"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

The fact is that the support for Kerry is shallow, more "anti Bush" than
"pro Kerry" In past elections, the turn out is usually less when there
is
not the energy "for" a candidate. On the other hand, Bush's support is
quite strong.


Past elections don't mean a whole lot. I agree that normall when people are
not
"for" a candidate they stay home. But this year that are a lot of people
that
will go to the polls to get Bush out even if they aren't "for" Kerry.
And yes, I'll freely admit that there are many Bush supporters, and
many that will be energized to vote for him.

Actually, on second thought, you are absolutly correct, Bush's support IS
quite strong,
no need for you to go vote whatsoever.



Which is probably why the dems are reving up the 'suppressed vote" lie
and
mobilizing the trial lawyers.

Not that the professional & armchair dems don't spread crap too, but I kinda
figured we could *all* get behind the idea that everyone that is eligable
and wants
to should be able to vote and have it counted. After the fiasco of hanging
chads
in Florida - which was a disaster as far as counting every person's vote, no
matter what side you were one - I really would hope everyone could get
behind
efforts to make the vote safe. But whenever a person mentions efforts to
make
all the votes count correctly I see the responce of "oh, it's just a big lie
so when
the Dems loose...."