SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: American Spirit who wrote (386253)4/5/2003 12:25:16 PM
From: Rock_nj  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769667
 
Wesley Clark is a Democrat? In any case, your points are well taken. Gore ran probably the lamest campaign in 2000. He couldn't even win his own state of TN. That's about as lame as you get. Gore had a strong economy and the public comfortable with a Democrat in the White House and he still couldn't win in 2000. A lot of candidates have lost when they didn't have much going for them. But, Gore lost in 2000 when he was handed the perfect running environment. Stupid is, is stupid does. Gore will go down in history as running the lamest campaign ever.



To: American Spirit who wrote (386253)4/5/2003 12:28:59 PM
From: CYBERKEN  Respond to of 769667
 
You are like the old generals planning the next war by fighting the last one. 2000, with it's 1 to 2 million fabricated Gore votes-and millions of "independents" who had not yet watched thousands killed in NY and the Pentagon in payment for the Clinton/Gore failures-is distant history. Kerry, Edwards, Leiberman, etc., have very little chance of getting as high as 40% of the popular vote even with massive fabrications in ghettos and universities (which will now be limited by the re-emergence of poll-watchers).

The only ticket the Dems can mount will be a mere marker, a sacrificial lamb. The real question of 2004 will be whether Bush can break 70% or not.

It's over before it starts: Enjoy your propaganda run...