What Happens if Kerry Wins?

[moneyp]

What changes? Be specific. No rhetoric, please.

Perhaps many people will live to breathe free--at least we know that things can only get better with the Bush gang out of the way.

[moneyp]

I repeat: No rhetoric, please.

[Al in NYC]

Not much. Since he won't have a Democratic Congress his power will be rather limited.

There will probably be a push to roll back the most egregious of the Bush tax cuts. A little more effort expended to try to reduce (or at least slow the growth of) the deficit. Certainly a much less anti-environmentalist stance, and perhaps small actions around the edges on health care (like real perscription drug relief for seniors, instead of the drug co. bs Bush did). A big push to internationalize the occupation of Iraq, and to try to win back the favor of some of our traditional allies.

I'm afraid he will also, because Democrats always are so afraid of appearing "soft," raise the defense budget and allow so-called "homeland security" to become even more pervasive and invasive.

[de Selby]

Tony Blair will decide he didn't like Dubya after all...

That's not rhetoric, Moné, I really think things can only get better--will they get real good? Naw, not in the next 4 years, the damage Bush caused is too great for that. Will I be happy with Kerry? Probably not, he is the lesser of two bad possibilities--I just hope that he does well enough to insure that we don't get another one of those misguided Republicans in 2008.

[stonemonkts]

If Kerry wins,

Scott Dolan will shrivel and disappear like the bad witch in Oz....

Monte will bloat from indigestion until he resembles the Dune slob....

Gordon will develop the nasty habit of inhaling his cigars, until one day he simply begins swallowing them whole...

Willy will grow breasts and sing in a falsetto voice.

All will be good and made right.

[de Selby]

Originally Posted by Al in NYC

I'm afraid he will also, because Democrats always are so afraid of appearing "soft," raise the defense budget and allow so-called "homeland security" to become even more pervasive and invasive.

That sounds pretty much like what Labour have done over here recently, and for the same reason. See http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/other/blunkett.php (David Blunkett is in charge of security/law & order over here).

[moneyp]

Thanks for the response, Al. Right now, I see environmental legislation as the surest major policy change, although I'm not entirely convinced. It will be interesting to see if there is any change to health care should Kerry get elected.

I'm jotting down all of the "plans" listed on his website, just to follow along should he actually be elected.

[Stuckinagroove]

All my wildest dreams will be fufilled.

Originally Posted by mone peterson

Thanks for the response, Al. Right now, I see environmental legislation as the surest major policy change, although I'm not entirely convinced. It will be interesting to see if there is any change to health care should Kerry get elected.

I'm jotting down all of the "plans" listed on his website, just to follow along should he actually be elected.

Actually, Kerry's environmental voting record is strong. Damn near flawless.

I'd highly suggest that anyone interested visit votesmart.com.

It has his entire Senate voting record on there.

Very informative site.

[stonemonkts]

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

Actually, Kerry's environmental voting record is strong. Damn near flawless.

I'd highly suggest that anyone interested visit votesmart.com.

It has his entire Senate voting record on there.

Very informative site.

Thanks Scott, that is very helpful.

I'm very encouraged about the potential shifts in environmental policy overall.

[Gordon B]

Originally Posted by stonemonkts

If Kerry wins,

Scott Dolan will shrivel and disappear like the bad witch in Oz....

Monte will bloat from indigestion until he resembles the Dune slob....

Gordon will develop the nasty habit of inhaling his cigars, until one day he simply begins swallowing them whole...

Willy will grow breasts and sing in a falsetto voice.

All will be good and made right.

and Stonemonkts will be one place (10th) away from the final table at the World Series of poker, go all in with A-A against a J-5 bluff by crew member Dutch Boyd but Boyd will catch 5-5 on the turn and river and deny Stone a place at the final table.

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by mone peterson

I repeat: No rhetoric, please.

[ahem]

Let's stop abusing this word, shall we?

To wit:

rhet·o·ric n.

1. The art or study of using language effectively and persuasively.
2. A treatise or book discussing this art.
3. Skill in using language effectively and persuasively.
4. A style of speaking or writing, especially the language of a particular subject.
5. Verbal communication; discourse.

Aristotle defined Rhetoric as: The Art of Persuasion.


Rhetoric is neither trivial nor bullshit.

[crawjo]

If Kerry wins:

I don't see much difference in the area of foreign policy, although I think an early pullout of Iraq would be more likely if things became more bloody. On the other hand, I could see the insurgents trying to "test" Kerry by ramping up the violence after the election, and Kerry "proving that he can be tough on defense" by moving to crush the rebellion. So I don't know if there would be any difference or not.

I think he would reverse some of the Bush environmental measures that have been enacted, and I expect that he would try to push through a tax increase for wealthy Americans, a "targeted" tax cut for the middle class, and a bevy of new spending programs on prescription drugs, education, and health care.

I think a Kerry victory would signify a major realignment in the Republican Party. I think a Bush defeat would be bad news for the conservative, evangelical Christian wing of the party, and I'd expect that, once out of power, the Republicans would return to their roots by resisting new spending programs and urging fiscal restraint. Some new face would become the leader of the Party. A Kerry victory actually could be good for Republicans in the long run, if it forced them to rethink their strategy and remake their image. Maybe some conservative voices would actually heed the advice of some true conservatives and advocate for a more socially liberal policy, in the sense of giving government less of a role in the everyday life of Americans. I know that the National Review has been writing some articles outlining the argument for legalizing marijuana...maybe that idea could gain steam if the evangelicals were kicked out of power.

[stonemonkts]

Originally Posted by crawjo

. I know that the National Review has been writing some articles outlining the argument for legalizing marijuana...maybe that idea could gain steam if the evangelicals were kicked out of power.

William F. Buckley has been calling for the decriminalization of many illegal narcotics for ages. He had a special 2 hour Firing Line devoted to it.

But there's something sinister about the argument. I wish I could recall what it was, but there was an arch cynicism associated with his position.

[GoodSpeak]

If Kerry wins...

Education programs like No Teacher Left Sober, er, sorry...No Child Left Educated...no, wait! No Child Outside of Texas Left Behind will actually be funded;

The Environment will mean something more than a place to make money;

The Rich will pay their fair share;

The radical right will pay someone to dig for sex or bad land deals then waste countless millions of taxpayer money on investigation after investigation.

Alfonze D'Amato, Newt Gingrich, Haley Barber or Dan Quayleeeee won't be there to say something incredibly stupid or downright ignorant. Tom Delay, Ralph Reed, Ann Coulter and Alan Keyes will.

Gas prices will rise and corporations will jack up prices as a "get back" for King George II;

SSI will be saved from the greedy paws of investment bankers/brokers;

The elderly will get a break on their meds by being allowed to circumvent the pharmeceutical greedheads and buy from Canada;

HMO's, insurance companies and corporate/for-profit hospitals will be brought back into control;

The republicans will use the conservative media to spin their discredited policies into a way to blame Democrats for their own failures, lies and idiocy.














Canada won't look as good...unless you can't afford your perscriptions.

[crawjo]

Originally Posted by stonemonkts

William F. Buckley has been calling for the decriminalization of many illegal narcotics for ages. He had a special 2 hour Firing Line devoted to it.

But there's something sinister about the argument. I wish I could recall what it was, but there was an arch cynicism associated with his position.

Yeah, the argument basically centers around the idea that the government can't really win the drug war, and that we waste valuable resources pursuing minor dealers. I don't think that's the best argument for decriminalization, although it might be the best political argument, but on this issue I'd take any argument that I can get, since I think that the laws on the books in general make no sense and need to be abolished.

[moneyp]

Originally Posted by GoodSpeak

[ahem]

Let's stop abusing this word, shall we?

Goody:

1. [n] study of the technique and rules for using language effectively (especially in public speaking)
2. [n] loud and confused and empty talk; "mere rhetoric"
3. [n] high flown style; excessive use of verbal ornamentation
4. [n] using language effectively to please or persuade

Note the second definition, please.

Good luck, brother.

[moneyp]

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

Good luck, brother.

Yeah, what the fuck am I thinking?

Never mind, Goody.

[sonic1]

You can't win the "war on terror" either. Hell why don't we start a "war on bad things that happen".

My prediction is that the republicans will unleash a Ken Star like Dog on Kerry and not let up until the end...

Wait, that isn't a prediction. That is just protocol for the republicans.

I honestly think he will put together a pretty good team and make an effort to gain trust again in the white house. There will probably be a lot of bad mouthing about his relationship with his wife. And I see a restructuring in the military and its presense in Iraq. I don't think he'll back out of Iraq that easily-he'll cut down forces and put more responsibility in the current Iraq government (instead of the appearance of it now).

I see Afghanistan becoming more of an issue to be dealt with, and a new internationalism in the white house. Bush could only keep a few countries in his head at once. It is not natural for him to keep more in his mind.

I also see gay marriage becoming more and more of an issue-he will resist dealing with it at first, and if he wins a second election, he will decide to support it. It will be a harder battle to fight than the civil rights movement in the 60s because gays don't tend to start city riots, but he'll have to deal with it beginning at least his second term.

The deficit will be difficult to manage, as it is already looming. It will be the biggest challenge, besides the terrorism issue. Terrorists are trying to bankrupt america and probably want us to fight several war fronts. Hopefully Kerry will see this coming, but so far nobody is really thinking in those terms.

[Please god, don't let Bush win and pick the next supreme court...please!]

Kerry will have to deal with an antagonistic congress unless there is some change. That will be a big issue.

The health care issue will once again proove to be very difficult to manage unless congress changes-if nothing passes the voters will take it out on congress during the next elections, unless bigger news changes everything.

There will be a very nasty terror campaign no matter who wins. Starting with unlikely places, not just LA, NY, SF. Phoenix and Seattle are likely next big targets and the border issue will have to be managed.

[Tom Storer]

I think Al's on the button with post #4. A Kerry presidency will mean less enthusiasm for reckless foreign adventure, an effort to mend the bitter rifts with allies around the world, more reasonable fiscal policy, more respect for the environment, and more regard for the public welfare as opposed to corporations. Whether he'll actually manage to do much of anything worthwhile is anyone's guess, but I believe he's much less likely to stumble eagerly forward doing the stupid, incompetent and sinister things the Bush administration is so fond of.

[Gentle Giant]

I would expect (and hope) for a return to a Clinton-era level of engagement in the Israeli-Palestinian situation. Entering office, W made a deliberate decision to scale back involvement in the peace process and look what happened. I wouldn't dare predict that an agreement will be reached during a Kerry administration, but I would expect to see real progress.

I think that in general one of Kerry's first priorities would be to mend fences around the world. Once he wins back a strong level of support for America among our allies, he'll have the leverage he needs to tackle hotspots like Israel, Iraq, Iran, N. Korea, etc.

[crawjo]

Originally Posted by Tom Storer

I think Al's on the button with post #4. A Kerry presidency will mean less enthusiasm for reckless foreign adventure, an effort to mend the bitter rifts with allies around the world, more reasonable fiscal policy, more respect for the environment, and more regard for the public welfare as opposed to corporations. Whether he'll actually manage to do much of anything worthwhile is anyone's guess, but I believe he's much less likely to stumble eagerly forward doing the stupid, incompetent and sinister things the Bush administration is so fond of.

Do you believe that Democrats actually stand "for the public welfare" over "corporations"?

[stonemonkts]

Originally Posted by crawjo

Do you believe that Democrats actually stand "for the public welfare" over "corporations"?

I'm not answering for the highly esteemed, noble Mr. Storer, but...from my perch it is more a matter of degree, or how far the pendulum swings towards deregulation/consumer welfare issues vs. corporate profits. Certainly a republican administration would favor the latter more, at least the current one would (and does).

[sonic1]

ditto

[Tom Storer]

Originally Posted by crawjo

Do you believe that Democrats actually stand "for the public welfare" over "corporations"?

No, I don't. I have no illusions about the Dems' indebtedness to corporate interests. But I do believe they're inclined to be not quite so shameless about screwing the public in favor of big business and, call me gullible, I prefer it that way. The environmental issue is part of this: Bush really doesn't care in the slightest about the environment and if he could, he would gladly pave all forests and eliminate all curbs on air and water pollution if it resulted in short-term profits for business. Kerry, I believe, in this regard at least would value the public interest over the corporate interest more highly than Bush does.

[Dr Dave]

What will happen if Kerry is elected: John Ashcroft will lose his job. Everything else will remain the same. Or get worse. I'm cool with it. I have a bad nervous condition which is related to the idea of having an Attorney General who anoints himself.

[Sergio Zamora]

Originally Posted by Dr Dave

...an Attorney General who anoints himself.

Is it true that it stunts growth?