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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (68409)	5/21/2006 12:06:03 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362851

Kerry is a change. A huge change. The only reason we need a change is because Bush won and the congress stayed in rightwing hands. Warner would be the Clinton or Carter of 2008 if he can show us he's made of the right stuff. But we don't know enough about him yet. Would he be a better president than Kerry just for the sake of more "change"? Don't judge it that way. Reagan and Nixon both won two terms after being beaten their first tries, and like Kerry, Nixon was robbed in one state which swung the election, in Nixon's case West Virginia, in Kerry's Ohio. Remember Kerry whuped Bush's butt in all three debates and would have won if Bush had played fairly. And he would have been the first to ever beat a war-time president.