Comments on the DNC?

  • #1
loseyourname
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
1,749
5
Who else watched it? What did you think? Did you see the almost constant look of discomfort on Joe Scarborough's face?

Did anybody else think Clinton, as good of a speaker as he is, just can't help but come across as a sleazy used-car salesman?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
russ_watters
Mentor
20,572
7,231
loseyourname said:
Did anybody else think Clinton, as good of a speaker as he is, just can't help but come across as a sleazy used-car salesman?
My roommate, a democrat and real Bush hater is annoyed by the fact that the Democrats keep him around and downright pissed that they keep feeding Hillary. Both are divisive, though I'm not sure which is worse. It almost seems like pathetic nostalgia. Those were the days...

I listened to a little of both speeches. Not a whole lot in them except some funny self-deprecation from Billy. Nice to see he can make fun of himself, anyway. The content, though, was for the most part predictable drivel. One nice thing was it was not too much anti-Bush, but rather pro-Kerry. Seems the party is finally learning that being negative isn't a good thing (see the thread on the subject...).
 
  • #3
loseyourname
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
1,749
5
Did you see Jimmy Carter's speech? He was fuming.

Hilary isn't just divisive, but she's terribly uninteresting to watch. Everything just seems so calculated with her, so not-genuine. She's like Angela Lansbury in The Manchurian Candidate, but without the charisma.
 
  • #4
Evo
Mentor
23,193
2,998
Having once dated a former president of the SDS (Students for a Democratic Society). I tend to shy away from political discussion. :bugeye:

I was only able to catch the very beginning. The woman who spoke after Glenn Close was very good. Unfortunately, I missed the rest.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
loseyourname
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
1,749
5
Oh God, that's sick. Please tell me you were very young when you did this.
 
  • #6
Evo
Mentor
23,193
2,998
loseyourname said:
Oh God, that's sick. Please tell me you were very young when you did this.
Before you were born, most likely. In the 70's. I was very young.
 
  • #7
russ_watters
Mentor
20,572
7,231
loseyourname said:
Did you see Jimmy Carter's speech? He was fuming.
No, but I don't much care for him either. There used to be an understanding that former Presidents wouldn't attack sitting Presidents. Even Clinton seems to be following it. Carter used attacks on sitting presidents to get himself a Nobel Peace(the "P" could just as well stand for "Politics") Prize.
Hilary isn't just divisive, but she's terribly uninteresting to watch. Everything just seems so calculated with her, so not-genuine. She's like Angela Lansbury in The Manchurian Candidate, but without the charisma.
I need to see that movie.
 
  • #8
loseyourname
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
1,749
5
If you decide to see the remake, see the original first. Some of the best acting you'll ever see.
 
  • #9
Evo
Mentor
23,193
2,998
How much do you think the general public is persuaded by the televised conventions?

I tend not to get into political arguments, but I think that this election is likely to bring out the largest number of voters in recent memory.

The last Presidential election was a sorry testament to the level of apathy people had in who governed them. People tended to feel it was just a lesser of two evils.

Since I have sworn off politics for health reasons, that's all I am going to say.

Hopefully I can get to see reruns of the DNC opening that I missed.
 
  • #10
Robert Zaleski
loseyourname said:
She's like Angela Lansbury in The Manchurian Candidate, but without the charisma.
You hit that nail on the head, she's manipulative as hell and has the personality of a prison warden.
 
  • #11
russ_watters
Mentor
20,572
7,231
Evo said:
How much do you think the general public is persuaded by the televised conventions?
An awful lot - for about 3 weeks after each convention. Then they forget.

Bush and Kerry are currently in a dead heat - by the end of the week it'll be 60-40 Kerry.
 
  • #12
Njorl
Science Advisor
258
12
I find the convention weeks to be the least interesting of the campaign season. They're both completely stage managed. Nothing interesting ever seems to happen at them, and because they suck in all the media, anything else interesting goes unreported. I usually watch the acceptance speech, and that's about it.

The nominating speech is also worth watching sometimes. While the topic is banal (they talk about the guy who will be inundated with press coverage for the next 15 weeks) they usually get good speakers. Often it is a clue who the party wants to groom for a run at the white house eventually. This will be more interesting in teh Republican convention. Who will the Republican powerbrokers begin grooming to oppose McCain in 2008?

Njorl
 
  • #13
kat
26
0
I only saw Glenn Close through Bill Clinton and a bit of Gore. Hilary was very unconvincing, she seemed to me as though she was forcing herself to go through the motions when talking about Kerry. Bill, as always, was an engaging speaker but I think that only helps to show how un-engaging Kerry is. It's a good thing that Kerry isn't following Billy boy. Gore...really should be shelved, I don't think he does anything for the party except maybe keep the pissed off Gore-ites pissed off. He just seems bloated and pathetic to me.
 
  • #14
Njorl
Science Advisor
258
12
kat said:
Gore...really should be shelved, I don't think he does anything for the party except maybe keep the pissed off Gore-ites pissed off.

I think you are underestimating the value of this enormously. Gore received many more votes than Clinton ever did.

Njorl
 
  • #15
BobG
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
185
82
I thought Gore looked much more personal and relaxed than during his campaign 4 years ago (I think the transformation was just as dramatic as Bob Dole's appearances after his hopes for future political aspirations were gone). Made we wonder why I only saw a light weight loser who rode to success on his daddy's coat tails (or was that Bush?). Aww, who am I kidding - he's still a light weight loser even if he at least looks better.

Bill Clinton was as good as ever. He's a sleazeball and knowing he's a sleazeball might bias one's opinion of his performance, but he's still got that on-stage charisma of a talk show host.

Carter wasn't that impressive. But, then again, past history may have a little to do with that. I used to think of him as a decent person, but an ineffective leader. His meddlings since then have lowered my opinion of him a little bit more and it's hard to take him very seriously.

Hillary is just not that interesting.
 
  • #16
russ_watters
Mentor
20,572
7,231
Njorl said:
Nothing interesting ever seems to happen at them, and because they suck in all the media, anything else interesting goes unreported.
There are supposed to be real events happening, like discussing and laying out a platform. But everything is already polished and packaged.
Often it is a clue who the party wants to groom for a run at the white house eventually. This will be more interesting in teh Republican convention. Who will the Republican powerbrokers begin grooming to oppose McCain in 2008?
A very good question.
 
  • #17
amp
Actually, the convention is interesting. Bill Clinton attacked Bush politely "...in the only test that matters, are you better off now than before.." and when he spoke of the surplus Bush squandered. Polite attacks that made a good point. Barack Obama may become the first afro-american prez, if he is as good as the key-note address he gave which was about unity "...there are no liberal amreica ... no conservative america ... we are the United States of America..." He reached out to encompass the country and I think America will respond. Sharpton rebuked Bush for his presumtiveness, that was good. John Edwards speech was good also "Hope is on the way" and when he pointed out the the Republicans don't seem have or can't put anything on the table so they try to divide and sling mud. They haven't said anything positive but go on and on with negative ads against Kerry.

The question that will be answered come November is do we want a United States of America that benefits all US citizens or a Divided States of America that benefits a select few.
 
  • #18
russ_watters
Mentor
20,572
7,231
amp said:
Bill Clinton attacked Bush politely "...in the only test that matters, are you better off now than before.."
That's how Clinton won his first election, but its not as simple this time. The answer in 1992 was a clear-cut no for a large percentage of Americans. Today, it isn't.
Polite attacks that made a good point. Barack Obama may become the first afro-american prez, if he is as good as the key-note address he gave which was about unity "...there are no liberal amreica ... no conservative america ... we are the United States of America..." He reached out to encompass the country and I think America will respond.
My dad told me about his speach and I'm a little upset I missed it. Sounds like a great guy - unfortunately, that is not the message of the Democratic party and they will work to prevent his rise just as the Republican Party cut McCain off at the knees.

The Democrat's will say 'one America,' right before they say 'stick it to the rich.' People who don't see a conflict have no reason to vote to fix it, therefore the Democrats must work hard to promote the idea that there isn't 'one America.'
 
Last edited:
  • #19
137
0
I'm sure we'll see a LOT more bashing coming from the Republican convention than we did from the Democratic one. I think the convention has been pretty tame so far. Good to see that Democrats have some restraint.

I don't know why Bush, as an incumbent, has had as many negative ads as he did. Interestingly, I’ve heard many Bush supports say Kerry isn’t making a case as to why people should vote for him, but rather why people shouldn't vote for Bush. However, according to ‘the Campaign Media Analysis Group,’ 75% of Bush’s television ads have been negative while only 27% of Kerry’s have been. *

Kinda makes you wonder…

*Source: http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040613/news_1n13pres.html [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #20
amp
Russ -
...The answer in 1992 was a clear-cut no for a large percentage of Americans. Today, it isn't.

What country are you in? In the USA, unemployment is up - the jobs that have been created are substantially inferior to the ones that were lost. We are less safe than we were before we pre-empted Iraq. Terrorist recruitment is going up. Health care cost are spiraling out of control. Civil liberties have been dissed. Do I need to go on. No, we are not better off than before Bush.

...Sounds like a great guy - unfortunately, that is not the message of the Democratic party and they will work to prevent his rise just as the Republican Party cut McCain off at the knees.

No, again thats not going to happen. Obama will likely get all the support he needs.

Unity is the message, purpose and drive of the Democratic party, NOW. This current Admin has forced the party to re-invent itself and embrace its core values and beliefs more firmly, to realize we are all in the same boat, to reason that if it sinks - we all drown. Do children spontaneously share with their siblings or even other children? Yes, they do unless they learn selfishness from an adult.
 
  • #21
Tom Mattson
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
5,500
8
I don't usually post in this Forum, but I think I'll drop a couple pennies here.

Regarding Carter's speech, the thing that stuck out the most for me was when he ran down the list of struggles that our nation faces, and how Kerry will get us through them when he wins the election. Struggles such as education, and unemployment, and the economy.

But he forgot terrorism.

Do you think that's deliberate? That he didn't want to bring up a problem that he thinks Bush might be better at than Kerry? Or do you think that he just doesn't think that terrorism is a problem?
 
  • #22
Robert Zaleski
Tom Mattson said:
I don't usually post in this Forum, but I think I'll drop a couple pennies here.

Regarding Carter's speech, the thing that stuck out the most for me was when he ran down the list of struggles that our nation faces, and how Kerry will get us through them when he wins the election. Struggles such as education, and unemployment, and the economy.

But he forgot terrorism.

Do you think that's deliberate? That he didn't want to bring up a problem that he thinks Bush might be better at than Kerry? Or do you think that he just doesn't think that terrorism is a problem?
Carter suffers from Nobel Peacenik Prize blindness. I think he actually believes that if we reach out to the terrorist with love and compassion the terrorist will reciprocate in kind. By the way, don’t you think the whole Carter family was bizarre. There was brother Billy, the drunk that boasted of smoking pot in the White House, urinating in public and accepted a $200,000 loan from the rogue nation of Libya. Then there was his mother who joined the Peace Corp at 68 and his two sisters; one a bible thumping preacher and the other that rode motorcycles. And finally, there's Jimmy, reporting a UFO siting and his bout with ‘Killer Rabbit’.
 
  • #23
Njorl
Science Advisor
258
12
Robert Zaleski said:
Carter suffers from Nobel Peacenik Prize blindness. I think he actually believes that if we reach out to the terrorist with love and compassion the terrorist will reciprocate in kind. By the way, don’t you think the whole Carter family was bizarre. There was brother Billy, the drunk that boasted of smoking pot in the White House, urinating in public and accepted a $200,000 loan from the rogue nation of Libya. Then there was his mother who joined the Peace Corp at 68 and his two sisters; one a bible thumping preacher and the other that rode motorcycles. And finally, there's Jimmy, reporting a UFO siting and his bout with ‘Killer Rabbit’.

There is nothing at all odd about reporting a UFO. It is the people who insist on putting identifications on their unidentified flying objects that are odd.

As for the Killer Rabbit, he had probably seen "..Holy Grail" recently and over reacted.

Njorl
 
  • #24
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,051
18
Robert Zaleski said:
...the drunk that boasted of smoking pot in the White House, urinating in public and accepted a $200,000 loan from the rogue nation ...

Hmmm...sounds like someone else we all know, wot ?

Then there was his mother who joined the Peace Corp at 68

Bad, bad momma !

and his two sisters; one a bible thumping preacher

Can the right wing actually say things like this ?

and the other that rode motorcycles.

The last I heard, motorcycles are more fuel efficient and less involved in accidents than cars and SUVs.

Dubya tries to ride bicycles - though it'll be a while before he actually figures it out. He fell again last week !
 
  • #25
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,051
18
I thought Obama showed some real promise. The edia will watch him all the more closely from here on. Let's see how he turns out.
 

Related Threads on Comments on the DNC?

  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
63
Views
5K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Replies
25
Views
3K
K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
39
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
3K
Top