<html><body> <DIV>       In terms of probabilities, the best outcome imo would be a repeat of the situation we had in the mid 70s - divided government, with Dems decisively in control of the Congress and weak Republican President.  Given the emphasis so many Dems have on the deficit it is hard to see any kind of meaningful increase in social spending coming from a united Dem govt, under current leadership (Congress and President) and possibly  major cuts, all in the name of deficit reduction.        </DIV> <DIV>       One must doubt whether any of the three New Dem frontrunners would dare withdraw from Iraq (and wherever else US troops may be occupying).</DIV> <DIV>  Gridlock may be the best option on offer, given the present choices.SR</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: "Colin Brace" <cb@lim.nl> <BR><BR>> On 5/12/06, Steven L. Robinson <SROBIN21@COMCAST.NET>wrote: <BR>. <BR>> <BR>> Yeah, well it would be great if Feingold got the nomination, but do <BR>> you see that happening? I don't. Who would be preferable to Gore and <BR>> actually has a chance of getting elected? <BR>> <BR>> -- <BR>> Colin Brace <BR>> Amsterdam <BR>> <BR>> ___________________________________ <BR>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk </BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>