[dfwgator]

Why not have two GOP losers on the same ticket, Burns and Allen.


Say goodnight, Gracie.

[beaversmom]

LOL:)

[Eagle Forgotten]

Why not have two GOP losers on the same ticket, Burns and Allen.

ROFL!

With all the talk about Burns and Allen being among the endangered incumbents, that pairing never occurred to me. Your proposed ticket would win heavily in the crucial nostalgic-octogenarian voting bloc.

As for the subject of the thread, I agree with the consensus that Allen is toast for '08. Nixon lost his own state (California governor in 1962) and came back to be President, but he had much more national stature than Allen, and it still took him six years. If John Warner decides not to run for re-election to the Senate in 2008 (when he'll be 81), Allen might replace him, and then conceivably have a shot in 2012 or thereafter.

[BillyBoy]

I never understood the infatuation with Allen on FR. John Ensign (ever heard of him?) was the OTHER conservative Republican elected in 2000 and he was TOTALLY ignored on this board. Ensign WON re-election last night in a swing state, Allen lost in a state that hasn't elected a Dem President since 1964.

Nominating washed-up losers for President who can't carry their OWN state should remain a Dem affair.

The useful idiots on this board STILL cheerleading for Allen must be the FR equivilents of the RATs who cheered on McGovern. They might well slate Janklow/Foley for President while they're at it. Another couple of "winners"