Karl Rove Supports Dean.

http://www.sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/07/1624957.php

Karl Rove tried to stir up enthusiasm for Dean marchers yesterday at the 37th annual Palisades Citizens' Association Fourth of July parade along the District's MacArthur Boulevard, which always attracts plenty of politicians.

As a dozen people marched toward Dana Place wearing Dean for President T-shirts and carrying Dean for America signs, Rove told a companion, " 'Heh, heh, heh. Yeah, that's the one we want,' " according to Daniel J. Weiss, an environmental consultant, who was standing nearby. " 'How come no one is cheering for Dean?' "


Well, you can be sure I won't vote for dean. You can have him.

(We did this already.) Article written July, 2003. "Debated" to death 5 months ago.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

after all, you are repeating the Republican meme. He, he, that's the one we want.

"Please, whatever you do, don't throw me in the briar patch!"

Don't fall for this crap hook line and sinker. You're better and smarter than that.

Dean '04...

He is the good angel perched on Bush's shoulder.

...in the red suit :evilgrin:

Possibly Grandpa Prescott's good friend Adolf?

this is from July..... :(

perspective for me.

I was somewhat interested in dean until I saw this on a chance google a few moments ago.

Now I'm not so sure. And it turns out he supports israel? Some are saying that, I hope it's not true...

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

actually.

I do my own research.

When something like this pops up, it gets my attention real fast. "Even handed" means sit on the fence and do nothing until someone tells you to.

That's pantywaist to me; fence sitting; leaving options 'open'. Anyone who supports israel at all is nefarious and knows nothing of the issue and is pandering to the bush regime.

I want someone who makes a decision and sticks to it.

Uh, whatever. I frankly don't know how to answer that.

in defeating Dean than Rove pretends-

RE:
Election 2004: Why Dean Can Win, September 2003

A recent article by David Brooks left readers with the distinct impression that Republican pollsters are all of the opinion that Howard Dean cannot possibly beat George Bush. We regret that he didn’t check with us first, as it is our belief that Dean has the potential to be a formidable candidate who could give the President a very difficult race.

The conventional wisdom that has some Republicans giddy about a potential Dean candidacy is not only misguided, it is counterproductive. Writing off a candidate like Dean by selectively sorting statistical gobble-de-gook and mixing it into a broth of “empirical” sociological evidence ignores the political realities of our time.

Howard Dean can win because he believes in what he is saying, because he can semi-legitimately spin his record as Governor into one of fiscal conservatism, and because he comes across as if he actually cares about people. We don’t know what the issues will be 14 months from now. Perhaps the economy will be rolling and the President will be soaring. If that’s the case, no one can beat him.

But there is the potential for the economy to remain sluggish and stagnant and conditions in the Middle East are impossible to predict. Should these situations remain status quo or worsen, America will be looking for someone new, someone fresh, someone who can shake America out of the doldrums and reinvigorate the body politic. Dean would provide solutions and excitement where the other Democrats, while perhaps polished and attractive, are not as convincing because they don’t have the perceived conviction of a Howard Dean. more..............

http://www.moore-info.com/Poll_Updates/2004%20Election%20%20Why%20Dean%20can%20win%20Sept%2003.htm

I don't necessarily agree with their rationale but they see a fight coming.

I don't know what got into me. Here I was doing research on the candidates, studying their positions on issues I care about, looking at their past records so I can make an informed decision about who to support.

Silly me. I should have just waited for Mr. Rove's pronouncement. It could have saved me a lot of time.

Seriously?

Karl Rove points at Dean and says "THERE'S the one we want!". And you think it's because the BFEE is working out some shady deal with Dean?

Here's my take on it:
Rove "wants" Dean for exactly the reaction you expressed in your original post: "You can have him...". He thinks Dean's a nobody, one who he can dirty trick all the way back to Vermont and not have to break a sweat doing it.

And having disinformation like this thinly-veiled accusation of Dean being in bed with Rove out here is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

Serioulsy, Rad, I thought you were faster on the thought than that.

Why would anybody here believe anything that comes out of Rove's mouth?

Edited for typo

They actually believe Dean will win. It's a losing battle trying to convince them otherwise. It's been obvious for months who the RW wants to win. They have RW talking heads on the cable shows defending Dean for crying out loud. Rove wants him and Rove will eat him alive if he wins. IMO Just do eveything you can to support and promote YOUR candidate so THEY will win. Then we won't have to worry about losing to the shrub in 2004.

pointless to take an abstract from the obvious....

Hello rad (or do you prefer 0555?) (j/k)

As a Dean supporter, I am naturally disappointed to hear that you won't vote for Dean, but if you don't mind my asking I would like to understand your reasoning better.

Your first issue seems to be the quote from Karl Rove indicating that he (Rove) would like Dean to be nominated because he (Dean) would be easy to defeat in the general election.

I certainly feel that defeating Bush is the single most important political objective of every American outside of the Bush circle of cronies. If I believed that one of the other Democratic candidates had a significantly better chance of accomplishing that goal than Howard Dean, I assure you that I would be working for that campaign today. However, as I am sure you will agree, just because Karl Rove says something, that does not make it true. I am skeptical that Karl Rove believes that Dean is the weakest of the major candidates, and I am skeptical that he would say so in public if he DID believe it. Of course, if you believe it is true, then I would expect you to do no less than work to see that a stronger candidate is selected, and I sincerely wish you luck. If you are successful, I will be there beside you working for the nominee.

The second issue is the one that has me confused. Namely, your statement "And it turns out he supports israel? Some are saying that, I hope it's not true... ".

Here is my perception of the Governor's stance on Israel:

1. At one point in the campaign he stated that US policy in regard to Israel/Palestine needed to be "even-handed", and this was immediately jumped on as a sign that he was veering from the mainstream position of strong support for Israel. As a result, he clarified his remarks which seemed to put him right back with everyone else.

2. At one point Dean used the term "soldiers" when discussing Hamas fighters. This generated a rapid negative response from many who felt that this was treating these people with too much deference (i.e., he should only refer to them as terrorists, I guess). Ironically, Dean was using the term soldiers in order to justify the Israeli attack on these Hamas members.

To boil it down, I am perplexed that you seem to feel that you cannot support Dean because he supports Israel. While I think it is fair to say he supports Israel to an extent, most of the criticism of Dean during the campaign in this regard has been the implication by some that he does not support Israel enough, and my impression is that most, if not all, of the other candidates would claim to support Israel at least as much as Howard Dean.

I gues my questions for you are

(1) Did I understand your statement about Dean and support for Israel?

(2) If so, which other candidate do you believe has a significantly different position on this issue?

Regards,
Schmendrick

Some REAL research? I mean you trust whatever pops up in a google search? You're not 14. I hope. If you have questions ask them. Otherwise, read Deans website. They go to all that trouble for you.

and Rove said this when Dean was an asterik in the polls, way back before Dean had all the money, the supporters, and etcetera. Remember the old adage "be careful what you wish for"

and not Muhahahahahh? I'm fascinated by those who overestimate Rove, a man who has singlehandedly driven Bush's popularity from 87 percent on Sept 12th 2001 to 52 percent today.

I mean this is the first time I've heard this comment, which hasn't appeared just about everywhere. And of course I'm totally comfortable taking electoral advice from Karl Rove who has only the Democratic Party's best interests at heart.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

"Choose the form of the destructor; choose and perish!"

This could prove an amazing similiarity to GHWB, who likewise was delighted to be running against a nobody from Arkansas.

If he gets the nomination and you and all the racists sit this one out, well, you'll get what you want I guess. Another 4 more years of Hell.

Maybe you guys should consider that Rove ain't such a genius. I mean hell, he had to lie, cheat and steal to win in 2000, and it still didn't work, so he had to rely on the Supremes. Why do you buy into his twisted psychological games?

just going to lie, cheat and steal the election again, where have you been?

What's the difference?

Shoot, even if the entire COUNTRY voted for the OTHER candidate, the bush regime would pull a hitler and appoint the boy king president again anyway. They've effectively hijacked this entire government. Anyone who thinks any differently has their head in the sand.

so vote for who you think is best and don't worry about it.

Rove may have played his hand wrong. I know there was a big drive for the rethuglicans to send money to Dean. But if the money goes to eventually beat Shrub then I couldn't think of a better use.

The RW is playing in our election. They have the media focusing on the agenday they specify. They have recognized that attacks on Dean have solidified his base. So remember after the IA debate a few days later they sent a RW guy to VT to bash Dean? They aren't stupid. That was a good play. It really worked things up for Dean.

Their plan is to attack Dean on security. He's gonna play the Draft doger...now I know we've got AWOL but he's @ war now. HE's "leading the country" but in our eyes he's leading it to hell. Clark, Gep, Kerry, Graham, Edwards aren't enough to cover for Dean's lack of foreign policy experience. Remember...the buck stops with the president. So a VP who is strong on foreign policy isn't going to work.

The RW is going to say that the economy is better so no need to discuss that. That is why Dean's message about the economy could go south.

What I do find funny is Gore is the one who screwed it up for KKKarl. If Gore hadn't made many of us angry by giving an early blessing he would have succeded. Now people are taking a second look and it is possible that the one they are really afraid of will get the nomination and beat the shit out of GWB.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Do you really thing Karl Rove is going to broadcast what he really thinks?

There's one born every minute.

on a cryptic comment made 5 months ago by a slime-covered reptile. nice to see someone putting so much work into the intellectual process needed to carefully weigh each candidate's platform and sentiments.

sheesh :wtf:

...I may faint.

:hi:

the governor's seat in California? And that they were going to run arnold schwartzenegger, and that the movement to shove through a recall was working?

Everyone here laughed at me then... and 6 months later we have a republican as governor who is now cutting every penny he can from cities and schools.

I'm always right.

How do you get all the people supporting Dean to suddenly shift their support and since you are always right, who should they support instead?

for flaming too much energy, too early and too fast. Niether has strong 100% positions to support, especially in light of dean's support of israel, and clark being an old war whore. Can't trust either ilk.

Edwards and Clinton are good people, and have the most potential as front runners. They're laying back, keeping quiet and planning their strategy behind the scenes. There is no grandstanding either. (Frankly I'm appalled that people support dean in spite of his position on israel. That alone speaks volumes. It doesn't mean he's a bad man, but it clarifies his positions in a wider scope. Not a position I agree with.)

It COULD well be that they're just laying up and staying out of the elections altogether, since there really is no way in hell for a dem candidate to win, no matter WHO runs. Why spend the money on a race that just cannot be won?

Or their strategy is to let the clarks and deans just play themselves out. Something will happen to both candidates and they'll be knocked out of the running. Then Edwards and Clinton can step up.

Most people vote by commercial anyway, few bother to actually research the records of their candidates. It's all marketing and sales.

Personally, I'd write in Bobby Kennedy for president. He's one of the few people in the country with genuine morals, compassion and clear direction. But that's a whole 'nuther story.

he's gonna support Dean straight into the Oval Office.

Good try though.

Funny how you attack me, but aren't interested in why dean supports israel or why karl rove wants dean to run.

Don't bother examining those tidbits.

And which candidate DOESN'T support Israel and didn't Dean get his ass nailed to the wall when he said he would treat the Israeli-Palestinian situation with an equal hand?

Yikes.

You won't vote for Dean if Dean is the Democratic nominee? Then you want Bush.

own opinions, oddly enough.

I can actually disagree with their choice of nominee. I disagreed with their gore/lieberman choice too, but I didn't vote for bush.

Pretty wild and nutty accusations you're making there. Entertaining though!

... Why do so many pukes BRAG about sending Dean money? Dean is the guy they want because they know Rove will paint him as a ski-nut draft-dodger, for starters.

BTW: Don't let the Deanieweenie* spammers and DDF contingent get you down. It seems many of these people have little knowledge of anything other than what Trippi's e-minions tell them to say.

BTW2: I agree with your analysis of the government situation. It's just not the pukes exclusively. It's BFEE. And it's been that way since 22 November 1963.

* Deanieweenie is a term of endearment for the mindless Dean drones who post en masse what they are told. They are not to be confused with DUers and others who happen to support Dean because they like him as a Democrat and as a candidate — and not because they belong to his cult of personality.

*Rover

Someone who singlemindedly believes the word of Karl Rove and spews it forth onto DU without thought of consequence

10 out of 10 for winning the 'playground politics' smear award.

Minus several million for 'future credibility' on Dean related posts.

I have tried telling people there are two kinds of Dean supporters on DU, and you outlined it nicely. Of course, the Deanieweenies will shout you down, insult you (and thereby prove your point quite nicely), and the valid supporters will ignore you or even silently agree. They don't like how the Deanieweenies make them ALL look bad and by extension, make Dean look bad.

Why should he play one in yours?

Ever play poker? Ever have an opponent psych you out? You are sitting there is a pair of 8's, not a bad hand for a friendly game of stud but not the best and your opposition narrows his eyes at you before tossing in chips to raise you. Do you meet the challenge or do you just assume that your opposition is holding better cards? You've got to play the hand you were dealt and you have to take some risks. Personally, I wouldn't sweat it and stand by my pair. The opponent is a known liar.

I don't care one way or the other what Rove thinks wants or plans.

for this:

After Al Qaeda attacked America, retired Gen. Wes Clark thought the Bush administration would invite him to join its team. After all, he�d been NATO commander, he knew how to build military coalitions and the investment firm he now worked for had strong Bush ties. But when GOP friends inquired, they were told: forget it.

WORD WAS THAT Karl Rove, the president�s political mastermind, had blocked the idea. Clark was furious. Last January, at a conference in Switzerland, he happened to chat with two prominent Republicans, Colorado Gov. Bill Owens and Marc Holtzman, now president of the University of Denver. �I would have been a Republican,� Clark told them, �if Karl Rove had returned my phone calls.� Soon thereafter, in fact, Clark quit his day job and began seriously planning to enter the presidential race�as a Democrat. Messaging NEWSWEEK by BlackBerry, Clark late last week insisted the remark was a �humorous tweak.� The two others said it was anything but. �He went into detail about his grievances,� Holtzman said. �Clark wasn�t joking. We were really shocked.�

http://www.msnbc.com/news/969659.asp?0cv=KA01&cp1=1

what a fat silly guy...

Plain and simple. He scares the cr@p out of them, so they pretend that they really want to go up against him so that the DLC guts him like a fish.

Even if it was true back then, a few little things have changed since then.

Why do people take this asshole seriously?

Looks like we won over Rove....boy Bush sure is in trouble Now!!!!

*sigh*

the folks Dean supporters used to deride as media whores are doing--Frank Lunz has Dean winning every debate. Tweety thinks Dean is fantastic. Bil Cristol is very publkicly shaking in his boots over a Dean win. FAUX pundits say Dean is inevitable every chance they get.

Oh wait....this is part of some new, hugely sophisticated and complex Karl Rove plan to fake out Dems...no wait. these people have suddenly become objective journalists....no wait, they want Dean to win because they feel guilty about their big tax cuts and want to give them back...no wait....

The raving anti-Deanites are foaming at the mouth!

:eyes:

thinking he would never be elected, hahaha. I don't think this is a good tactic for either party.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2003-09-07-dean-usat_x.htm

WASHINGTON — Republican Party officials and political advisers to President Bush admit that they underestimated Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean and say they now consider him a formidable potential adversary.

Some Bush allies say he reminds them of another insurgent candidate who once bedeviled Bush: Arizona Sen. John McCain. His wins in Republican primary elections in New Hampshire and Michigan rattled Bush's 2000 campaign.

"There is something going on there, and I tell you, if we don't pay attention ... we're making a big mistake," says Tom Rath, a Republican strategist and Bush adviser in New Hampshire.

MORE...

You're going down, Repubs! Hope you like the taste of ashpalt!

We've been over this one before - don't you people ever come up with anything new?

and is trying make up for it with the most ridiculous charges.

is ignore anything that comes out of Rove's mouth
base your descision on the individual candidates and
their positions on policies .

I remember reading this article back in July and thinking
"this guy rove wants this comment to affect me and my
choice " Don't give him the satisfaction ;-)

I certainly have worries about all of the candidates
for different reasons . But I'd vote for anyone of them
over the current misleader .

What a rube.

Hello rad (or do you prefer 0555?) (j/k)

As a Dean supporter, I am naturally disappointed to hear that you won't vote for Dean, but if you don't mind my asking I would like to understand your reasoning better.

Your first issue seems to be the quote from Karl Rove indicating that he (Rove) would like Dean to be nominated because he (Dean) would be easy to defeat in the general election.

I certainly feel that defeating Bush is the single most important political objective of every American outside of the Bush circle of cronies. If I believed that one of the other Democratic candidates had a significantly better chance of accomplishing that goal than Howard Dean, I assure you that I would be working for that campaign today. However, as I am sure you will agree, just because Karl Rove says something, that does not make it true. I am skeptical that Karl Rove believes that Dean is the weakest of the major candidates, and I am skeptical that he would say so in public if he DID believe it. Of course, if you believe it is true, then I would expect you to do no less than work to see that a stronger candidate is selected, and I sincerely wish you luck. If you are successful, I will be there beside you working for the nominee.

The second issue is the one that has me confused. Namely, in a follow-up post, you make the statement "And it turns out he supports israel? Some are saying that, I hope it's not true... ".

Here is my perception of the Governor's stance on Israel:

1. At one point in the campaign he stated that US policy in regard to Israel/Palestine needed to be "even-handed", and this was immediately jumped on as a sign that he was veering from the mainstream position of strong support for Israel. As a result, he clarified his remarks which seemed to put him right back with everyone else.

2. At one point Dean used the term "soldiers" when discussing Hamas fighters. This generated a rapid negative response from many who felt that this was treating these people with too much deference (i.e., he should only refer to them as terrorists, I guess). Ironically, Dean was using the term soldiers in order to justify the Israeli attack on these Hamas members.

To boil it down, I am perplexed that you seem to feel that you cannot support Dean because he supports Israel. While I think it is fair to say he supports Israel to an extent, most of the criticism of Dean during the campaign in this regard has been the implication by some that he does not support Israel enough, and my impression is that most, if not all, of the other candidates would claim to support Israel at least as much as Howard Dean.

I gues my questions for you are

(1) Did I understand your statement about Dean and support for Israel?

(2) If so, which other candidate do you believe has a significantly different position on this issue?

Regards,
Schmendrick

It is inflammatory.


DU Moderator