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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Baker who wrote (13957)	3/5/2006 3:58:45 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543667

The bottom line in politics is who won. Coming in second is....losing. A good loser is still a loser. That is surely true. But one cannot make too much of this when you try to interpret it's meaning. If the winner wins by 10 points, it's a very big deal, and we can look at that margin as a governing margin. But when the winner doesn't win but is chosen and then wins but by very small margins, the meaning is much less clear. Apart from Bush, Sr., the last several presidential elections have been won by people who caught the voters' imagination. They had a message and/or a personality that resonated with voters. The problem with that assertion is that had Gore managed his Florida legal stuff better, you would have to argue that for him. Which wouldn't be any more true than arguing it for Bush now. They had a message and/or a personality that resonated with voters. You can just as easily argue that Kerry and Gore had a personality and a message that resonated with half the voters and Bush with the other half. We are 50-50 and Bush is trying to govern as if it's 55-45. Doesn't work. I like your other point, that we won't have a governing coalition until some candidate figures out how to move the margins much more strongly. And my argument with you is that it's not clear going to the center is the answer.