Planderella said:This is like fantasy football. LOL.
Repo Man said:I think W is beatable. If next year at this time he continues to have no real domestic policy the Dems will pound that into the minds of voters. If the right Democrat gets some momentum going who knows what will happen. I believe that this race will be a lot closer than people assume.
pete-rock said:No doubt W is beatable. If the economy is still sucky, the tax cut produces huge deficits, the Middle East is still very prickly, and no real domestic policy emerges, then sure, he can be beaten.
biscuit said:That's an excellent idea. To bad that W's a republican however. He would make a great stand-in for Patrick.
Mud Princess said:Gore should have won by a landslide. Instead he ran a lackluster campaign.
El Feo said:...As long as Democrats delude themselves into believing our candidates are dumb, they're underestimating them. And the longer Dems do that, the longer we're in power. And the more of us get elected. And...well, you get the point.
Republicans know Democrats are smart. We just think they're wrong. As long as we keep that squarely in our minds, we can figure out how to beat them and not have our legs cut out from under us come election time by our own arrogance.
On another Spongebob/Patrick related note, though, I have to admit that whenever I hear Patrick say "Uh...I...uh...forget!", Hillary Clinton pops into my head. I gotta figure out what that's all about...
gkmo62u said:But watch for Gepheardt...middle America's guy. No New England Democrat has faired well in 40 years. That says something.
NHPlanner said:This is the main reason I'll likely vote for him....electability....well....at least among the current choices.
prudence said:DId Clinton have a domestic policy? And "nailing anything that moves" is not a policy...it was more of a motivation to stay in office. Oh, there was that health care fiasco...oh, and pardoning every dirty democrat...I gues you could call those "policies."
The Middle East has been "prickly" for 1000s of years...let's not blame W for it.
And who is the economy bad for? Interest rates are ridiculously low. Construction hasn't stopped. Am I supposed to feel bad for people who work in the volatile tech industries? They reaped the rewards for nearly a decade. Maybe people aren't as marketable as they once were. Maybe they need to invest in themselves (i.e.-education). Because venture capitalists don't stand on every corner with buckets of cash to give out to every upstart doesn't mean the nation is going to hell. Maybe America's "buy now, pay later" spending habits are catching up with us. We are a creditor nation, and maybe that's not best.
How about some service cuts...like axe-ing unproductive programs. That would save $$, cut fat, and ultimately reduce taxes. Maybe AFDC needs to go...
pete-rock said:Can W be beaten? He can, in the sense that no one is guaranteed victory. Will he? I don't know. I just know that the Dems need to step up to the plate if they really want to win.
prudence said:No candidate is a lock...but the Dems have the greatest variable on their side, minorities. Their # grows exponentially (so it seems) and they are devoted to Dems. I cannot understand why, because the Dems' programs don't truly help them...but they keep voting that way...
Alan said:...none of the above...
pete-rock said:Hasn't unemployment been climbing steadily for several months now? I think our economic problems are broader than the fallout of the tech industry. We're producing more than we can consume or export, and there are signs that deflation is on the horizon (see Alan Greenspan). Maybe this economy has problems that are more systemic than cyclical.