Dean slipping

It looks like Howard Dean has started his slide off the political stage with a third place finish in Iowa. Some people credit this to some of his misstatements or flip-flopping on issues, but I tend to think it’s coming down to what some Republicans had realized some time ago that he doesn’t appear likely to beat Bush. Kerry on the other hand, strikes me as someone who appears more presidential (I don’t know a better way to put it), and could give the Republicans more of a run for their money. It will be interesting to see how Clark impacts the race in New Hampshire since he didn’t campaign in Iowa. It will also be interesting to see who Coon Dog votes for.

9 thoughts on “Dean slipping

  1. Personally, I’ve been very disappointed with this Election. Where are the McCains, the Phil Grahms, and the Gores? Where’s all the excitement? I’d even like to see an Alan Keyes or two (and by that I mean ‘brothers’). I honestly had forgotten that the Primaries are just around the corner. In my opinion as a registered Republican (who’s actually a Libertarian), there are just no good competitors out there. I am not a big fan of Bush at all (my biggest complaint is that he’s a moron. The President should be someone who is smarter than me, which is one of the things I liked about Clinton). I agree with T that Kerry is someone who appears more like a President (more so than any of the other Democrats), but I don’t think anybody can beat Bush at this point, and that’s really a shame. I suppose my only option is to throw my vote away and vote for Gary Nolan.

  2. I’d also like to comment on a statement Coondog made about Clark:
    He’s real military, serving in Vietnam and as the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, I believe. In fact, that is his only major qualification for the presidency.
    I disgree. I don’t believe he is “real” military. Although he did serve in Vietnam and as the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, it’s been explained to me by a retired Air Force colonel that he was nothing more than a figurehead. He tends to take credit for negotiating the peace in the Balkans when he really had a rather minor part in it. He was the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe for a while but left no real impression there. On the other hand, Madonna supports him.

  3. What about Edwards? He has 1. the “in-crowd” experience of a US Congressman like Kerry, 2. the boyish good looks of Clinton (when Clinton was running in 1992 that is – Paula Jones and Ken Starr [and probably Hillary, for good reason] beat the boyish good looks out of him) 3. he doesn’t have the sharp edges of Dean’s personality (which actually is what I like about Dean), 4. He’s a Southerner, which according to popular belief is what the Dems need to win the Presidency and 5. he did well in Iowa.

    Throw Hillary in as VP, and I’m good to go.

    According to web polls and my limited knowledge, I’m all about Kucinich (insofar as I’m “all about” this election at all).

  4. I HATE Edwards…I recently saw him talk at the Bedford Village Inn and I can tell you he makes Bush look like a genius. Plus, he sounded like Forrest Gump.

  5. I don’t have many thoughts on Edwards, except as you’ve both pointed out: 1) He looks boyish, and 2) He has a stupid accent. Seems like a nice enough guy, though. I also like that according to his website he doesn’t appear in favor of socialized medicine (although I’m sure he’ll still spend billions).

    The most frightening candidate is Kucinich, who I beleive is pretty close to a full blown socialist who probably wouldn’t mind too much if we, say, set a cap on how much an individual could earn or enacted laws to fix wages. I’d rather have Sharpton as president.

  6. As to Schulte’s comment, my comment was meant solely to compare him to Bush who was in the Texas air national guard. In recent days, Clark has been talking some trash about Kerry, in that Kerry only lead low-level military troops (or something to that effect). Both were wounded in Vietnam. If it comes down to a Clark v. Bush or Kerry v. Bush, either would hold a large “military” advantage over Bush, though I’m not sure how much this matters to the electorate (Clinton beat both Bush Sr. and Dole, both of whom were highly decorated WWII veterans)

Comments are closed.