Dean surges by becoming the anti-Bush

More emphatically than any other candidate for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination, Dean is the anti-Bush. And that is propelling him toward winning the leadership of a party that increasingly defines itself by its loathing of the president.

The combative, finger-waving Dean decided early on to adopt a risky but potentially high payoff strategy - flatly opposing virtually every one of Bush's major initiatives at a time when many Democrats supported the president, especially in the days between Sept. 11 and the Iraq war, when Bush enjoyed record-high approval ratings.

The former Vermont governor opposed the war in Iraq when many Democratic rivals supported it. He proposes to repeal all of Bush's tax cuts, while many rivals want to keep those that go to the middle class. And he rips Bush's education reform, the No Child Left Behind Act that was widely supported by Democrats, as the No School District Left Standing Act.

Having thus carved out his ground, once the broad post-Sept. 11 support for Bush washed away and the nation's 50-50 partisan split re-emerged, Dean became the champion of all who never really liked Bush.

…

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/7470292.htm

:kick:

With all due respect to Dean's anti-Bush message and the momentum it has gained, being anti-Bu$h isn't enough.

Getting elected is one thing; being a good President is another. Even an idiot like Bu$h got himself elected. I don't want another President who runs for office for four more years. I want a President who will solve our nation's problems!

This is one of the big differences I see between Dean and Clark. Dean has been anti-Bush for years, or so I hear, and he hasn't yet put forth his own ideas about what to do instead? He is supposedly going to make his FIRST SPEECH about his foreign policy agenda tomorrow, but apparently he is also going to credit Gore and a host of other advisors for the ideas in it. I can't wait to see how closely they echo Clark's position; Dean has been saying in every debate that he agrees with Clark about what to do on repairing Iraq and on the rest of the foreign policy issues.

Clark, on the other hand, has a wealth of solid foreign policy ideas and the career in foreign policy to back them up. So you say "well that's his strength, what about domestic issues?" Clark has been a candidate for two months, and already he has put out positive, original ideas about what to do on each domestic issue; go to clark04.com and see for yourself. Clark's domestic policy ideas may be fairly mainstream Democratic, but they are his. From start to finish, Clark is running a positive campaign, offering ideas that are Better Than Bush. Instead of just saying Bush is doing poorly at foreign policy like Dean does, Clark is saying Bush should be held accountable for what he has done.

Don't settle for anti-Bush when we have Better Than Bush standing on the same stage!

opposite of bush....which is all good. Where bush misleads...Dean will Lead.

Where bush Lies ...Dean will give us the Truth.

Anti=opposite...you can't get any better than that.

Open your records Govorner Dean!!

:wow:

They both like to execute people for example.

the right wing israeli gov

Defining the best you can get as the opposite of B*$h is precisely what I was talking about. We can do better than that.

If the economy and Iraq take up-swings, through no fault of B*$h, and Dean is our candidate, B*$h wins. THAT is what is wrong by running as the anti-B*$h.

Any candidate that wants to win, AND WANTS TO BE A GOOD PRESIDENT after winning the job, needs to define a good path for us to follow for the four years ahead. Dean hasn't done that on foreign policy, despite running most of his campaign against B*$h's foreign policy.

Bush and Dean went to Yale. Clinton and Clark were Rhodes Scholars. Which President was better for our country? Which candidate will be better for our country?

not negative.You can get bogged down in the hate easily when talking about bush and then he wins yet again. I have seen dean speak and i like Kucinich's speeches better because he offers hope and is so inspiring.Instead of leading an angry mob he led brought some of to tears with his vision of a better world. We always say another world is possible and kucinich describes that world.Anyway smetimes i wonder if Dean would have that momentum if not for bush suppling the amunition.I also have to admit i have a bad habbit of this also. The way i see it the repugs are like the titanic goin down and we need to be a party boat showing are positive funside for people to jump off and swim to us (bad paraphasing of a speaker i heard)

BECAUSE Right Wing operatives have been contributing to his campaign big time since last March originally to get rid of Kerry, now Clark.

So the money that Dean Raised (much from right wing sources) Now has him generating media attention.....

SO, the media keeps talking about him non stop....even when he doesn't do anything that deserves merit....while virtually ignoring most of the other candidates......

they say it's because of his fundraising prowess: which,

LOOKS LIKE A GREAT BIG CIRCLE TO ME....(Right wing, Chicken and egg)

And of course the more the press reports on Dean, the more his poll numbers go up because he's always being talked about, no matter for what...his name becomes a household word.....

SO THEN...EVEN AFTER ALL OF THAT:

BECAUSE his numbers still weren't going up that much, GORE comes to the rescue and gives him a boost.

NOW with this boost, he "SURGES" 10 POINTS........

After all of this help, thank god, DEAN FINALLY IS SURGING!

took an awful lot to orchestrate!

IN THE MEANTIME:
no one is looking at Dean's actual record, so many jumping on the RW funded bandwagon don't know what this man really stands for.....