343 Kerry / 195 Bush

Never said it would be facist, Ryen. I'm saying that the majority of the population is swinging to the right. It's a cycle, but a long one.

The right wing is extremely powerful right now. Look ANY talk radio station, the majority of the TV networks (re: Sinclair Broadcasting/SBGI), and of course Fox.

The right wing ability to influence US opinion is stronger than it has ever been. The left wing simply does not currently have a mechanism to counteract that. (Who; Al Franken? Michael Moore? There's not much of a comparison here when you look at the likes of Savage, Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity, Gallagher and O'Reilly. It's a powerhouse.)

This is just where the majority stands right now. It won't result in facism; it'll result in republican presidents.

That's all.

Chip, this may be true; I'm 26 and this is my first vote, as well. I also am not a "likely" voter, so I am never surveyed.

But you also have to remember that this is just as emotional of an election for the right wing, and I believe they will turn out in record numbers, as well. The Right has mechanisms there, too, that the Left does not have: Polling places, often churches, in predominantly conservative areas, hold the vote as an almost social event. "Get out the vote" drives among conservative communities are, at least historically, much more cohesive and effective.

Let's not forget what seems to actually swing many of the swing voters too: a peculiar number of people in this country will vote for who seems to be the 'winningest' person up to the night of the election. Some rationale for this may be, "Well, everyone seems to be behind this guy, he's probably the right vote", or, perhaps, just the feeling of security in being on the side who voted for 'the winner'.

I firmly, firmly, believe that the best we can hope for on the Left is a very close race. But more than likely, a number in the low 200's for Kerry and high 200's for Bush will occur.

It'll be an exciting night; I work for ABC News, and strangely enough, I'm going to be a Liberal working the republican convention. (It's just what I was assigned to.)

I know it sounds like, to the left wing folks here, that I'm being a pessimist, but I also believe that the right wing is absolutely not ready to cede control at this point, and with three weeks left to go, they absolutely have the media advantage, and therefore, the public opinion advantage.

We'll see what the polls say after SBGI's mandatorty broadcast of "Stolen Honor". I believe it will lock it for the GOP. However, after all is said and done, I have to say, this round; the 2004 election, though it got off to a tepid start, will have been one hell of a ride for the dems.

If nothing, a WHOLE LOT of viewpoints and points have been made, and now are out in the open. I don't think they'll be forgotten. I just don't think they'll have been enough to win 270 electoral votes.

I'm approaching this like a realist (I believe), and am already starting to look beyond the election.

Conservative radio has been around forever. While it has a strong impact on the Republican base it has very little overall impact.

Liberals have one big thing going for them. History.

Historically the best economies have been under Democrat Presidents. We just left eight years of peace and prosperity under Clinton and people remember that. Kerry will make an excellent President, he is just not as charasmatic as some.

The american public tends to balance itself out. Meaning they don't go completely liberal or completely conservative. This actually works out well for the country. A large part of Clinton's success was that he was balanced by a Republican congress.

I did have a *very* realistic dream last night that Bush won by a huge landslide. He was even taking things like NY and California. It was so real and I was so upset. I just couldn't believe it was happening. I also think in my dream I didn't realize it was election day. (you know how dreams are)

Even a couple of hours after I woke up this morning I had a lingering sadness. I can't stand the thought of validating everything this President has done.

Okay, first off a slight detour:



Um, employment is decreasing in manufacturing (and before that agriculture) partially because of globalization, but also becasue of automation. The services industry, including everyone from burger flippers to disease researchers, is harder to automate and often has a lot more high paying jobs along with many crap ones to be sure. Services are much more labor-intensive than manufacturing because of technology. Short of a radical change beyond standard Democrat/Republican policies, that won't change.

Back on the main topic.

Here's a scenario, Bush wins this election. Okay. Four more years, then out (eliminating term limits is a pipe dream). Who is going to run for the Republicans? Cheney? Please. As a member of the libertarian wing of the Republicans (really a liberal, in the classic sense) I'm having trouble with Bush, Cheney is a non-starter. So, Republicans have no strong incumbent advantage, and the Democratic heavyweights come out to play. For the Democrats, this doesn't seem to be a despairing scenario. Or the Democrats win now. Democrats are still in this.

That's east Lit. McCain.

Why else is he still kissing Bush's ass.

They want McCain/Guiliani

I predict McCain will be the next GOP nominee and wish it was so this time. This has been a very interesting thread and I have enjoyed reading it. I predict a Bush re-up but it will be close. I don't think he will get Florida by much. As a former military member who served under the last 4 presidents I will state that I wish we (GOP) had another option this time around but we don't. Sen. Kerry is like a fish out of water ( I won't use the tired cliche figure it out) and will say whatever needs to be said to gain the popular vote. The charade last sunday trying to win the "black" vote (what the hell is that anyway media moguls?) was absolutely embarrassing. More recent comments since Christopher Reeve's death have been simply atrocious. Do we really want this pair of charlatans in executive power ?
Peace

I'm guessing Bush wins, but I would certainly not be surprised if he loses. Part of me hopes for Bush to win the popular vote but Kerry wins the college, just to take that recriminations issue off the table for both parties.

And sure, McCain could be the the next Republican nominee in my scenario. Hell I'd take him over Bush in a heartbeat. But never underestimate the ability of political parties to shoot themselves in the foot in the primaries. The Cali Republicans are masters of this. Nationally, not as likely, but I would expect some more conservative candidate to have a chance in the primaries next cycle, as distressing as that might be. As for the Democrats, no idea, yeah there is Hillary, not sure who else. Edwards scares the hell out of me.

Kennedy didn't win the popular vote. It has happened a few times.

I never understood people getting in an uproar over that aspect of the 2000 election.

Bush will win. Why? The Democrats do not have a good candidate. No clear ideas, just Monday morning quarterbacking. And like they say... "Better evil known, than evil to come".

But I hope Bush wins by a decent margin so we will not have to put up with four more years of whinning from the left (or another silly Moore flick).

I personally hope that this election is over and looking forward to 2008:

Powell-McCain-Kemp vs Hillary-?

Politics in the USA right now are pretty extremist and hateful with the far left and the extreme right battling it out. Many if not all moderates like myself, are totally turned-off by both sides and tired of the BS that has taken place during the last four years (and I don't mean Bush exclusively).


BUSH = 307 KERRY = 231

-tito

Very well said Tito and I concur on your numbers as well.

Michi, I agree with a lot of what you say. The right definitely has control of the airwaves these days, but I don't believe that translates as directly to controlling the hearts and minds of the public as much as they'd like to believe it does. People are getting just as fed up and disgusted with the media as they are with Bush. The media slant to the right gives the appearance that this is a hugely conservative time in the US, but it's just that... slant. It's just a hugely conservative time in US media, partly due to the influece of the Rupert Murdoch's of the world, and partly due to the simple minded forces that drive media... everyone's trying to be Fox News right now because they came out of nowhere to become a media powerhouse. I personally believe that election night will show just how unrepresentative, biased, and short sighted the media really is. The right doesn't have greater numbers. They never have. They just have greater bluster.

If Bush does get elected to a second term I'll be very surprised if his administration doesn't go down in flames through corruption and scandal ala Nixon.

That's just republican propaganda. The left hasn't been far left for years. (DOMA, Welfare Reform, Budget Surpluses)

Neocons just like to say that so they can justify going as far from center as possible.

When I start thinking Pat Buchannan doesn't look so bad, you know the Republican party shot far to the right of right.

Kerry is am amazing candidate with a plan. Bush is running like he wasn't the President for the last four years. He's got a plan for education and healthcare now? Hell, he said that four years ago. Put up or shut up Mr. Texas.

Although, to Bush's credit, I hear that being President is "hard work".

Ummm.. ya, Tito. I'm not 'far left' at all, but I do believe the current administration is far too close to the Religious Right. As a moderate, that makes me *really* uncomfortable. It really struck me how much they've bedded down with the RR when during the RNC, they were voting to adopt (although I need to find out if they did) a formal stand on two issues:

Abortion - all abortions outlawed.

Same sex relationships - ban all, including civil unions and domestic partnerships.

To me, there is nothing 'Compassionate' about that.

King Ralph for President !!!!

Your examples come from an avowed centrist Democrat. Um, there are plenty of far left wing cranks out there. Plenty on the far right too, no argument there. As for the parties themselves, Howard Dean was the MAN for the Democratic party for quite a while, then the parts of the party that actually want and can reasonably expect to have a chance to govern (i.e., not folks like Nader, Sharpton, and a plethora of guys on the right too to be honest) woke up, and got a lot of help from the primary voters to be sure.

Now I am surprised (and disappointed) with how much Bush has run to the right, in the first election, since then and in this election. Gore had his populist outbursts and doomed himself. Kerry not so much, but he has to deal with an incumbent now. Makes me wonder if the old conventional wisdom of "running towards the center", given low voter turnouts, is no longer effective and it really is just energizing the candidates base, the undecided and moderates be damned. Or the campaign managers really need to get a clue. I kind of hope the latter, but the prospect of the former is rather terrifying to me.

And in Bush's defense, he did pass an education bill, Kennedy diluted it. I'll grant some of the Republican plans for education reform tend on the cheap side, but at least they support school choice (the party, plenty of individual Democrats support it too, but not in the platform), even if they don't have the balls or votes to do it.

McCain won't run because he'll be too old - the GOP won't want to run someone that elderly, there wouldn't be enough broad appeal.

Yes, Jeb says he doesn't have his eye on the presidency, but I think 4 years from now that will change. No I didn't say anything about getting rid of term limits. But I think Jeb will run.

No, the country has never become 'completely right' or 'completely left', but we've never seen *this* much power from the right before.

Yes, talk radio has always been conservative, but never quite this conservative. Besides Limbaugh, five years ago, all you had were folks who were moderate with a conservative bias. Listen to Savage Nation for five minutes and see where this has shifted. Even Limbaugh has become more extreme than he used to be.

No, I don't see much activity from the 'far left'. Nor would I really want to, any more than I would from the 'far right'.

Extremism on both ends really gets under my skin. (And I'm a double minority -- once again: Whatever that means.) It's just that right now, far right extremism is becoming more of an accepted norm.

I'd love to have a rational discussion with someone from the Right, without it escalating into people hitting eachother with 2x4's; as in - Even for a right winger, why is Bush so wonderful? I don't want to invoke Ed Schultz, but when he says "Why are you all so high on this guy?" - it echoes my sentiment. I'd like to know what about Bush, the person, not the GOP, the party, appeals.

Realize that when some people say "Anybody but Bush", they do mean anybody -- even another Republican. (of course that can't happen this time around.)

The things that bother me about Bush are not neccessarily 'Republican' qualities, but bush qualities.

Sometimes this stuff isn't completely partisan.

Funny you say that Michi...

Just this week, on my commute I've seen 3 "Republicans for Kerry/Edwards" bumper stickers. I think both parties are losing touch.

I'm still hoping Bush wins, so that we'll get to see John Titor's United States Civil War II.

So… the left is really the center and the right is farther right than right??? You can not possibly believe what you just wrote Neehai. Unless of course you in fact are one of the far left who has themselves convinced that you are in the center. Like it or not there is a far left and a far right. I have never heard anyone else claim otherwise.



That is Kerry’s pat answer for any question these days. “I have a plan for __________ (fill in the blank)” Well… I should hope so… how about actually telling us what your “plan” is instead of just saying “I have a plan”.

I am quite sure both sides have “plans” for just about everything. To hear Kerry say that Bush “didn’t have a plan” about Iraq is just ridiculous. Are we to really believe that we went into Iraq with no plan at all? Are we to believe that Bush woke up one day and decided to invade Iraq, making no plan at all, just drop in a few thousand troups and lets see what happens.? Yes, I am a conservative but I would never say that any president in the history of our country went to war without a “plan”. Some plans work, some do not but to repeatedly say that we did not have a “plan” just shows me how deep the ignorance of Kerry and anyone who believes that lie runs.

Did Bush’s plan work perfectly? No, but we have the ability to look upon that now in retrospect but I would also contend that NO plan would work “perfectly”. Iraq was doomed to be messy under ANY “plan”. Wars are messy people and ousting an oppressive government that effectively has a fair amount their citizens brainwashed to believe how evil we are… taught this from birth… this is not easy under ANY plan. Some people forget that the road to freedom is paved with the blood of our forefathers. To remain free there is no doubt that more lives will be given. Sure, it would have been nice if Sadam and the rest of those nuts would have just laid down and given up without a single life lost but that is and was never a possibility.

At least Bush had the balls to act when after umpteen resolutions it was perfectly clear that Sadam had no intention in complying with anything. It is very clear that “some” of our allies who were in bed with them (France and Germany) would NEVER act. If Kerry would have waited on France and Germany to join us in Iraq to invade then Sadam would still be in power.

Do you really forget the years and years of negotiating that the UN “negotiated” with Sadam and how many times he thumbed his nose at us all. The time for diplomacy had passed and Bush did the right thing. You can argue weapons of mass distractions were not there til you are blue in the face but ya know what? Not only WERE they there but Sadam used them on his own people, the Kurds. Are we to just sit back and wait for him to find a way to use them on us? No. I for one feel much better that the war was taken to them and not fought on US soil. I feel better that there has not been another attack on US soil since 911. Never forget what these people are capable of. Is there anyone out there that doubts Sadam would detonate a nuclear weapon in a major US city given the chance? If so, you are the only one with a valid argument for us not taking him out.

Well, even though we are a 'Democracy', we have been brainwashed into the notion that we should vote either Republican or Democrat for our vote to really count. I know there are other parties and that people actually vote for them, but really other than acting as spoilers, or for the self-satisfaction does it make sense to vote for a third party? Not the way things are right now. We really need to have more choice out there and a way to make it count. I even would go as far as to say that aside from campaign rethoric, Republicans and Democrats are the same. Sure each party may live to their stereotypes, but by looking at history we can see there is no much difference.

At the very least, I would also like to see someone else from the party in power be allowed to run against the incumbent president during the primaries. Not able to do so tells me that it is the party is choosing the president, not the voters. Is that a democracy?

I sometimes wonder if a parliamentary system would be better, but not living in Europe, I could not comment on what the advantages or disadvantages may be. I know our British friends are not too happy with Tony Blair either, but do they have a choice or are they stuck with the choice of labour and conservative parties like we are with dems and reps?

The whole point is that I hate to see the people of this country and even the world so divided over their support of two jokers that are into it only for their own benefit and that of their buddies. If you truly believe that Bush, Kerry, or anyone else down the chain of command gives a s**t on what happens to you on a personal basis, I admire your limitless optimism.

Countless young men and women of all nations have given their lives throughout history thinking that it would make a difference on the way the world operates. History shows that the world is basically the same as it was 3000 years ago, even though there may have been cosmetic alterations; there are poor and rich, oppressed and oppresors, good and evil. Their valiant effort is appreciated, but the song remains the same.

Jeb Bush commented over the weekend I believe when pressed on his aspirations. I can't quote him verbatim but it was something like " I am busy trying to help my state recover. D.C. needs heart surgery." I wish I could find this in print so I could quote the questions asked and his exact response but that was the gist. Was he posing? I'm not sure but it seemed genuine and echoed in my heart as to how I feel about politics today. As I stated earlier, I wish the GOP had another choice this year but we don't so the lesser of two evils gets my vote.

He has told you what his plan is. YOu can also go to johnkerry.com and download the book. More Republican propaganda. Saying he doesn't have a detailed plan that is readily available is just a lie. Not a "hey that dress looks nice on you" kind of lie, but a "hey it's your baby" kind of lie.


Perfect is never an expectation I associated with George Bush. I believe the man has based his entire career on lowered expectations. Seriously, we are talking about a man who gets applause when he pronounces the "big words" correctly. We are talking about a President who think naming three foreign leaders is a good day. Bonus points if he can also name their country. No one expected perfect.

However, he should have known that occupying Iraq would be more difficult than he planned. His father said, everyone said it. Instead, he hopped into a flightsuit for a little dog and pony show declaring major combat was over. Shock and Awe, yippie aye yay mother fucker!

On top of that with troops on the ground in a hostile environment he told the terrorists to "Bring it on." Bring it on? Troops on the ground in Asia and you tell the insurgents to bring it on? I never expected perfect.


You do realize that Sadam was in a hole in the ground. You do realize we killed his sons early on? Don't you? I mean really, this bothers me a lot.

You realize that the people we are fighting now are not part of Sadams regime. Do you know the different factions in Iraq? Please tell me you just don't know and are repeating something someone told you.


And that would be a problem why? There WERE NO WEAPONS. He was contained. Of all the places we needed to be, Iraq wasn't it. How about staying the course and finishing the job in Afghanistan? You know the mantra. "We've got to stop terr!"

You are ignorant. I am sorry. Sadam used weapons on the Kurds that WE GAVE HIM. We gave him that because we hated Iran. Iraq was our ally.

We didn't give a shit about the Kurds then and frankly this administration doesn't give a shit about the Kurds now. They serve a convenient purpose to justify an invasion.

It's "yippie Ki yay muther fucker". Neehai please get your facts straight

Isn't 'Saddam' usually spelled with two 'd's?

I stand corrected.


Saddam is how them pissy librawls say it. Sahhh-dahm.

Sadam is how we say it here in Texas. Sa-damn!