Comments on: The Friday debate: Still just a bunch of losers

By: Donald/TheJarndyceBlog

Donald/TheJarndyceBlog — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 08:58:24 +0000

Never work with children, animals, or political predictions, obviously.

By: Jonn

Jonn — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:22:52 +0000

I just wanted to add that I have never been so elated to be proved so completely and utterly wrong. I thank you.

By: Jonn

Jonn — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 14:38:09 +0000

Dearieme: I think Kerry personifies the problem I was talking about. There was a whole load of enthusiasm for a Democratic win in 2004 from 48% of Americans... but people weren't voting for Kerry, they were voting against Bush.

By: Sunny

Sunny — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 14:37:06 +0000

I think one upshot if this may be that Kerry finally gets a boot from any leadership election.

I have a bad feeling you may turn out right. And the reason for that is squarely the Democrats’ inability to have a coherent message on anything that will pin down the Republicans.

But Hilary Clinton? No way. I think she is part of the problem – after all this time still unable to lead with a strong message. Barack Obama is their hope. Maybe along with John Edwards they could do so much better.

By: dearieme

dearieme — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 14:31:12 +0000

Had I been a yank, I suspect that I’d have voted for Gore not Bush. But I really couldn’t imagine voting for Kerry. What a find he was!

By: Katie Bartleby

Katie Bartleby — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 14:30:29 +0000

Even if they make gains (which they will, just not as many as some breathless commentators say) it’s a pyrrhic victory, as they’ve have to run while extolling the “moral majority” stance on a lot of stuff: they have to push the immoral nature of Mark Foley’s actions, thereby in my mind sacrificing one of the few things that differentiates the blue dog democrats from republicans.