Announcement

**MrFun** · February 5, 2004, 17:58

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
You think I'd actually vote for a Democrat unless I was pissed at the Republican nominee?

I knew that you had this reason for supporting Kerry -- but I will not abide by your idea that Kerry is connected to the Republican party in any way, shape or form.

**Capt Dizle** · February 5, 2004, 18:08

Originally posted by GePap

Nah, people in NYC still remember rudy before 9/11. His image as a saint is large in upstate NY perhaps, and outside on NYC. Sure, he is still popular int eh tri-satte area due to 9/11, but he could not bring Bush any states. Certainly not NY or NJ.

Rudy has national appeal, as does Edwards to a much lesser extent.

When we get to talking primaries we forget that politicians get both a regional and national read. Jesse Helms for example was a regional God and a national pariah.

Rudy would be one of the few VP nominees that could actually add 3 or 4 points nationwide. That would be huge.

**Capt Dizle** · February 5, 2004, 18:20

Originally posted by randomturn

you're on for $2k at Bush getting 400 electoral votes. That's what you promised. What's with 370 all of a sudden?

I don't think I promised anything. What I remember doing was projecting 400 for Bush if Kerry runs. You suggested a wager of 1K so I went back and counted votes and offered you a 2K wager with Bush=>370.

You want it or not?

**Imran Siddiqui** · February 5, 2004, 18:24

but I will not abide by your idea that Kerry is connected to the Republican party in any way, shape or form.

If he gets elected he will be (especially with the Republicans in control of Congress)

.

**MrFun** · February 5, 2004, 18:27

He will not be so weak-in-the-kness as to kowtow to the Republican Congress.

**Imran Siddiqui** · February 5, 2004, 18:31

Why not? Clinton did so

.

**PLATO** · February 5, 2004, 18:32

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Why not? Clinton did so

.

Are you saying that Clinton's successes are due to the republican Congress??

**MrFun** · February 5, 2004, 18:34

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Why not? Clinton did so

.

Ah, but Clinton was a dumb*ss -- whereas Kerry is not.

**lord of the mark** · February 5, 2004, 18:36

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe

I agree, but if asked I'm sure he would consider. Rendel would definitely help Kerry in swing state PA. He is a moderate who was genuinely extremely well thought of in cleaning up, balancing the budget, and attracting industy to Philadelphia.

Rendel the photo-op king is still hungry.

BTW, Rendell is Jewish. Not sure how that plays.

**Capt Dizle** · February 5, 2004, 18:38

Originally posted by randomturn

you're on for $2k at Bush getting 400 electoral votes. That's what you promised. What's with 370 all of a sudden?

Well at 370 I am showing Kerry with 12 states. I know, it's not likely that he will win that many but, if you think the stiff can get 13 take the bet.

That is 370-168. Got 86 votes for Kerry in California and New York alone. Too many folks in Silicon Valley have lost their jobs for Bush to have a shot out there.

**Imran Siddiqui** · February 5, 2004, 18:41

Are you saying that Clinton's successes are due to the republican Congress??

Partly. He sure did change his tune after the Republicans swept into Congress in 1995, didn't he? Bye, bye universal health care, hello balanced budget and welfare reform

.

I liked the guy after that

.

**Boris Godunov** · February 5, 2004, 20:10

Edwards has VP material all over him. He's young, he's exciting, he's charming and he's Southern. Since he doesn't have much political future in NC, I'd bet he would accept being VP.

Miller would never accept the VP slot, and Kerry would never offer it. Miller's way too out of step with most Democrats, and he and Kerry would clash over too many issues, number one being Kerry's going after Bush's waging of the war. He's a patently absurd choice.

Graham would be a bad choice too, purely from the fact that he is such an awkward speaker and unattractive candidate. I mean, he wasn't meant for TV.

Kerry needs a relatively young, energetic VP from either the South or Midwest. Any such candidates beyond Edwards that fit that bill in those regions?

**Boris Godunov** · February 5, 2004, 20:13

Originally posted by MrFun
Ah, but Clinton was a dumb*ss -- whereas Kerry is not.

Clinton may be many things, but he certainly isn't stupid. One does not scrape one's way out of poverty and become a Rhodes Scholar by being dumb. He's just very human.

I've not seen anything to prove Kerry is particularly intelligent, certainly not moreso than Clinton.

I have to ask, though...do you actually have any reasons you support Kerry? I mean, if the graft being reported now is true, surely you'll apply the same standards to him as you seem to apply to Clinton, yes?

**MrFun** · February 5, 2004, 20:20

Originally posted by Boris Godunov

Clinton may be many things, but he certainly isn't stupid. One does not scrape one's way out of poverty and become a Rhodes Scholar by being dumb. He's just very human.

I've not seen anything to prove Kerry is particularly intelligent, certainly not moreso than Clinton.

I have to ask, though...do you actually have any reasons you support Kerry? I mean, if the graft being reported now is true, surely you'll apply the same standards to him as you seem to apply to Clinton, yes?

I try to elect the politician that is the cleanest mudball.

**MrFun** · February 5, 2004, 20:23

But you're right -- dumb*ss was bad choice of a word.

I went a little overboard in my haste.

Announcement

Democratic Vice-Presidential Candidate

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment