Kerry May Delay Democratic Nomination

[crabcake]

All in the name of money

John Kerry's campaign said Friday he is considering delaying his nomination to gain more time to capitalize on his record-breaking fund raising and reduce President Bush's multimillion-dollar financial advantage.

Kerry and President Bush are each expected to accept $75 million in full federal funding for their general election campaigns. Once nominated, the candidates will be limited to spending that money and can no longer raise or spend private contributions.

And someone was pizzed about a couple fed employees' pay grades?

 

[blacklabman]

This is just another example of the devious nature of this person.

 

[rraley]

I can understand why Kerry would want to do this: he cannot cede too much time to Bush to spend like a drunken sailor. Still I wonder if this could hurt the bounce that candidates typically get out of a convention. And I also wonder if not accepting the nominaton during the convention will jeopardize the $15 million that parties receive for "nominating conventions." Too many questions, just give Bush the extra couple weeks to run misleading ads that don't change anyone's minds.

 

[vraiblonde]

Can you say "McCain-Feingold"?

 

[willie]

The only "misleading" statements Bush & company made were true at the time but Kerry did his usual flip flop.

 

[rraley]

Originally posted by willie
The only "misleading" statements Bush & company made were true at the time but Kerry did his usual flip flop.

Let us get into the misleading statements.
The ad about John Kerry not supporting the troops...misleading. Yes John Kerry did vote against the final $87 billion package for Iraqi Reconstruction, but he voted for another version of the package that provided the funding, except it offset the costs by increasing taxes slightly for millionaires. The ad is also misleading because it suggests that Kerry specifically voted against body armor, bullets, etc.
The gas tax ad...misleading. Suggests that Kerry supported a fifty cent gas tax. Kerry mentioned in one line of one speech in the early 90s that a possible fifty cent gas tax hike would cause fuel efficency to increase and less gas consumption. He was noncommittal about the tax in the speech (it was an academic forum in which suggestions were being thrown around) and a week later said that after further analysis, found that the tax would not do that and would only hurt the economy. President Bush's cheif economic advisers meanwhile, still do support the fifty cent gas tax.
And just a general note about the Bush ads. They usually cite the hundreds of times that Kerry did this in the Senate, etc. For instance, Kerry voted 352 times for a tax increase. This is not something that is hard to do in the United States Senate where bills average about 1,000 pages and include subsections, and sub-subundersections, and fine print. Often the 352 claim is based on one line of one bill that is reintroduced every session that the Senate reconvenes (and Kerry has been in the Senate since 1987 so of course the number of times he has voted is huge). It is just like how George W. Bush brought up John McCain voting against breast cancer treatment funding (it was part of a 2100 page bill that overspent on pork barrel projects according to McCain). These ads are misleading and it is sad that some Americans accept them wholly without any thought.

 

[willie]

The tactic of adding an unacceptable amendment to a bill is an old one. Kerry did do a flip flop on supporting the troops. On such a life saving bill that funded the body armor why would Kerry and his cronies add and amendment that would kill that bill? For Bush to call him on that is not misleading.

If he makes a speech and suggest a whopper of a gas tax, what does that mean? TAX TAX TAX, that is what he is telling us. It sure isn't misleading to me. As soon as he found out it went over like a fart in church, he did his flip flop.



For instance, Kerry voted 352 times for a tax increase. This is not something that is hard to do in the United States Senate where bills average about 1,000 pages and include subsections, and sub-subundersections, and fine print.
This is something very hard to do if you do not believe in raising taxes.

Kerry is all about double speak and his solution to everything is taxes. I do believe the man has a sincerity problem and will say whatever it takes to buy the vote.

 

[sleuth]

Originally posted by rraley
Let us get into the misleading statements.
The ad about John Kerry not supporting the troops...misleading. Yes John Kerry did vote against the final $87 billion package for Iraqi Reconstruction, but he voted for another version of the package that provided the funding, except it offset the costs by increasing taxes slightly for millionaires.

rraley, I'm assuming you're condoning the raising of taxes of millionaires from this statement, since you're using it to support Kerry's campaign effort. Could you explain to me why you support raising taxes on millionaires, i.e. why you feel that millionaires should pay a higher percentage in taxes while the rest of Americans get the benefits of military protection without paying a higher percentage themselves?