Long winded and in the end you really said nothing.
Thanks. I’ve been on pins and needles awaiting that much electoral insight!
Too long, didn’t read.
That sounds a lot like my typical weather forecast: Looks like it'll rain, unless it doesn't.
;^)
In seriousness, I think you underestimated the number of Hillary! supporters who assumed their gal would win, and crossed over in record numbers to vote for McQueeg in open-primary states so we'd be sure and have a really lousy candidate.
I’m not taking much to the bank these days, :(, but I’ve got a feeling that whoever the next president is, s/he will only be a one-term president.
Of all the candidates, only Obama (Communist, Black Supremacist, and closet Mahometan) has swooning supporters, but they are not enough to sustain him. His presidency will look a lot like Jimmy Carter’s, only much worse with much more tragic results.
Hillary (Marxist Socialist) is only good for one term, because she has too many negatives and WAY too much baggage. She will also run the economy into the ground, but she isn’t as likely to compromise National Security as much as the closet Mahometan, Obama. You don’t see Hamas cheering her on.
McCain is too old to run for president now. He will be WAY too old in 4 years. Besides, most of those who will vote for him, including me, will only be doing so because the alternatives are so much worse.
“In the end I believe strongly that Hillary!, Saint Osama Obama, or McLane could each bring about a 49 state landslide for or against themselves; a one vote victory; or anything in between. You can take that to the bank.”
Take what to the bank? Every possible eventuality?
Did this make sense in your head before you wrote it?
I like your article. I agree about the evangelical base.
BTW, Obama was elected in 2004, not 2006.
I don’t feel very satisfied as I was anticipating some really great analysis. lol.