On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:24:17 -0500, HK wrote:


Voting for Bloomberg is like voting for Ralph Nader. It simply helps
elect a Republican. Bloomberg cannot win.

I'm not saying he would win, but he could win. He has the money, fully a
third of the electorate identify themselves as independent, and if he
could bring in some of the 30-40% of the apathetic, that don't vote, he
could win. Personally, I suspect that much of the apathy is caused by a
general disgust with what the Democrats and Republicans are offering.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:24:17 -0500, HK wrote:


Voting for Bloomberg is like voting for Ralph Nader. It simply helps
elect a Republican. Bloomberg cannot win.

I'm not saying he would win, but he could win. He has the money, fully a
third of the electorate identify themselves as independent, and if he
could bring in some of the 30-40% of the apathetic, that don't vote, he
could win. Personally, I suspect that much of the apathy is caused by a
general disgust with what the Democrats and Republicans are offering.


Yup... we're only about a tenth of your size but usually have 5 or more
choices.
Some of them can be silly. but are a good protest vote.
Most don't run a candidate in every federal riding... tending to be a
localized thing.
http://www.altstuff.com/federal.htm

wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:36:00 -0000, wrote:

Voting for Bloomberg is like voting for Ralph Nader. It simply helps
elect a Republican. Bloomberg cannot win.
I'm not saying he would win, but he could win. He has the money, fully a
third of the electorate identify themselves as independent, and if he
could bring in some of the 30-40% of the apathetic, that don't vote, he
could win. Personally, I suspect that much of the apathy is caused by a
general disgust with what the Democrats and Republicans are offering.

Personally I think any strong 3d party candidate insures a Clinton
win. Isn't that the way Bill did it ... twice. (43% and 48% of the
vote)

About the only way Hillary can win is if a 3d party sucks away 15-20%
of the vote since over half of the people say they would vote for
anyone but her.

Oh, I dunno about that. I think Hillary can beat the hell out of *any*
of the GOP possibles, with the exception of McCain. The Republican
recruiter for this year's nomination must have looked for losers, first,
second, and third. One is worse than the other.

wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:22:53 -0500, HK wrote:

About the only way Hillary can win is if a 3d party sucks away 15-20%
of the vote since over half of the people say they would vote for
anyone but her.
Oh, I dunno about that. I think Hillary can beat the hell out of *any*
of the GOP possibles, with the exception of McCain. The Republican
recruiter for this year's nomination must have looked for losers, first,
second, and third. One is worse than the other.

She is still bumping up against that 51-52% negative. Some of it is
her position on the war, some is just Clinton fatigue and there are
those who don't want the bush/clinton/bush/clinton dynasty to
continue. I do believe the same people control both families.



Neither Bill nor Hillary would have believed that they could have
deposed Saddam and be greeted in Iraq with flowers.


--
George W. Bush - the 43rd Best President Ever!

"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:


Neither Bill nor Hillary would have believed that they could have deposed
Saddam and be greeted in Iraq with flowers.


Not now of course. I don't know about Bill, but Hillary *did* until she
didn't.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:


Neither Bill nor Hillary would have believed that they could have deposed
Saddam and be greeted in Iraq with flowers.


Not now of course. I don't know about Bill, but Hillary *did* until she
didn't.

Eisboch



I notice that none of them ever mention the idea of invading the correct
country and placing it under new management.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Neither Bill nor Hillary would have believed that they could have deposed
Saddam and be greeted in Iraq with flowers.

Not now of course. I don't know about Bill, but Hillary *did* until she
didn't.

Eisboch



I notice that none of them ever mention the idea of invading the correct
country and placing it under new management.




It's too late for that now.

Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Neither Bill nor Hillary would have believed that they could have deposed
Saddam and be greeted in Iraq with flowers.


Not now of course. I don't know about Bill, but Hillary *did* until she
didn't.

Eisboch


No, she never believed that.

wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:22:53 -0500, HK wrote:

About the only way Hillary can win is if a 3d party sucks away 15-20%
of the vote since over half of the people say they would vote for
anyone but her.
Oh, I dunno about that. I think Hillary can beat the hell out of *any*
of the GOP possibles, with the exception of McCain. The Republican
recruiter for this year's nomination must have looked for losers, first,
second, and third. One is worse than the other.

She is still bumping up against that 51-52% negative. Some of it is
her position on the war, some is just Clinton fatigue and there are
those who don't want the bush/clinton/bush/clinton dynasty to
continue. I do believe the same people control both families.



Oh, that will "equalize" as soon as the GOP nominee is determined,
especially if he is a religious nutcase like Huck, a flipper like
Romney, or a crook like Guiliani.

"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:22:53 -0500, HK wrote:

About the only way Hillary can win is if a 3d party sucks away 15-20%
of the vote since over half of the people say they would vote for
anyone but her.
Oh, I dunno about that. I think Hillary can beat the hell out of *any*
of the GOP possibles, with the exception of McCain. The Republican
recruiter for this year's nomination must have looked for losers, first,
second, and third. One is worse than the other.

She is still bumping up against that 51-52% negative. Some of it is
her position on the war, some is just Clinton fatigue and there are
those who don't want the bush/clinton/bush/clinton dynasty to
continue. I do believe the same people control both families.



Oh, that will "equalize" as soon as the GOP nominee is determined,
especially if he is a religious nutcase like Huck, a flipper like Romney,
or a crook like Guiliani.


By the way, here's a site where you can listen to the candidates' lie about
their views on guns.

http://www.nravalues.org/