Dissatisfaction with bush* doesn't mean a win for us....

[vi5]

I see so many people pointing out that they think it doesn't matter if we find WMD's because the damage is done....or it doesn't matter if this or that happens because the damage is already done to bush* and his reputation.

I couldn't disagree more. The fact is that people WANT to like this guy and cut his such a wide swath of slack. So all it will take is for a vile of chemicals to be found and bingo the people will be right back on bush's side. All it will take is some token gesture towards the military and their families and vets and bingo the people will be right back on his side.

And ultimately I'm convinced that even people who regret voting for bush and who may or may not be pissed off at him are still more than likely going to walk into those voting booths and say "Oh well, the devil you know....right?".

I don't want this to be so but I just don't think that the level of anger of even the people who don't think this country is going in the right direction or who have been pissed off by bush, runs deep enough for them to send a particularly strong statement to him by voting for a dem in '04. I also think that if someone is a voter that they are not going to "stay away" either. I think that the disaffected soft voter turnout hurts dems more than repubs.

Maybe I'm feeling fairly pessimistic today but these are my thoughts this Sunday morning and it depresses me.

[shockandawed]

1. to me, the essential problem america has is this

Dumb people have more children than smart people.

Thereby, the wolf's flock of sheep continues to grow, while those of us smart enough to think for ourselves continue to average fewer kids, reducing our representative percentage.

A sad FACT.

[demgrrrll]

2. I disagree. My gut feeling is that it is all downhill from this point for

the chimp. That does not mean that people should be complacent because losing didn't stop them from assuming power the last time out. Time to get tough, stay tough, register voters and turn out the vote.

[Droopy]

3. I sort of agree with you, but I'm more optimistic

I think you are right in saying that just bad news for Bush doesn't mean a win for a Dem. It's going to take a Dem candidate who can show people a better way. That can make people want to get out and vote for him. Then the bad news for Bush will really take hold because of the stronger Dem.

[JI7]

4. that's why we need to present our own agenda

not just on a few specific issues. but an overall agenda for the entire nation. we have to give people something they would want to vote for whether or not there are wmd found in iraq. people should have to want to vote for democrats, not want to vote against bush only.

[Demobrat]

5. No, it doesn't.

What we have to remember at this point is that Bush has not even begun to attack our nominee. By the time they're done painting whoever it is as Satan himself, a couple of little demons might not seems so bad. We have a long, hard year ahead.


edit for typo

[chesley]

6. I agree

I think that after the Democratic nominee is chosen, all Bush has to do is show a few scenes of the 9/11 disaster, and say, "He didn't let it happen again", and he will blow the Dems out of the water,, unless they can come up with a credible scenario for keeping America safe. Doesn't matter if the Dems have a better policy, either. They have to convince the elctorate.