dyer@vaxuum.DEC (Where's the falafel?) (03/19/84)
~~~ I voted for Jesse Jackson in the primary; but I won't mind getting
to vote for Gary Hart this November. Hart *does* have new ideas; you just
don't hear about them because (1) he's busy countering Mondale, and (2)
the media would rather concentrate on (1) than on the issues.
I'm sorry to see George McGovern bowing out. He and Jackson were
the only ones talking sense (partially due to them not being front-runners).
Hart makes a lot of sense himself, but you don't hear about it very much
in this campaign.
What follows is a collection of ideas and opinions on this issue
from the E-Net here at DEC. I add them here in the interest of distributing
points of view.
(-: Plus, some of them are mine! :-)
<_Jym_>
| Jym Dyer | Nashua, New Hampshire | ...decvax!decwrl!rhea!vaxuum!dyer |
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
12-MAR-1984 21:54 VAXUUM::DYER
Meta-X
: execute-mlisp-line (setq friendly-flame 1)
The main reason the campaign has become so lively is that George
McGovern and Jesse Jackson are in it, and they're telling it like it is.
I am amazed at the issues they've been able to bring up and actually talk
about with national media coverage! It's a breath of fresh air.
Unfortunately, neither of these candidates seem to have very much
of a chance of winning.
We've got three who consider themselves serious contenders for
the nomination. It's unfortunate that those who think they have a shot
often tend towards mediocrity. For example, there's Gary Hart. Yes, he
has new ideas, but we haven't heard much about them lately; he's been
busy countering the attacks of the others and reacting to the campaigning
of the others. A pity.
I'm glad to see Hart running ahead of the pack. If he gets the
nomination, I'll surely vote for him and be glad I did. A race between
Hart and Reagan would not be a choice between the lesser of two evils,
and I for one am sick of voting for the lesser evil!
One has to admit that Hart's front-running owes much to the media,
who picked up on the "momentum" angle. It's odd now that "momentum" is
a campaign "issue"! But there's also the fact that Hart is a good can-
didate, even if not many know much about him!
A lot's being said about how little is known about him. It's
funny how nobody says anything about how little is known about Mondale
or Glenn! Really now, what do most people know about Mondale except
that he was Vice President? What do people know about Glenn except that
he was an astronaut? (It's interesting now that Glenn is trying to im-
press on people that he's *more* than an astronaut; at first it was his
entire campaign!)
The real reason that Mondale and Glenn were leading the polls
so early on is that they were the only ones anyone heard of! And nei-
ther of them have much public appeal beyond recognition.
Truth be told, Mondale is a better candidate than most people
make him out to be. He's acted honorably for quite some time, at times
he showed fine moral character when Jimmy Carter was going astray. He's
now coming off as a nasty grump trying to squash Hart.
But Hart is a better choice. I've known about him before this
race and I've been impressed. I'm *more* impressed with McGovern and
Jackson, quite frankly, but Hart has a better chance for the Presidency.
It's just luck that Hart's the front-runner. I'm not saying
that only luck keeps *Mondale* from taking that spot; I'm saying that
the American people want a change, and Hart now has the best chance of
making that change.
It was different before the NH primaries. A lot of people were
half-heartedly resigned to Mondale winning and decided to throw their
support his way in order to establish a unity to beat Reagan. What's
more, there was a large number of candidates at the time, and at least
three of them (Jackson, McGovern, and Hart) were good progressive can-
didates. By luck (and some early-bird campaigning in Iowa, truth be
told), Hart got the momentum.
His surge in popularity is no mystery. He's a good choice,
and he's got a good chance.
<_Jym_>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
13-MAR-1984 09:56 NACHO::CONLIFFE
People have never won elections by talking about REAL issues.
(setq FLAME 1)
I'm already getting sick of people who are calling HART the "next JFK".
It's largely media hype, and seems mostly based on age and the fact that
Hart is "coming from behind".
Hart is capitalizing on this (can you blame him) and, frankly, I think that
the whole mess is ridiculous.
(setq FLAME 0)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
13-MAR-1984 12:14 PIXEL::DICKSON
It is more than age. Hart's "new ideas" approach is lifted from
JFK's campaign.
And ALL the liberals have the hand motions down pat. Watch Mondale,
McGovern, and Hart with the sound turned off. Chop, chop, chop.
Mondale and McGovern even use the same voice inflections, as does
Teddy K: a forced nasal whine.
So who is the Libertarian Party running this year?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
16-MAR-1984 21:41 ELUDOM::WINALSKI
This year's Democratic primary campaign has degenerated into a beauty contest.
The news media have started hyping Hart as a come-from-behind underdog who is
gaining momentum and overtaking the front runner.
Does that make him a person that we want running the country?
I don't hear anything on the news about "Gary Hart believes X is the way to
lower the deficit" or "Mondale promises to do X to eliminate poverty." All
I hear is about how Hart leads Mondale in a poll taken somewhere, or how
Mondale didn't look good on camera in last night's debate.
The real issue is for the Democrats to choose a person who will make a good
president, or who at least can beat Reagan in the fall. Nobody seems to be
interested in that this time around, though.
--PSW
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
16-MAR-1984 23:04 VAXUUM::DYER
Where's the beef? My beef with the media coverage of the campaign
is this: They go to the polls and ask the voters who voted for Hart, "what
do you know about Hart?" The ones who reply, "nothing, really," get put on
the air.
Are they asking Mondale supporters the same thing? What, really,
do most people know about Mondale?
I wish the media would stop this nonsense and *tell* people about
these candidates so that they *will* know something about them. Isn't that
what they're there for? (Rhetorical question...)
<_Jym_>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
17-MAR-1984 13:18 ELUDOM::WINALSKI
That's what you and I WANT them to be there for. What the news media are
REALLY there for is to sell newspaper advertizing space or commercial time
on their stations. That and personal gratification. The real substance of
primary politics isn't exciting, so the news media create controversy where
none would have existed. In this particular campaign, they have done so to
the total exclusion of the real news they're supposed to be covering.
--PSW
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
18-MAR-1984 22:10 BABEL::BISHOP_2
The Libertarian candidate is Dave Bergland, VP Jim Lewis.
As far as I can tell, Hart is a supporter of "industrial policy",
otherwise known as "central economic planning", otherwise called
socialism. We've seen this in action, most recently in France. But
candidates have a positive incentive not to reveal their views:
any position will cause them to lose some votes. No positions will
not lose votes. QED.
-John Bishop
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
18-MAR-1984 22:38 PYGMY::BOEBINGER
Actually, you're dead wrong. Mondale is in favor of the
"industrial policy". Hart is opposed. What Hart has proposed is
quite different. He is in favor of a high-tech research exclusion
to the antitrust laws, which would allow DEC, DG, CDC, etc, to
combine efforts in joint ventures in basic research. The notion
is that a blanket exclusion would allow for more productive
combinations than the piecemeal approach taken now. In the industrial
(smokestack) area, what he has proposed is that the government
act as honest broker between labor and management in arriving
at long term plans to phase in automation (which makes management
happy) and retraining of workers (which makes the workers happy).
He is calling for sacrifices on both sides: the workers must
moderate pay demands and management must take the savings and
use them for something productive (NOT for buying things like
Marathon Oil). This position is similar to what the Japanese
do. Mondale's industrial policy is the traditional 'pass laws to
force folks to do this and that'.
Hart wrote a book on his views. It's not his fault that the
media can't read.
john
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mon 19-Mar-1984 13:32 Zen (not EST!) Time