Suggestion

Post #183,470 by ben_tilly 11/8/04 11:37:20 AM Reply	Suggestion Several points. I see no reason to believe that people in TN are more or less informed than anywhere else. That just happens to be the only poll that I have on how well informed the general electorate was on the candidates positions. Even Karl Rove could be proud of how you spun that one into a perceived insult where none was meant. People didn't generally just "remember" the debate that way. At least not unassisted. Look back to what I said a couple of posts ago about the Republicans trying to spin how the Democrats are perceived. (And vice versa of course. But Karl Rove is the master.) It is easy to say that the position could have been stated differently. It is far harder to come up with said statement. Either put up or shut up. How would you have said it, since you think it is so easy to say? Regards, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #183,471 by jake123 11/8/04 11:44:17 AM Reply	How I would've put it Marriage is a state's rights issue; I'm not going to try to influence them as it would be improper of me to do so. FWIW, I'm married to a woman. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #183,473 by ben_tilly 11/8/04 12:01:27 PM Reply	And what is a "state's rights issue"? You're assuming a far better understanding of the US constitution than most Americans have. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #183,475 by jake123 11/8/04 12:04:40 PM Reply	An issue that is under the purview of the state government as opposed to the federal government. By framing it as a states' right issue, you frame it in a way that is definitely comprehensible to the south-eastern vote. "States' Rights" is a buzzword and people do know what it means in general, even if they can't discuss the particulars very well. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #183,477 by ben_tilly 11/8/04 12:21:06 PM Reply	A complication for you Most people understand the word "married" to mean one thing. The idea that MA says that you're married by OH doesn't is very confusing. And yes, I'm fully aware that there are multiple definitions already. For instance the Catholic Church says that I'm not married while every US state says that I am. For another example, I know a gay couple who got married in Greece. Greece recognizes it but no US state (except possibly MA) recognizes that marriage. But how many people in the general public are going to think that it makes sense unless it is explained carefully? Or even if it is explained carefully (as already noted, they're not paying much attention so careful explanations are generally a waste of breath). Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #183,479 by jake123 11/8/04 12:41:38 PM Reply	Who said it has to make sense? You're talking electoral politics in the US here. Looking for sense is a fool's errand. In short, you don't (and more specifically, Kerry didn't) have to fully explain it. What he needed to say was: "Marriage is handled by the states, and it won't be my place as President of this country to tell them how they should handle it." ... and he should have gone on to say "by the way... take a look at your communities. Are they better off or worse off than they were four years ago? How are your schools holding up? Are they shortening the school year because they can't afford to keep them open?" The Kerry campaign (and Democrats in general) should be looking at and issues that work in red states. The current concentration by both parties on swing states to the exclusion of non-swing states is going to do bad things to the national fabric. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #183,482 by bepatient 11/8/04 12:53:11 PM Reply	I already told you. I would NOT have mentioned anything about any candidates children. As for the direct statement of issue, jake pretty much has it. >>I don't believe it is the federal governments role to decide issues of marriage that have been and should continue to be decided by the states themselves.<< Tie that in to the red state mantra of smaller government..you don't need Washington telling you how to live..etc..etc...would play VERY WELL in red states. No bending over backwards to try and convince everyone that people are people and that ..by the way... VP Cheney loves his daughter who just happens to be a lesbian. Sheesh. If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]

Welcome to IWETHEY!