The time now is 11/23/08 - 06:06
Log in: Username: Password:
Search forums for:
  
Calculator Running Log Uploads Smilies Calendar
FAQ Search    Articles Register Log in

Kerry/Edwards' concession speech & Bush's victory speech


www.runningforums.com Forum Index -> On-Topic Goto page 1, 2   Next

Post new topic   Reply to topic
sonnylax
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 2942
Location: Living in a lollipop and unicorn world
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/03/04 - 16:32    Post subject: Kerry/Edwards' concession speech & Bush's victory speech
Listened to both Edwards & Kerry plus Bush on the radio. Kerry did a pretty good job, but really just offered faint praise to Bush. Edwards speech made it seem like he was still campaigning. Frankly, he isn't a position to lecture anyone at this moment in time.

Think some in the Democratic party are glad that Kerry lost, so the door is open for Hillary in '08?
Gogirlgo
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 4777
Location: No deal, stalker.
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/03/04 - 16:35    Post subject:
I don't think we'll see Hillary win in '08. Or Lieberman. Or Obama. This country is not ready.
cherylpf
crazy cat lady
Reply with quote
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 17305
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/03/04 - 16:36    Post subject:
I missed Edwards but heard Kerry, Cheney and Bush.

I thought both Kerry and Bush gave good speeches. I agree that the country needs to be unified, but I have my doubts it will happen in the next four years.

I think Edwards is still campaigning. I don't think we've seen the last of him.

I also think that the Clintons and friends probably wanted the Democratic ticket to win. However, it certainly doesn't hurt that the opportunity is npw available in 2008. I'll be interested to see if we hear her change her tune on that. (Up to now she has always said she isn't interested).
kattzoo
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 28 Feb 2003
Posts: 3813
Location: Happily at the back of the pack
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/03/04 - 17:02    Post subject:
I thought both men gave fine speeches. Sen. Kerry seems to be more at ease with planned speeches, while Pres. Bush does better off the cuff. (or maybe seems more relaxed would be a better way to phrase it)

I couldn't help but think that if Sen. Kerry had shown this warm, open, gracious side a bit more during his campaign that the outcome may have been very different.
sonnylax
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 2942
Location: Living in a lollipop and unicorn world
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/03/04 - 17:19    Post subject:
Gogirlgo wrote:
I don't think we'll see Hillary win in '08. Or Lieberman. Or Obama. This country is not ready.


Winning (nationally) isn't the issue. My question is whether she will run in the primaries.

Obama hasn't served one day in the US Senate, so I doubt he would be electable based on his lack of experience. I'd be willing to bet that both Clintons are eyeing a return to the White House in '08.
Gogirlgo
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 4777
Location: No deal, stalker.
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/03/04 - 17:41    Post subject:
sonnylax wrote:


Winning (nationally) isn't the issue. My question is whether she will run in the primaries.

Obama hasn't served one day in the US Senate, so I doubt he would be electable based on his lack of experience. I'd be willing to bet that both Clintons are eyeing a return to the White House in '08.


You're missing the point entirely. Let me make it clear for you. This country is not ready to have a woman as president, or a Jewish person, or a black person. Those particular people and their experience right now or lack thereof is irrelevant.
genie
Master of Prissface
Reply with quote
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 16194
Location: Finding serenity one day at a time
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/03/04 - 18:22    Post subject:
Gogirlgo wrote:


You're missing the point entirely. Let me make it clear for you. This country is not ready to have a woman as president, or a Jewish person, or a black person. Those particular people and their experience right now or lack thereof is irrelevant.


Lieberman didn't lose because he's Jewish, he lost because he's too "moderate" for the Democrats. (This has to be true, because I even like him Wink )
megawill
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1552
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/03/04 - 18:31    Post subject:
genie wrote:


Lieberman didn't lose because he's Jewish, he lost because he's too "moderate" for the Democrats. (This has to be true, because I even like him Wink )


i don't agree he was too moderate...he ran an ineffective, no make that inept ground organization in iowa -- knew he had no chance to win -- and he like clark pulled out of the caucus to put all their eggs in NH...nobody in iowa shut out his 'moderate' message...he didn't know how to make his message heard in iowa...

---
megawill


Last edited by megawill on 11/03/04 - 18:36; edited 1 time in total
runaroundsue
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 18 Sep 2002
Posts: 6629
Location: supporting GREENer pastures
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/03/04 - 18:32    Post subject:
genie wrote:


Lieberman didn't lose because he's Jewish, he lost because he's too "moderate" for the Democrats. (This has to be true, because I even like him Wink )


I don't know. I think it was the religion factor....and again, bad move on the democrats part. I have no idea why they didn't go with Lieberman. They weren't getting the Christian vote anyway Maybe both parties were afraid of a moderate voice and future formation of a strong 3rd party. I wonder how many voters the dems could have gotten from the moderates. Would have had mine, in spite of Kerry (I could have dealt with the nimrod for 4 years)

edited: I'm looking at why JL wasn't selected as running mate more than why the dems didn't put him as their candidate. He would have got "slaughtered" had he been running for prez...IMHO and that's unfornuate.


Last edited by runaroundsue on 11/03/04 - 18:35; edited 1 time in total
megawill
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1552
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/03/04 - 18:34    Post subject:
Gogirlgo wrote:


You're missing the point entirely. Let me make it clear for you. This country is not ready to have a woman as president, or a Jewish person, or a black person. Those particular people and their experience right now or lack thereof is irrelevant.


i hate to admit this, but i do think that it is true...how far have we come in 40+ yrs???

---
megawill
Bill_Sev
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 727
Location: Marietta, GA
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/03/04 - 20:31    Post subject:
Liberman lost because he has no personality! He reminds me of the FATHER from ALF! DEM's better realize that the country doesn't want a far left CANIDATE! The DEM's better get back to their grass roots as told to them by one of their own.....ZELL MILLER!
Wicked Flea
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 365
Location: Hair of the Dog
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/04/04 - 08:55    Post subject:
Gogirlgo wrote:


You're missing the point entirely. Let me make it clear for you. This country is not ready to have a woman as president, or a Jewish person, or a black person. Those particular people and their experience right now or lack thereof is irrelevant.

1
Although I would love to see Obama as a potential.

Bill_Sev wrote:
Liberman lost because he has no personality! He reminds me of the FATHER from ALF! DEM's better realize that the country doesn't want a far left CANIDATE! The DEM's better get back to their grass roots as told to them by one of their own.....ZELL MILLER!


Zell Miller is a Dixiecrat which is nothing like a Democrat and more Republican than Democrat anyway.
Plus he has the added bonus of being a whack job. Duel anyone?
And I also believe that Kerry was more moderate.
Whereas Bush is pretty far to the right, definitely not moderate.
elkid
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 18 Nov 2002
Posts: 8353
Location: hiding out in Philly
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/04/04 - 08:58    Post subject:
Wicked Flea wrote:
Although I would love to see Obama as a potential.

... And I also believe that Kerry was more moderate. Whereas Bush is pretty far to the right, definitely not moderate.

1) I would, too. He's wicked smart and eloquently articulate, but I think due to his color Obama's got as good a chance of being nominated as Osama.

2) Amen, sister.
sonnylax
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 2942
Location: Living in a lollipop and unicorn world
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/04/04 - 09:42    Post subject:
Y'alls beloved NY Times is certainly looking ahead to Ms. Clinton in '08 this morning:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/04/nyregion/04hillary.html?ei=5006&en=dfc20f84753541d8&ex=1100235600&partner=ALTAVISTA1&pagewanted=print&position=

2008 Contender.
megawill
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1552
| Back to top
PostPosted: 11/04/04 - 10:28    Post subject:
sonnylax wrote:
Y'alls beloved NY Times is certainly looking ahead to Ms. Clinton in '08 this morning:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/04/nyregion/04hillary.html?ei=5006&en=dfc20f84753541d8&ex=1100235600&partner=ALTAVISTA1&pagewanted=print&position=

2008 Contender.


so what is the point exactly...she does have the right to run doesn't she?

fwiw...let me state flat out here and now Hillary Clinton will not be the next Democratic Nominee for president...
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2   Next

www.runningforums.com Forum Index -> On-Topic

Page 1 of 2

Related topics:
These are my concessions
House GOP makes concession on Arctic drilling
Should Bush's military record be an issue
President Bush's speech last night, poll not poll
President Bush's Budget Update May Show Deficit Goal Being R
victory is mine!