markyj987 Posted November 4, 2004 Report Share Posted November 4, 2004 I know you're a huge Edwards fan. I'm just curious about how you reacted to John Edwards' defiant tone in his remarks yesterday compared to John Kerry's tone. Certainly, Edwards will return to Congress and maybe run for president again, but did you find his tone tasteful or not? The message to carry on the fight is understandable, but he reminded me of the angry Al Gore we've seen so much over the last few years. Maybe I'm way off, but since you were an Edwards guy, I wonder what you think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted November 4, 2004 Report Share Posted November 4, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter [ QUOTE ] The message to carry on the fight is understandable, but he reminded me of the angry Al Gore we've seen so much over the last few years. [/ QUOTE ] I got to chime in here. What a huge contrast, have to agree with you Mark. I think Edwards in his speech is setting himself up for future runs and his tone set the stage for further seperation. Betting he has intentions of running in 2008. I had liked kind of Edwards more so than Kerry prior to that speech, not really so sure about him now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slugshooter Posted November 4, 2004 Report Share Posted November 4, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter I think it was set up that way. Edwards was always seen as the spark in the campaign, I mean, remember before he chose Edwards people complained that Kerry was kind of boring. I think both are excellent speakers but I think it was set up for Kerry to go out more gracefully, maybe Edwards was PO'd that Bush won his home county of Moore(people don't know loyalty around here) I am not sure what Edwards is gonna do for now, I mean, he basically had to give up his Senate seat to run for President, Richard Burr defeated Erskine Bowles, so either he is gonna wait for Doles seat to open or maybe wait 4 years and run for Governor. Kerry has 4 years left in the Senate. When I was watching the concession speech yesterday, before Kerry had entered the hall, the commentator was saying how difficult it was to run for President as a member of the Senate, the last sitting Senator to run for President and win was Kennedy. Honestly, I think Kerry might try to run again in 2008, I would rather have him then Hillary and really, I was discussing this yesterday with a fellow Kerry supporter, but out of all the candidates last year, Kerry was the only one who could have mounted a serious challenge. I have already started looking 4 years from now, and unless Kerry rund again, I have no other ideas for the Democrats, I'm not even sure of who the Republicans would run, John McCain possibly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossman Posted November 4, 2004 Report Share Posted November 4, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter [ QUOTE ] I think it was set up that way. Edwards was always seen as the spark in the campaign, I mean, remember before he chose Edwards people complained that Kerry was kind of boring. I think both are excellent speakers but I think it was set up for Kerry to go out more gracefully, maybe Edwards was PO'd that Bush won his home county of Moore(people don't know loyalty around here) [/ QUOTE ] Spark, all he is is a trial lawyer who couldn't deliver Kerry any electoral votes. The Dummycrats failed in electing Kerry to run for pres. They say he supports the troops but he testified against them in congress, they say he is strong in his stances, but he is a flip flop, and they say he is pro gun but supports legislation against gun rights. Most of the votes Kerry recieved were because they did not want bush, not because of Kerry's platform. Kerry and Edwards are losers and this just proves it!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slugshooter Posted November 4, 2004 Report Share Posted November 4, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter [ QUOTE ] The Dummycrats failed in electing Kerry to run for pres. Kerry and Edwards are losers and this just proves it!!!!! [/ QUOTE ] How old are you. I probably don't want to know cause I will probably be disappointed if these statements came from an adult. Another reason Edwards's speech might have been a little rough is he and his wife found out before the concession speech that his wife has breast cancer and after the speech they and the Kerry family went to the hospital. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Schmeck Posted November 5, 2004 Report Share Posted November 5, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The Dummycrats failed in electing Kerry to run for pres. Kerry and Edwards are losers and this just proves it!!!!! [/ QUOTE ] How old are you. I probably don't want to know cause I will probably be disappointed if these statements came from an adult. Another reason Edwards's speech might have been a little rough is he and his wife found out before the concession speech that his wife has breast cancer and after the speech they and the Kerry family went to the hospital. [/ QUOTE ] At that point, should he not have been more interested in his wifes recovery from that vile disease than to have a protracted legal battle over the election results. If not, he certainly needs to get his priorities in order! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slugshooter Posted November 5, 2004 Report Share Posted November 5, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter Just because he said that they are going to fight for every vote to be counted doesn't mean there is going to be a protracted legal battle, if there were, they would have said so. What Edwards was saying is that they are going to make sure every vote is counted because every American's vote should be counted. How would you feel if your ballot was sitting in a box somewhere cause they didn't feel like counting it, or because there was a glitch in some system somewhere, whenever I vote and put my card in the machine, I wonder if it is actually being counted, I would hate to find out it wasn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dg Posted November 5, 2004 Report Share Posted November 5, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter Edwards comments are fitting for an ambulance chaser! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Schmeck Posted November 5, 2004 Report Share Posted November 5, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter [ QUOTE ] Just because he said that they are going to fight for every vote to be counted doesn't mean there is going to be a protracted legal battle, if there were, they would have said so. What Edwards was saying is that they are going to make sure every vote is counted because every American's vote should be counted. How would you feel if your ballot was sitting in a box somewhere cause they didn't feel like counting it, or because there was a glitch in some system somewhere, whenever I vote and put my card in the machine, I wonder if it is actually being counted, I would hate to find out it wasn't. [/ QUOTE ] I suppose it's a matter of one's priorities! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slugshooter Posted November 5, 2004 Report Share Posted November 5, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I think both are excellent speakers but I think it was set up for Kerry to go out more gracefully, maybe Edwards was PO'd that Bush won his home county of Moore(people don't know loyalty around here) [/ QUOTE ] It's my experience when your home area won't vote for you, that doesn't speak well for you. His home area and state are the people who know him the best. And they wanted someone else in office. I hope Edwards does run for president in 2008, because I don't think he can win. But I don't think he could even win the primarys. [/ QUOTE ] Oddly enough, this state will vote for a Republican President, but if you are a democrat and want to be governor, you're basically guaranteed to win. He won his Senate seat but now a Republican has the seat his is vacating, Erskine Bowles lost, which I found surprising. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParrotHead Posted November 5, 2004 Report Share Posted November 5, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter [ QUOTE ] Oddly enough, this state will vote for a Republican President, but if you are a democrat and want to be governor, you're basically guaranteed to win. He won his Senate seat but now a Republican has the seat his is vacating, Erskine Bowles lost, which I found surprising. [/ QUOTE ] I think that the democratic party has swung so far to the left on social issues that it's created a backlash with people firmly rooted in basic principals which include Religion, family, moral values and yes, hunting and gun-ownership. As for the future - status will remain the same. One day after John Kerry gives a tear-jerker speech and preaches that there must be unity between the parties and it's the responsibility of the Republicans to reach accross the aisle, we have the democrats (those that are left) spewing that they still have enough in the House and Senate to block or at least delay anything Bush tries to accomplish. So much for the idea of a non-partisian government - the democrats have spoken! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParrotHead Posted November 5, 2004 Report Share Posted November 5, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter [ QUOTE ] John Ashcroft lost in Missouri to Mel Carnahan. And Carnahan was dead. [/ QUOTE ] Symathetic votes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slugshooter Posted November 7, 2004 Report Share Posted November 7, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter Voting for a dead guy for Senator is like voting for a movie star for governor. The only reason Arnold won was because of who he is, I may be a democrat and a movie buff, but Arnold never would have gotten my vote, just like Mel Carnahan wouldn't have gotten my vote, heck, I'm pretty sure John Ashcroft wouldn't have either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carbonhunter Posted November 7, 2004 Report Share Posted November 7, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter [ QUOTE ] great comeback doug [/ QUOTE ] hows this than....he prob. wont be the att gen. for the second term. seems like it speaks pretty well for @@@croft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slugshooter Posted November 8, 2004 Report Share Posted November 8, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] great comeback doug [/ QUOTE ] hows this than....he prob. wont be the att gen. for the second term. seems like it speaks pretty well for @@@croft [/ QUOTE ] Don't be so giddy Aaron, the next guy will probably be worse the Ashcroft, if that's possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markyj987 Posted November 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2004 Re: ? for slugshooter I hope Ashcroft stays for one reason.... I take great delight when the media looks into their crystal ball about everything political--and are wrong. LOL Bush will not ask Ashcroft to leave. If he does, it will be of his own accord. Despite his bad press, Ashcroft has been a much better AG than Janet Reno ever could have been. Like all members of the cabinet, he serves at the pleasure of the president. Bush did a fantastic job with his cabinet selections in his first term in my opinion--and I'm sure he'll do the same this term. The one departure I'm certain of is HHS Sec. Tommy Thompson. He's only leaving because he hates Washington and wants to come back to Wisconsin and enter the private sector. That said, if Bush does ask him to stay, I think he will. It'd be good to have good ol' Tommy back in Wisconsin though. Even though he wouldn't run again (I don't think), we could certainly use his leadership in Madison--or maybe he could run against Herb Kohl for the U.S. Senate...that'd be a great thing for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.