"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:18:15 -0500, "
wrote:



Jacob Kramer wrote:
"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
...


By the time the election comes around and Kerry's record is more widely
known, the undecided voters, who decide most elections will IMO elect
Bush
again.


In the latest polls his numbers are right where his father's were at
this time:


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...p/ap_poll_bush


It looks like most Americans are catching on to this charlatan.

Whether you like Bush or you don't (and I don't), this looks like
wishful thinking. The only Democrats that have been able to win the
White House in the last 40 years were from the south or southwest. Of
the Democratic Presidential candidates during that time, probably
Mondale and Dukakis are most similar to Kerry, and, to put it
charitably, they weren't particularly competitive.

Had there not been an assassination, you wouldn't be able to make that
statement.

OSAF.

Or, alternately, saying 44 years would render your statement
incorrect.

Kennedy wouldn't be allowed in to the current Democrat party.

It's one thing to think Bush is horrible and a menace, it's quite
another to talk yourself into believing that most Americans are going to
see it that way come November.

The big if right now is whether the right will feel betrayed enough to
jump ranks.

Never, they just stay home.

I'm not entirely convinced that this is the case, but if
the Demos are sufficiently aroused from the results of the last
election and get a big turnout, there could be enough defections to
make it interesting.

The record shows that there is a core for both parties that is pretty evenly
split, it's the undecided's who decide elections.