Edwards is by far, the most substantive candidate

That is scary.

It is, because all the rest are hacks. Every republican, and all the Dems- save Obama & Richardson. Obama has not shown much substance, except picking off plans by Edwards, and Richardson has substance, but the charisma of a lamprey.

Bush lost his first political race when he ran as who he was- an east coast elitist with money. He came up with the Texas personna, bought the ranch- dropped his g’s and r’s and never lost another election.

We are being sold a product- so shop carefully- its a fake.

I guess your meaning is a little clearer.

But I’m not really looking for uplift. I’m looking for someone to clean up the mess.

I certainly hope Democratic primary voters go with Obama and not HIllary. The Tennessee primary is on the mega-super primary day so we’ll probably have a good idea where things are going by that point.

My ‘Republicans and actors; comment was JOKE!!!

Lignten Up!
We have months and months of outlandish comments ahead of us. Just check this thread.

If you believe campaign funds count though, we will either have a Madam Clinton or a President Obama- as he raised twice as much as Giuliani did in the same time period.

And DLS- you can really say with a straight face that you are pleased with the results of your votes??? I’d be embarassed to admit I voted for such an incompetent man (even if her were a Democrat)

how many ways and on how many levels Clinton Inc. will be horrible for this country

The previous eight years she was co-President gave us plenty of warning.

Yes the last 7 years have vindicated your excellent choice all right

Mine was an anti-Gore, anti-Dem choice.

Last 7 years? You know I’m awake and aware and that I’m often saying “President Clinton” in preparation for the eventual result of that choice.

By the way, was the Clinton-Thompson comparison done before or after the commutation of Scooter Libbby’s sentence (and the White House warning it would not refuse to pardon Libby in the future)?

both Hillary and Thompson will have some ’splaining to do over the pardon issue.

Hillary will say that this is an “ugly partisan attack” by “extremists” who are “attacking the past because they offer the American people the wrong future.”

And the media will nod their heads up and down.

Next issue!

Edwards is by far, the most substantive candidate

That is scary.

Yet the 08 election is not a given for the democrats for one simple fact. No matter how bad Bush has been those who lean conservative know he will be gone and that the next GOP nominee might bring hope.

That’s what happened in 2000 once Gore lost the debates(!!!). Those who really didn’t want Gore to win, and were assuming Gore would win and were preparing for Gore to win, were totally surprised and uplifted. Bush won the debates! He really could win the election! (Which he eventually did.)

Democrats may consider their prospects better than ever in 2008, better than Gore’s in 2000 against a desparation candidate. Too good to be true. Just don’t get too cocky, Dem kids. This time, try to calm down and follow through and cash in the odds.

If the Dems lose again, will they and left activists soil themselves again by trying to steal again what they lost as in 2000?

Yes, indeed. (No, we’re not talking about all-too-true Democratic election fraud.)

1. Gore proceeded to lose the election at the end of the campaign, beginning with the debates. (Once Gore managed to lose the debates, the public then began to think Bush might actually win, which he then did. The Democrats’ disgusting tactics after the loss vindicated morally those who chose Bush.)

2. Kerry had long established himself as part of the Democratic party’s left wing, and he is from Massachusetts, both sources of the politics and the ideology most alien and antithetical to America and to Americans. Kerry was the candidate non-liberals dreamed would be chosen to run against Bush. It was even worse for the challenger than when [ugh] Bob Dole was run against an otherwise-doomed, held-in-contempt-by-Americans Bill Clinton in 1996.

(Romney is from Massachusetts. DQ!)

No just those two- George W Bush is used to having the deck stacked in his favor- that’s why he has done everything he could to ignore Congress and amass presidential power under his constitutional role as Commander-in-chief. I honestly think that the main reason he picked Cheney was that Cheney was an old hand in Washington and knew how to get around Congress, the Constitution and the president’s own Cabinet, in a way that Bush could never have managed on his own.

Oh well, OT again, lol.

Vision is having a coherent view of aims and how to achieve them, usually uplifting. No, W lacks vision.

This poll is definitely a watershed

Sorry. I still refuse to put that much weight to a mid-summer poll 16 months away from the general election (when IF they are the candidates, they would face each other)

We are still 6 months away from the start of the primary season, and that picture is far from clear for either party.

These polls are just mental masturbation for political junkies.