> The reasons why Repugs can count on winning is not because of evil
> shrewdness of Karl Rove, or spinelessness of Democrats, but because it
> reflects the preferences of a big slice of the US population.
I would say, more precisely, a "big slice of the US population" (the dedicated Bush supporters, mostly in the South and West, who at this point give him a greater electoral college vote than Kerry), plus the fact that Kerry is just not a very appealing candidate to the rest of the population, in terms of his personality and his very great difficulty in explaining all those Senate votes. If I were advising the DP, I'd say, "Dump this guy now, and try to find another candidate before your convention." But I can't think offhand of anyone they could come up with who would be more appealing. Maybe Edwards, but he would probably look too young and inexperienced next to Bush.
OTOH, it would be interesting seeing the Bush camp having to turn on a dime, dumping all their anti-Kerry propaganda and cooking up anti-Edwards stuff. (But perhaps they are already doing that, anticipating just the scenario I outlined above.)
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ A sympathetic Scot summed it all up very neatly in the remark, 'You should make a point of trying every experience once, excepting incest and folk-dancing.' -- Sir Arnold Bax