posted on Jan, 9 2003 @ 09:50 AM
You've avoided the obvious: a strong sitting president poised for a second term brings out a sacrifical lamb opponent ( see Mondale/Ferraro, Dole and
geez, who did the GOP sacrafice as VP with Dole?).
A weak and very beatable sitting president brings out a strong and large field as was the one Reagan came out of, as was the one Clinton came out
Edwards would take the South over Bush - notice how the Corporate/Complicit Media is spinning 'millionare trial lawyer' - when idiot GW had him on
the millionaire front ten times over.....did anyone remember him mentioned as a multi-millionaire Corpratist against McCain in the primaries?
Being, I mean saying, they were for social issues like a middle class tax rebate, extended unemployment, small business investment, no more corporate
welfare is the wolf in sheeps clothing tactic employed by winning Republicans in order to make them look like moderate Democrats.
In truth, the Dems hold more Moderates in their ranks than the Republicans; there is a larger percentage of Ultra Conservatives in the GOP than there
are Ultra Liberals in the Democrats. You can't be Bleeding heart Liberal in the areas they represent: NY/CT/CA/MA are all national epicenters of
business and industry in the US; the dividing point is business people are less prone to want goverment in their personal lives in those areas.
On Kerry, geez Bob, you sound like 'Tiger Beat' magazine!
Landrieu pulled her fat out of the fire by attacking Bush: she was in jeapody of losing BECAUSE she was touting that Bush connection. Once she
highlighted his moron-ness and showed how he was behind a global sugar supplier running the show over Louisiana sugar companies, then she won.
What you will see, unfourtunately, is more terror attacks and war movements the closer we get to th '04 election.
[Edited on 9-1-2003 by Bout Time]