Politics of hate won't beat Bush

Discussion in 'Politics' started by MtnBiker, Dec 4, 2003.

  1. MtnBiker
    Offline

    MtnBiker Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,327
    Thanks Received:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Ratings:
    +230
    Susan Estrich
    Politics of hate won't beat Bush


    December 4, 2003


    Anyone up for a "Hate Bush" meeting in Hollywood? Doesn't it sound like just the sort of thing conservatives would invent to make liberals look stupid and open the conservative spigots?

    But this was no right-wing conspiracy. Matt Drudge may be the one selling the idea that Hollywood held a "Hate Bush" meeting, but he didn't come up with the title. This is a self-inflicted wound by another silly Hollywood liberal giving honest politics a bad name.

    The meeting in question was chaired by two longtime Democratic operatives, Harold Ickes and Ellen Malcolm, who have recognized that whoever wins the Democratic nomination will be at a severe financial disadvantage as compared to the president.

    The Republicans have an institutional advantage when it comes to raising money, because they are the party of business, and because they have a larger small-donor base; they also have an advantage because they control the White House and both houses of Congress.

    So what are Democrats to do?

    Under the new campaign finance laws, neither party is allowed to raise "soft" money. But independent groups can. So longtime Democrats have created two independent groups. One, headed by Ickes, focuses on providing media cover for the nominee beginning this spring, when the president is expected to start spending heavily; one headed by Malcolm and former AFL-CIO political director Steve Rosenthal will focus on field organizing in target states for the general election.

    Invitations were sent to the usual Hollywood suspects, a collection of people with an interest in politics and money to give, to attend a meeting Tuesday with Ickes, Malcolm and Rosenthal. It was titled a "Meeting to Change the Leadership in America in 2004." Hardly worthy of Drudge.

    Then Laurie David sent an e-mail forwarding invites to the "Hate Bush 12-2 Event," and the right went nuts.

    Who is Laurie David? In news clips, she is identified as Larry David's wife. Who is Larry David? He's the star of "Curb Your Enthusiasm."

    Maybe his wife should curb hers. It is only helping Republicans.

    The way to defeat Bush is not to advertise how much you hate him. Hard-core ideologues who hate Bush are not going to decide this election. They'll vote for the Democrat, as they do every four years, but there aren't enough of them to elect a Democrat. You need swing voters to do that. Hatred may motivate the left to contribute money, but it is hardly an effective talking point for public consumption if you want to win elections.

    Ari Emanuel, a talent agent who represents Larry David and whose brother served in the Clinton White House and now in Congress, knew just how bad the Drudge story was for Democrats. "People are assembling over a political issue -- the 2004 election," he told the press in response to the ruckus about hating Bush. "The invite didn't say 'Hate Bush,' and I don't think (the Drudge story) was productive."

    Productive? I bet it produced a lot of money for George Bush. And worse, it helps produce votes for him.

    The people whose votes Democrats will need to defeat George Bush don't hate him. On a personal level, they like him. They need to be convinced not to vote for him, for reasons that have to do with the war, or special interests or the economy. "Hate Bush" headlines do just the opposite.

    Enemies are one thing, but with friends like Laurie David, the Democratic nominee is going to need all the help he can get.

    link

    This is what I was questioning with the "Hate Bush" meeting, or whatever they called it. It will do little to advance a democrat canidate and this author of the article was Dukakis's campaign manager in 1988. a link to her bio
     
  2. Psychoblues
    Offline

    Psychoblues Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,701
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Missisippi
    Ratings:
    +143
    The politics of hate will certainly not beat the shrub. But I think his own actions will precipitate his demise. He lied about being a "compassionate conservative". I don't even think he's a conservative at all. He lied about his "no child left behind" program. He doesn't even begin to address the real problems of adolescent education. He lied about WMD and sent our dear soldiers into his personal war. I haven't seen the WMD's and I certainly don't see any evidence of "imminent threat" that was so much talked about months ago.

    Please don't confuse my statement about the WMD thing. I fully supported and continue to support the "war on terror". I don't think the Iraqi people fall into that category. A few political nuts maybe, but not the general populace of Iraq. But that's history. We've done what we've done and we are still doing it. Again, history will tell us, I hope. If American media has it's way, we'll never know.
     
  3. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    Any particular reason why you continually change the presidents name in order to ridicule? Shall the rest of us reply to your posts in kind?

    You claim differently, but your agenda is as clear as water.
     
  4. Joan
    Offline

    Joan Mommy Dearest

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Messages:
    400
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +39
    Don't start talking about lying presidents!! Was it not noclit who emphatically stated "I did NOT have sex with that woman"???
     
  5. Psychoblues
    Offline

    Psychoblues Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,701
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Missisippi
    Ratings:
    +143
    I always joke about the names of the prez. I called Jimmy Carter "Big Tooth" Ronald Reagan "The Actor", GB1 "The Tax-Cutter" and Bill Clinton "Big Dog".

    I have no specific agenda, jimnyc, but I stated my political persuation when I came here. I'll state it again. I am a Liberal. To go a little further, I am a Democrat, a moderate/centrist Democrat. I make no apologies for that and I seek no sympathies. I voted for both Ronald Reagan and GB1. I guess you could say that I lost my presense of mind.

    I hope that doesn't muddy up the water in any way. I really do prefer that my objectives and agenda remain crystal clear.
     
  6. dijetlo
    Online

    dijetlo Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    I hate to keep hitting the same note, but it seems to be a popular one with the right. Anybody who thinks the Dems have gone above and beyond in the "Hate the Prez" department need to try to remember the last president, and what the republican led congress tried to do to him. For the first republican who hops up with "he had it coming" I think you need to remember, you failed to remove him from office, after 7 years of investigation and an impeachment proceding, he served until his last day. If you don't consider that "Hate" politics, I'd like to hear your definition. Buck up little troopers, if it seems the Dems are being petty and venal in their critisicm of Bush, they learned it from Newt and the republicans.
     
  7. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    Did Clinton lie under oath?
     
  8. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    Yes, clinton lied under oath.

    Before that event, though, Gingrich led an all out assault on the clintons with whitewater and travelgate. I don't remember anything more right off but it seemed to me that the republicans were digging just as hard as the democrats are now.
     
  9. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    Except the republicans had legal standing about a president that was residing in office. Offer anything you like from 30 years ago, but there's nothing like breaking the law while holding the highest position in the nation.
     
  10. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    what legal standing? anything BEFORE clinton lied about lewinsky.
     

Share This Page