gore was way ahead in the early polls, nathan, and blew it. he squeaked out a win but he and your party threw the election when winning it meant going against the ultra right wing set on the supreme court.
>Bush is going to lose. It may be close or it may be a blowout-- that's the
>main debate I'm having with myself trying to analyze the race.
>
>And by the way, Kerry's victory is not a victory for DLC politics-- seeming
>the reverse of Chuck's argument-- since Kerry's pro-labor policies are
>hardly DLC talking points.
>
>Nathan Newman
anyone who believes kerry's campaign rhetoric would have to be an idiot. not only because they've no idea what kind of a congress kerry will be dealing with but because kerry will be the brunt of attacks that make the immobilization of wild bill clinton look like child's play should kerry be lucky -- or unlucky -- enough to win.
heck, the rove set already has kerry on the ropes with a minimum of expense and time with the swift boat vets for truth, and a lot of time and money from the kerry campaign on the defensive. the book is coming out soon -- for those few who still read in our society. rove has only begun to fight, with a war chest that beats all.
the fact rove has nothing but garbage to sell doesn't reflect well on kerry being in a "dead heat." just the opposite. kerry would be comfortably ahead if his campaign had any idea what they are doing. a dead heat is an embarrassment.
the DLC wins any way you look at it. they know kerry's tawdry attempt to beguile the labor vote is pure nonsense, as is the rest of his campaign propaganda.
if i were a democrat -- gasp, wheeze -- i'd put a lot more time on figuring how the kerry campaign can right itself than trying to analyze whether or not the "race" will be a blow out. if shrub looses, it will not be due to kerry or his campaign.
R
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk