Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (83543)	3/18/2003 9:20:53 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Any Dem will win if we are in a mess, no Dem can win if things have gone well. A bit too blanket a statement for my tastes. I think these kinds of judgments exist along a continuum from bad to good. The worse the occupation (not the war) goes, the less likely Bush will win (but weak dem candidates still won't win), the more apparent the economy becomes a big factor; the better the occupation goes (less American casualties, some progress to democratic forms--but not time enough for substance) the more likely Bush will win (but strong dem candidates will definitely have a chance, one needs only look at 92 to see that). As for the themes of the campaign, your list is about where they are now. But who would have thought a campaign on the economy woudl have beaten Bush I in 92? So, short answer, in my view it's still too early. The fate of Iraq will provide the context as to whether the economy, deficits, etc., become the center piece but good candidates will make this unpredictable.