The Kerry Effect

[The Rabbi]

Wow. You come from a "military family and have lots of military friends"? That almost means something.

BTW, you realize Oliver Stone volunteered to go to Viet Nam and served as an Infantryman there? Perhaps it's further ironic that Stone served in the 25th ID, the same unit portrayed in Platoon. Perhaps Stone knows something you don't having actually been there.

Say what you want about Stone. The man is not a coward.

You lectured me and yet you didn't contradict my post, dumb ass

I didn't see any point of contradicting your opinion based on having 1.) Watched Platoon 2.) "come from a military family" and 3.) "have several friends that were military"

Contrasted with Oliver Stone's first hand account of Viet Nam, the dumbassery seemed self evident. Though I don't believe Stone ever meant Platoon to be anything other than semi-autobiographical. I think the village scene was borrowed from My Lai.

BTW, a "Platoon" is an Infantry unit. Kerry was in the Navy. You are welcome.

Oliver Stone is one of the biggest liars in Hollywood next to Michael Moore. Why would you believe anything he produces is factual??

 

[elvis]

You lectured me and yet you didn't contradict my post, dumb ass

I didn't see any point of contradicting your opinion based on having 1.) Watched Platoon 2.) "come from a military family" and 3.) "have several friends that were military"

Contrasted with Oliver Stone's first hand account of Viet Nam, the dumbassery seemed self evident. Though I don't believe Stone ever meant Platoon to be anything other than semi-autobiographical. I think the village scene was borrowed from My Lai.

BTW, a "Platoon" is an Infantry unit. Kerry was in the Navy. You are welcome.

Oliver Stone is one of the biggest liars in Hollywood next to Michael Moore. Why would you believe anything he produces is factual??

Stone's films have a lot of truths in them and a lot of lies in them.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Aw crap..really? So the government lied when it handed Kerry a mess of medals...eh?

Boy you can tell the ones who never served in the military when they make comments like this...

Kerry got medals because the officers know how to game the system. An EM never would have gotten purple hearts for injuries that minor.

But that wasn't the issue the Swift Vets had with Kerry. The issue they had with him was he slandered them after the war.

He didn't slander shit.

Vietnam was a war crime and a slaughter house.

Yeah, and it was the dimwits who got us into it and made up all those stupid play nice rules. Thanks LBJ.

 

[Dot Com]

Quite often, after President Bush won his reelection, I've asked the people who voted for him the second time around, "why did you vote to reelect him?", and their answer always came back..."Because the Democrats put up Kerry as their candidate".....


Is Obama going to win his reelection in 2012 due to the "Kerry Effect"?

Due to there not being a strong, energetic, and charismatic Republican candidate that can pull Democrats over to vote for him?

Add to that the fact that they all basically have the same worn-out Randian policies of cutting taxes and gutting regulations

 

[JoeB131]

He didn't slander shit.

Vietnam was a war crime and a slaughter house.

You hysterical lefties just love to squeal "war crime" over everything of which you don't approve. And, have you never heard kerry's comments after he returned?

So you support massacres of entire villages and gang rapes of little girls? That if they are not Americans..correct?

Yes or no.

You libs agonize over Mai Lai, where the people responsible were put on trial, but we rarely talk about the Hue Massacre during the Tet offensive or the Killing Fields of Cambodia. In fact, the left stopped caring about what happened over there five minutes after they realized they couldn't be drafted for it.

To the point of Kerry, he didn't run as the "Guy weeping about Mai Lai". He ran as "Mr. Big War Hero". He tried his best to hide his anti-war past because he was the war hero who was going to win this one.

 

[JoeB131]

I dread when I hear the word "Gravitas". It's one of those liberal code words I have no use for.

Well, I'm not a liberal, and its not a code word. Whether or not you have no use for it, I fail to see the relevance. The lack of gravitas destroyed whatever chance Dan Quayle had of becoming President.

Are you posting from an alternate universe where anyone even thought Dan Quayle was presidential material. Ironically, Quayle was a much smarter guy than people gave him credit for, but the Media painted him with this image, and he let them do it.

So the message should be, don't let the media define you. Hopefully, Perry will take this to heart.

First, I never said success as a business person would translate into success as a President. In fact, it can be a hinderance. But it is a positive for someone running for the Republican nomination, especially right now when the country is struggling economically. The country is looking at those who have economic experience. Romney oozes that in spades. Perry, after all, isn't at the top of the polls because he's a Tea Party evangelical (though it certainly helps). He's at the top of the polls because Texas led in job creation.

And I don't think the attack line on Romney destroying jobs is going to work. It can, but I don't think the Democrats are skillful and clever enough. Bain Capital made its name as a growth capital firm, i.e. it successfully funded growing businesses that hired a lot of people. I don't have any hard numbers, but I would be willing to bet a fair amount of money that while Romney was there, the firm's portfolio companies hired multiples more people than they fired. THAT is the narrative I expect Romney to pursue. Successful businessman who knows how to create jobs. That is very appealing to a country experiencing 9% employment. Assuming, of course, he can get through the primaries.

Bush I was a good businessman. Bush II was not. Carter was a good farmer.

Carter ran a very formidable agri-business, not just a farm. And Bush made money on a few of his ventures. I'd certainly have rather had stock in the Houston Astros than AmPad.

Romney can try to claim he hired people, but all they have to do is what Ted Kennedy did, bring out some weepy AmPad workers to say how Romney stole their way of life.

 

[JoeB131]

Aw crap..really? So the government lied when it handed Kerry a mess of medals...eh?

Boy you can tell the ones who never served in the military when they make comments like this...

Kerry got medals because the officers know how to game the system. An EM never would have gotten purple hearts for injuries that minor.

But that wasn't the issue the Swift Vets had with Kerry. The issue they had with him was he slandered them after the war.

]

He didn't slander shit.

Vietnam was a war crime and a slaughter house.

And Kerry didn't run on how he put an end to it. He ran on how he proudly served. Didn't want to talk about his anti-War activities, and Jane Fonda was stuck in a closet like a crazy aunt.

Sorry, a lot of guys went over there and did their best. You can talk about the wisdom of the war all day, but that wasn't the fault of the men who went over there and did the job we asked them to do.

These guys never forgave Kerry, and they took him out the minute they had the chance. Boo-hoo-hoo...

 

[Missourian]

Boy you can tell the ones who never served in the military when they make comments like this...

Kerry got medals because the officers know how to game the system. An EM never would have gotten purple hearts for injuries that minor.

But that wasn't the issue the Swift Vets had with Kerry. The issue they had with him was he slandered them after the war.

]

He didn't slander shit.

Vietnam was a war crime and a slaughter house.

And Kerry didn't run on how he put an end to it. He ran on how he proudly served. Didn't want to talk about his anti-War activities, and Jane Fonda was stuck in a closet like a crazy aunt.

Sorry, a lot of guys went over there and did their best. You can talk about the wisdom of the war all day, but that wasn't the fault of the men who went over there and did the job we asked them to do.

These guys never forgave Kerry, and they took him out the minute they had the chance. Boo-hoo-hoo...

*You must spread some reputation around...

 

[Trajan]

He didn't slander shit.

Vietnam was a war crime and a slaughter house.

You hysterical lefties just love to squeal "war crime" over everything of which you don't approve. And, have you never heard kerry's comments after he returned?

So you support massacres of entire villages and gang rapes of little girls? That if they are not Americans..correct?

Yes or no.

should I read the rest of this thread?

 

[Toro]

I dread when I hear the word "Gravitas". It's one of those liberal code words I have no use for.

Well, I'm not a liberal, and its not a code word. Whether or not you have no use for it, I fail to see the relevance. The lack of gravitas destroyed whatever chance Dan Quayle had of becoming President.

Are you posting from an alternate universe where anyone even thought Dan Quayle was presidential material. Ironically, Quayle was a much smarter guy than people gave him credit for, but the Media painted him with this image, and he let them do it.

So the message should be, don't let the media define you. Hopefully, Perry will take this to heart.

First, I never said success as a business person would translate into success as a President. In fact, it can be a hinderance. But it is a positive for someone running for the Republican nomination, especially right now when the country is struggling economically. The country is looking at those who have economic experience. Romney oozes that in spades. Perry, after all, isn't at the top of the polls because he's a Tea Party evangelical (though it certainly helps). He's at the top of the polls because Texas led in job creation.

And I don't think the attack line on Romney destroying jobs is going to work. It can, but I don't think the Democrats are skillful and clever enough. Bain Capital made its name as a growth capital firm, i.e. it successfully funded growing businesses that hired a lot of people. I don't have any hard numbers, but I would be willing to bet a fair amount of money that while Romney was there, the firm's portfolio companies hired multiples more people than they fired. THAT is the narrative I expect Romney to pursue. Successful businessman who knows how to create jobs. That is very appealing to a country experiencing 9% employment. Assuming, of course, he can get through the primaries.

Bush I was a good businessman. Bush II was not. Carter was a good farmer.

Carter ran a very formidable agri-business, not just a farm. And Bush made money on a few of his ventures. I'd certainly have rather had stock in the Houston Astros than AmPad.

Romney can try to claim he hired people, but all they have to do is what Ted Kennedy did, bring out some weepy AmPad workers to say how Romney stole their way of life.

Maybe, but they haven't so far. You can roll out all sorts of explanations why Perry should not get much credit for all the jobs created in Texas as well. Doesn't mean it will stick. The Democrats don't exactly terrorize anyone with their ruthless Presidential political tactics.

Bush was a partner of the Texas Rangers. He was brought in as a small partner because of his name to effectuate a deal to build a taxpayer funded stadium for the Rangers (if I recall correctly), which isn't going to land one in the annals of deft business acumen.

It still pales to what Romney has done. Bain Capital is one of the most successful investment firms in the country.

 

[Trajan]

quite possible, although it's more the independents than democrats that the republican must bring over.

And thats why you cant get a true read on the candidates until the primaries are over. Both party's have to pander to there base.

Usually that works. But since the GOP has gone so far to the right, it's going to be hard to get over pandering to the base of the GOP and then making it to the middle.

really? how so?

I don't think Obama is in a good position, but I don't think he's being dumb either by trying to portray himself as the calm voice of reason in the fray that is Washington right now.

frankly, I don't think many from either side of the aisle see him as having much of a 'voice' at all, he can say hes the adult in the room, but he cannot seem to translate that into effective force or influence to make anything of it, in short; the food fights go on and the cafeteria monitor cannot do a thing to stop, change or defuse it.

 

[Trajan]

I didn't see any point of contradicting your opinion based on having 1.) Watched Platoon 2.) "come from a military family" and 3.) "have several friends that were military"

Contrasted with Oliver Stone's first hand account of Viet Nam, the dumbassery seemed self evident. Though I don't believe Stone ever meant Platoon to be anything other than semi-autobiographical. I think the village scene was borrowed from My Lai.

BTW, a "Platoon" is an Infantry unit. Kerry was in the Navy. You are welcome.

Oliver Stone is one of the biggest liars in Hollywood next to Michael Moore. Why would you believe anything he produces is factual??

Stone's films have a lot of truths in them and a lot of lies in them.

yes and its shame because he makes a great movie, gotta say, I can watch JFK anytime, its taut , great cast , very well acted, the editing is spot on, great cinematography etc...but, lets say it plays fast and loose with what we have to come to observe as the truth.

Platoon was remarkable as well, he had the cast out in the bush for 2 weeks before he shot one frame of film so they would acquire a certain saltiness, they had the field aspects down pat to I think, the plastic bag around the handset made me chuckle at the memory, it to was well shot and had a story to tell aside from the massacre scene , which surprised me and was very unfortunate becasue thats all people remember it appears.

 

[JoeB131]

Carter ran a very formidable agri-business, not just a farm. And Bush made money on a few of his ventures. I'd certainly have rather had stock in the Houston Astros than AmPad.

Romney can try to claim he hired people, but all they have to do is what Ted Kennedy did, bring out some weepy AmPad workers to say how Romney stole their way of life.

Maybe, but they haven't so far. You can roll out all sorts of explanations why Perry should not get much credit for all the jobs created in Texas as well. Doesn't mean it will stick. The Democrats don't exactly terrorize anyone with their ruthless Presidential political tactics.

Bush was a partner of the Texas Rangers. He was brought in as a small partner because of his name to effectuate a deal to build a taxpayer funded stadium for the Rangers (if I recall correctly), which isn't going to land one in the annals of deft business acumen.

It still pales to what Romney has done. Bain Capital is one of the most successful investment firms in the country.

Again, they aren't going to attack Romney now. They aren't afraid of Romney. Romney is Alf Landon. Obama is hoping that's the guy they run against. So they aren't going to attack him NOW. they will attack Perry now, because Perry scares them.

Look at BDBoop, SeaWytch and Shallow's posts. They ain't attacking Romney right now. They are going after Perry.

Yeah, I will agree, Bush loaning his name to a successful baseball franchise is nothing compared to all the people the Android from Kolob has screwed over to buy another mansion.

 

[JoeB131]

I didn't see any point of contradicting your opinion based on having 1.) Watched Platoon 2.) "come from a military family" and 3.) "have several friends that were military"

Contrasted with Oliver Stone's first hand account of Viet Nam, the dumbassery seemed self evident. Though I don't believe Stone ever meant Platoon to be anything other than semi-autobiographical. I think the village scene was borrowed from My Lai.

BTW, a "Platoon" is an Infantry unit. Kerry was in the Navy. You are welcome.

Oliver Stone is one of the biggest liars in Hollywood next to Michael Moore. Why would you believe anything he produces is factual??

Stone's films have a lot of truths in them and a lot of lies in them.

The problem with Stone is that he has an agenda. He is also truly an awful filmmaker.

Platoon was good only because he was still early in his career and didn't have the creative control he has now. I think parts of the film are good in that he kind of takes you to that place, what it was like to be there. (I served in an infantry unit, never in combat, but some of the stuff felt quite authentic.)

Other movies he made, where he got more control, were awful films. He's just in his own little world, really.

If you are going to argue that terrible things happened in Vietnam, yeah. they did. Terrible things happened in WWII, the supposed "Good War". My dad told me stories about how his unit ambushed French bandits after Normandy who were raiding their supply trains and just shot them. It clearly disturbed him 30 years later. But it was war, that's what you did.

 

[Unkotare]

He didn't slander shit.

Vietnam was a war crime and a slaughter house.

You hysterical lefties just love to squeal "war crime" over everything of which you don't approve. And, have you never heard kerry's comments after he returned?

So you support massacres of entire villages and gang rapes of little girls? That if they are not Americans..correct?

Yes or no.

What kind of a stupid fucking straw man is that?

 

[Neotrotsky]

Quite often, after President Bush won his reelection, I've asked the people who voted for him the second time around, "why did you vote to reelect him?", and their answer always came back..."Because the Democrats put up Kerry as their candidate".....


Is Obama going to win his reelection in 2012 due to the "Kerry Effect"?

Due to there not being a strong, energetic, and charismatic Republican candidate that can pull Democrats over to vote for him?

It may be too late for Papa Obama
The "Kerry" effect started early for him

 

[Maple]

On the other hand you could say that Obama won the election because of the McCain effect. Even the surprise appointment of conservative dynamic Sarah Palin as VP couldn't energize republicans to vote for a rino.

I am still shaking my head in dis-belief that he won the nomination. Romney won my state in the straw polls, not too many people could stand John McCain. It won't be that way this time though, we will nominate the candidate who will win by a landslide.

 

[Flopper]

The election of 1936 took place as the Great Depression entered its eighth year. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was still working to push the provisions of his New Deal economic policy through Congress and the courts. Although unemployment was falling, it was at 20+%. The country was in sorry shape. The presidency should have been an easy win for the Republicans considering the economy. A Republican victory was widely forecasts, but it didn't materialize. The problem was the Republican candidate, Al Landon. He was a poor campaigner and didn't connect with the people. The election of 1936 was the most lopsided presidential election in the history of the United States in terms of electoral votes. In terms of the popular vote, it was the third biggest victory since the election of 1820.

The outcome of a presidential election depends every bit on the challenger as much as it does the incumbent.

 

[The Rabbi]

The election of 1936 took place as the Great Depression entered its eighth year. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was still working to push the provisions of his New Deal economic policy through Congress and the courts. Although unemployment was falling, it was at 20+%. The country was in sorry shape. The presidency should have been an easy win for the Republicans considering the economy. A Republican victory was widely forecasts, but it didn't materialize. The problem was the Republican candidate, Al Landon. He was a poor campaigner and didn't connect with the people. The election of 1936 was the most lopsided presidential election in the history of the United States in terms of electoral votes. In terms of the popular vote, it was the third biggest victory since the election of 1820.

The outcome of a presidential election depends every bit on the challenger as much as it does the incumbent.

You managed to pick the one presidential election where that was the case.
Carter in 1980, Bush in 1990 tell the opposite tale. When the economy is very bad and lots of people are out of work the incumbent suffers. The opposite is also the case, as we saw in '94 and 2004.

 

[JoeB131]

The election of 1936 took place as the Great Depression entered its eighth year. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was still working to push the provisions of his New Deal economic policy through Congress and the courts. Although unemployment was falling, it was at 20+%. The country was in sorry shape. The presidency should have been an easy win for the Republicans considering the economy. A Republican victory was widely forecasts, but it didn't materialize. The problem was the Republican candidate, Al Landon. He was a poor campaigner and didn't connect with the people. The election of 1936 was the most lopsided presidential election in the history of the United States in terms of electoral votes. In terms of the popular vote, it was the third biggest victory since the election of 1820.

The outcome of a presidential election depends every bit on the challenger as much as it does the incumbent.

There are a whole lot of the problems with the "Alf Landon's Zombie" plan, which Democrats are clinging to because it's the only one where their guy wins at this point.

First and foremost, the GOP had been devastated in the previous election cycles. They had lost 52 House seats in 1930, 101 in 1932 and 14 in 1934. In six short years, they went from 270 seats down to 103. (They would lose an additional 15 in 1936).

In the Senate, the GOP lost 8 seats in 1930, 12 in 1932 and 10 in 1934. (they would go on to lose another 7 seats in 1936)

They also lost most of the governorships they enjoyed up to that point, mayoral seats, state legislature. Alf had the bad luck of being the one guy they missed. The Republican Party wouldn't really become viable again until the 1950's.

Suffice it to say, although the GOP lost ground in 2006 and 2008, they more than made it up in 2010.

The second thing is, Americans don't have the kind of patience today they had in the days of slooooow living of the 1930s. We live fast today, and we want instant gratification, which is probably what got us into this mess.

Third point. It wasn't that Alf Landon lost so much as FDR won. Hell, I'm a Republican and even I admit that FDR was one of the greatest presidents of our history (I'd rank him just below Lincoln.) For better or worse, he lead our nation through two of the worst crisis. Obama isn't fit to carry his breifcase.

Fourth Point- Unemployment had actually improved under FDR. It was at 23.6% in 1932, but FDR got it down to 16.9%. Obama the UR was 6.6% the day he was elected and it is 9.1% now.

So the notion that the GOP candidate is going to be the new Alf Landon is specious. Alf's Zombie might have a good chance at beating Obama at this point.