Longest, tightest, costliest race in history (strongest Democrat line-up in years?!)

The Independent on Sunday (U.K.) ^ | 11/02/03 | Rupert Cornwell

[mewzilla]

ROTFLMAO!!!

May I have some of what this guy's smoking? Pretty, pretty please!!!

[self_evident]

Chance of success: 7/10
Chance of success: 6/10
Chance of success: 5/10
Chance of success: 5/10
Chance of success: 5/10
Chance of success: 3/10
Chance of success: 3/10
Total: 34/10

Apparently we are going to have three presidents.
At least they gave 110% effort on the article.

[fqued]

On this very night, in exactly a year's time, it will all be over.

Very first line is erroneous.
Hey, BRITISH DUDE! OUR ELECTIONS ARE ON TUESDAYS!!
Whether your newspaper thinks it's Saturday or Sunday, it ain't TUESDAY!!
No way will it be this very night in exactly one year.

And the most amazing thing about the article was that this erroneous sentence was the closest thing in it to the truth.

[Verginius Rufus]

The general election will be on November 2, 2004...this is from tomorrow's edition (November 2).

[pogo101]

Strongest in years? Four years? That's when Al Gore got more popular votes than anyone in history, right?

[aruanan]

About the closest they get chance-wise is 3/10 and this should be used only in discussing the chances of any Democrat candidate with respect to any other Democrat candidate.

[skinkinthegrass]

Hmmmm....Where's Shrillary? Surely, The British Pol-watchers have heard about Shrillary as being groomed for Veep, this time around...Most important, Where's the little Rock Mafia? :/

[dwd1]

I don't know if the democrats have any chance being that they have almost completely abandoned the conservative wing of the democratic party...

Why no one has considered getting John Breaux, Mary Landrieu, Zell Miller, or someone from the South with an independent voting record is beyond me...

Democrats had been such a powerful party because there was room for everyone from compassionate conservative to ultra liberal... After 94, this is no longer the case...

I saw Zell Miller speaking the other day trying to convince Democrats to be more reasonable on Judicial appointments and come back to the center... He looked very frustrated...

[ExSoldier]

"Why no one has considered getting John Breaux, Mary Landrieu, Zell Miller, or someone from the South with an independent voting record is beyond me..."

Could it be that they're all pro-gun? Although the RATS want to make it seem like they're backing off the gun issue, they're not really and to back a pro-gun RAT, would to them, be like putting the cart before the horse. Rats are elitist, anti-gun, anti-life and anti-liberty. Changing any one of those would lead to a general unravelling and quick self destruction of the party.

Of course, it's going to happen anyway, just incrementally. First the minorities will wake up and realize that the Republicans really can offer alternatives and can show them how to accumulate wealth without having it come from the government nipple. Next, (this is already happening) the middle class white RATS willl suddenly realize just how far their own party has walked away from what's important to them....and the snowball will gather speed. I think the events post 9-11 have already started this chain of events.

[CyberAnt]

"strongest Democrat line-up in years"

ROTFLOL! These people are not only deaf, dumb and blind .. they're also stupid and in denial.

[dwd1]

You may be right. It is just that there has not been a successful democratic campaign without a southern conservative...

Also, I think that what allowed Clinton to win in 92 was the presence of Perot because Perot gathered the support of a lot of independent and swing voters... Unfortunately for the Dems, this was seen as a mandate to go way left and as you know, they quickly loss the house and I believe two Senators changed parties (Shelby and Campbell)...

I remember the campaign of one Jim Collins back in 82 when he was running against Lloyd Bentsen (Texas is conservative and Bentsen is a liberal) It did not sell that year but by 94, the message came through loud and clear because of national party policies...

With the Republicans having the center and the right, the Dems are going to have to wake up and realize how much of their future they mortgaged with Clinton's election and re-election... I don't think that was the legacy he was looking for...

[woofie]

The Independent on Sunday (U.K.) ^ | 11/02/03 | Rupert Cornwell

Rupert! You have been drinking again!

[dwd1]

I was watching an episode of the West Wing the other day where a conservative Democratic Senator from Idaho resigned from the Democratic Party and stated that he would be running as a GOP candidate in the future...
The show which has a very liberal slant had a character that is about to get his clock cleaned because he committed the act that was the final straw...

Jeffords went independent but not Dem but Shelby and Campbell flat out switched...

I think what Terry McAuliffe and those in that circle simply do not get (Bill Press in California had the same problem back in 94) is that the people who are elected to represent work for the people in their district or state...

I think McAuliffe and too many in Democratic Leadership forgot that...

I wonder if being Pro-Gun is a deal breaker at the national level... And I do not believe that anyone who receives the nomination has the courage to nominate or select a running mate who is pro-gun and holds conservative views... It is like a tidal wave that can not be stopped... I will bet one thing... Terry McAuliffe is going to be experiencing a career change very soon... Perhaps he and Gray Davis will end up in some interesting venture...

[Straight Vermonter]

After a campaign that has been under way almost from the very moment George Bush entered the White House in January 2001, we will finally know (barring, of course, another Florida) whether he will be in office for a further four years - or, as much of the world devoutly wishes, whether a Democrat will replace him in the most powerful office in history.

Sure, if you count a billion muslims and 2 billion red Chinese.

[Holden Magroin]

Here's a snapshot of the "strongest Democratic line-up in years":

Lieberman: Snoozeville.

Gephardt: Melodramatic gasbag.

Kerry: Pompous opportunist who changes his mind on Iraq every week.

Edwards: Ambulance chaser. Tried to sell his mansion to a Saudi lobbyist.

Dean: Hatemongering liberal.

Clark: Self-promoting liar. Conspiracy theorist.

[AFPhys]

This bloke is really living in a dream world.

[uglybiker]

All the others are too ugly, and in the age of TV in America, ugly runs second.

Does that mean I'll never be President? *sniff*