>
but the fact is, the Dems were THAT CLOSE to yanking the money from Kerry and moving it to the senate races. His "good" performance in Debate #1 kept that money in place :)
>
I doubt it was contrived, but if so there was a better reason than this to keep Kerry viable. The Torricelli option.
Well, I totally disagree that anyone was ever going to replace Kerry as the candidate.