"Marty Feldman" wrote in message
om...
"Maxprop" wrote in message
hlink.net...


The reason I'm bitching about him is that I really dislike Bush/Cheney
and
wanted another ticket for whom to vote. Kerry is a disappointment and
Nader
is unelectable. John McCain could have been promising, but his party's
nomination is locked up. I'd have supported Lieberman or perhaps even
Gephardt, but Kerry is simply too far left and inconsistent to warrant
my
vote. My 2 cents worth.

Max


i've tried to stay away from these kind of issues because 1) it
doesn't interest me, and 2) i don't think it makes a significant
difference.

that said, within max's words of delusion, we have what i believe is
the best way of approaching the nader and veep issues:

1) nader is a fact. that means we've got to deal with him. maybe a
deal like this: dems will stop bashing him, if he takes more
conservative positions, and aims his message to as many
disenfranchised conservatives as possible.

2) nader is a kook more interested in himself than his country. so,
don't listen to him about the edwards recommendation. instead, look
at what maxi pad said above, he didn't even mention edwards but did
mention gephardt. gephardt will be a far better fighter against
cheney in the debates (good for conservatives), and far more capable
in getting health care passed through congress (good for dems). also,
gephardt is just plain tougher than most, and will have broader appeal
to recovering republicans. with a kerry/gephardt combo, they will not
convert conservatives to the dem party, but these two just might
convince them to stay at home and THAT is the way to win this
election. (...along with gotv.

Talk about delusion . . .

Terry McAuliffe really isn't interested in hearing from you, sock puppet.

Max