Gould,
When you express your opinion you are doing the exact same thing the
talking heads do when they express their opinion.

No one can say what Kerry would have done in similar situations, no one can
say what the economic situation would be if Kerry was president for the last
4 years

Any opinion that Kerry would do better is pure speculation.

When I show long term studies by the University of Mich, that tracks voting
trends you want to scream I can find a survey that says anything I want.

Now find any survey or study, that shows democrats are better educated than
republicans. Find me one survey or study that shows those democrats are
better informed than republicans. Find one person who does not believe the
Univ. of Michigan study of voting trends in the US is a faulty study and is
biased. It is reviewed by 100's of college professors who use their raw
data in their research. If a respected university was gathering incorrect
raw data you would be able to easily find those who disagree with their
data.

You got your feathers all ruffled when I disputed your theory concerning
democrats being better informed and better educated than the republicans who
rely on talk radio to make their decisions.
Your theory was your opinion and I showed two very respected Universities
who disagreed with you.
Since when is unsubstantial opinion more valuable than high profile unbiased
studies?

I will be waiting on your validation your preposterous theory.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
You are not only guilty of what you are accusing the radio talking heads
of
doing, but you are so blinded by your hatred of Bush, don't realize you
are
doing it.

Not at all. I fully realize that I'm expressing an opinion. My opinion
should
be clear.
The current administration is unethical, fiscally irresponsible, and
careless
with the security of the United States. My opinion is that it is time for
a
change.

Here's the difference between the R's "mud" and the D's "mud". The D's
have the
advantage of being able to point to four floundering years of GWB, and
they can
factually establish "Bush did this, Bush did that, Bush failed to do this
and
that." Of course, as far as certain studies are concerned, those
oberservations
of objective fact, based on historical record,
are "negative campaigning".

When the R's get wound up, they use their advantage: Nobody knows how
Kerry
would behave as POTUS as he has never held the office. They use this lack
of
information to arrive at all sorts of ridiculous and outrageous
conclusions
that are Olympic broadjumps of convoluted logic away from any recorded
fact.
Most of the time it's down to: "Kerry will do this and that (speculative
conjecture) based upon the fact that he has said or done (something that
doesn't exist outside Republican spin machines or is a total out of
context
distortion).


Somebody else seems to be the party fixated on having his or her opinions
validated by some outside survey, report, study, or what not. Forgive me
if I'm
not impressed- I can find a study, survey, or report to substantiate
almost
*anything*