lies…
July 30th, 2004 at 1:34 PM
77% at last count…
Okay….John Kerry has not spent a good portion of his career voting against defense budgets, important weapons and intelligence… okay, explain this:
“SPECIFIC” ENOUGH?
1) Sen. Kerry Voted Against B-1 Bomber. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)
2) Sen. Kerry Voted Against B-2 Stealth Bomber. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)
3) Sen. Kerry Voted Against F-14. (H. R. 5803, CQ Vote #319: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90, Kerry Voted Nay)
4) Sen. Kerry Voted Against F-15. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)
5) Sen. Kerry Voted Against F-16. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)
6) Sen. Kerry Voted Against AV-8B Harrier Vertical Takeoff And Landing Jet Fighters. (H.R. 2126, CQ Vote #579: Adopted 59-39: R 48-5; D 11-34, 11/16/95, Kerry Voted Nay)
9) Sen. Kerry Voted Against Patriot Missiles. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)
10) Sen. Kerry Voted Against Aegis Air Defense Cruiser. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)
11) Sen. Kerry Voted Against Trident Missile System For U.S. Submarines. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)
12) Sen. Kerry Voted Against M-1 Abrams Tanks. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)
13) Sen. Kerry Voted Against Bradley Fighting Vehicle. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)
15) Sen. Kerry Voted Against Tomahawk Cruise Missile. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)
So you go back to spinsanity and find a relative explanation for each of these votes… I’m sure they have one…
NOW, if you want to be about getting rid of Bush as your sole purpose in life (as quoted below), great. More power to you! That is your choice… But don’t paint the guy as the poster boy that you and I both know he isn’t.
“I don’t know what your perspective is (you’re voting for Bush, right?), but the support behind Kerry is strong and surprisingly united. There is little vocal dissent on this side with supporters because so many people just want Bush gone. I’ve talked to many people in the past few months who, like me, are more involved and are more motivated behind a single candidate than they have been before, all because of the pathetic record that Bush has put together in the past 3 years.
This is the first year I’ve contributed to a political campaign. It’s the first election in which I actually identify with a party at all… party affiliation for me has mostly been nothing more than which primary I get to participate in. This year getting rid of Bush is priority number one because of the issues and because, quite frankly, he’s a terrible President and this is a terrible administration.”
and don’t assume you know who I am voting for… If you know? please tell me because even I haven’t decided. You see, like most educated Americans, I spend the better part of the campaign season letting all candidates make their case and in the end, I weigh the pros and cons.
July 30th, 2004 at 1:38 PM
erased my cookies and it erased my name… more interesting articles for you to digest:
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/02/12/john_kerrys_shifting_stands/
http://slate.msn.com/id/2096127/
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/state/8181098.htm?1c
Just in case../.
The President doesn’t get a free pass either. His record is in play as well. And his record will be held to the intense scrutiny after all… as well as Nader’s.
Happy Reading
July 30th, 2004 at 1:41 PM
Nice Doug, I guess I’m an uneducated American then… bite me. And where did you cut and paste that fancy list you have up there? I’m sure you made it all up yourself.
July 30th, 2004 at 1:47 PM
Wow.. you actually posted a Republican Press Release! http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=3941
And it’s funny… your Slate article actually defends Kerry’s record and again, points out the true points from the spin.
You say I’m putting Kerry up there as a poster boy… I’m obviously no. The DeLong story I linked to was an attempt to broaden the discussion into areas that I think Kerry and I disagree. But, no, you have to see it as a partisan post about partisan issues… well, that’s fine.
July 30th, 2004 at 2:19 PM
No… I don’t think you are uneducated.
You can get the list anywhere, United States Congress… many media outlets, I took the list out of the slate piece…
And yes, The reason I posted the slate piece that defends Kerry is that there are two sides to the argument….so why put up one side. I would be guilty of not allowing people to formulate an opinion for themselves.
A point I have made all along…
July 30th, 2004 at 2:21 PM
RE: the list of systems Kerry voted against:
1) Generally bills cover a lot of items. There is almost never a bill that is a straight up or down vote on one item, once you add in riders, amendments, etc. So citing the votes without citing the actual text of the bill is very close to useless. (Notice how 10 of those “votes” all have the same vote number…)
2) Even a quick Google search comes up with articles explaining more of the nuances to the votes you’re describing. Try this one or this one or this one. Or maybe even read the Kerry website response.
3) Frankly, he should have voted against some of those systems. For example, the AV-8B Harrier, which appears to pose more of a danger to our troops than the enemy, or the B-2s the Pentagon didn’t even want. Blind spending on defense programs just because they’re defense programs is just silly and wasteful.
4) Even Cheney voted against some of these systems.
July 30th, 2004 at 2:34 PM
Damn it! It rejected my post.
RE: the list of defense programs Kerry voted “against.”
1) Most bills contain lots of provisions, riders, amendments, etc. So citing them as a vote for or against a specific system is just disingenuous, without giving us the text of the bill. (Notice how ten of those votes are actually all vote 273…)
2) Even a quick Google search shows that some of this criticism is just off the mark. Try this one or this one or this one or this one. Or even the response on the John Kerry website.
3) Kerry should have voted against some of those systems. Like the AV-8B Harrier, which seems more dangerous to our troops than the enemy, or the B2 bomber that the Pentagon didn’t even want.
4) Even Cheney voted against some of these systems.
July 30th, 2004 at 2:36 PM
You took it out of the Slate piece? You mean, you missed the big fucking “GOP.com — Republican National Committee” header at the top of the page?
Doug, you can have a different opinion, but argue with some factual basis… don’t spread things you know are untrue. If you were actually concerned about “allowing people to formulate an opinion” you would present facts rather than spin. For example, you could’ve linked to his actual voting record, or found out certain bills that were more important to you that he opposed. Instead, you chose to quote an obviously biased source that has misled people for their own gain.
As for you Spinsanity smear, they’re actually pretty fair. They are non-partisan (it’s part of their mission) and do take Kerry and Edwards to task quite frequently. Their columns appear in the Philadelphia Inquirer. You might want to read it rather than just bashing it.
July 30th, 2004 at 2:37 PM
URL for unliked “this one” above is here.