Admit it, we all know that war hawk Joseph Lieberman is going to get it. It's practically already been decided. And if he wins, we'll have this real-life version of Senator Palpatine continuing the Bush Doctrine, while tossing out a bone or two to the poor and workers at home (and even then, only after fierce struggle).
And regarding polls that have any "unnamed Democrat" already beating Bush, don't "unnamed" candidates generally beat out incumbents, no matter what? (The appeal is, they're unnamed -- project who you like on them.) Slap Daschle's or Gephardt's face to this "unnamed" persona, and Bush's prospects will suddenly look a whole lot better.
Brian
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Nathan Newman wrote:
> As for Dean, if the war goes really badly, I think he has a fair chance of
> getting the nomination-- the buzz he's getting and the national organization
> he's building is on a scale no "fringe" candidate has had since Jackson in
> 1988 and the wide open field in 1976. And his pro-gun stance could get him
> some odd cultural conservative support that will broaden his base in some
> midwest and southern states.
>
> And I still have a hard cold prediction that Bush will lose next year,
> almost regardless of who the Democrats nominate (okay, I think he might be
> able to beat Sharpton, but that's about it).