Both enemies and friends will start to mark time from this point forward...until its clear who will win, its hard for anyone to make policy decisions vis a vis the United States.

Of course, a cursory reading of the American political scene indicates a Bush win this November - what is debateable is whether it will be narrow or whether Kerry is really as bad as he appears so far and it ends up a 49-State blowout.

Yeah, it could be very close but I think Bush will win too in November. While a taking a clear majority of the votes would be nice a win is a win.

I just think it's funny that even the enemies of the U.S. realize that Kerry is softer when it comes to foreign policy. Not that it should ever have changed but the federal government's job, in my opinion, should be almost exclusively concentrated on foreign policy. 9/11 isn't that far away and already people are forgetting where the real threat is and that threat only repects force.

Lets see -- Bush ducks out of serving in war, Cheney has other priorities (including siring a draft baby).

Kerry goes to war, goes to Vietnam, serves heroically. On return, he channels his energy into opposing a war that the majority of Americans at that time opposed, blaming the leaders who led America into that war, while Bush gets his teeth cleaned in Okhlama and gets into frat parties.

Yup -- I know who would scare me more.

Johnston,

Obviously, you got your DNC talking points for the day....

Kevin D,

Its absurd the way the Democrats are going about this - leaving aside the right or wrong of it all, simple political common-sense dictates that when the troops are in battle, flag-waving, muscular patriotism is the only way to go...its why I put it that if Kerry continues as dumb as he so far appears, then this election could be a landslide for President Bush.

There should not be the slightest possibility that any enemy of the United States should be pleased with the election of any person to the United States - it should be that regardless of who is elected, all enemies still feel the cross-hairs of American military power pointed right at them...but, they don't; and there it is. Strange.

Is Mark as deluded as he appears in this thread? Probably not. Thinking Kerry WON'T win the popular vote is lunacy as he will almost certainly do. Now, to say that Bush has any foreign policy credibility (aside from going to war without a planning effort for the aftermath) is also a tad crazy. Check out Bush's stumped looked to reporters (as seen on "The Daily Show's" moment of Zen.) and you'll come to the conclusion that Bush is exactly that - Bush League.

The Bush administration erased years of diplomatic progress with N. Korea while pissing off the S. Korean President at the time. Man, he's got them right where he wants them. The only problem is, he doesn't know how he got there, and he certainly doesn't know what to do with them now that they are there.

Clearly one of the weakest links in his administration is Rice whose expertise is in the Soviet Union. She's out of her league in the middle east, asia, and has made absolutely NO headway in dealing with Russia.

While I don't think Kerry is the best the Dems have (Edwards is truly groomed to be our future President) I can't help but think that reelecting Bush would be a step backwards for our nation.

Tim,

Give me even the slightest indication that Kerry will win...I mean, really; whence comes your conviction?

Anyways...

"Years of diplomatic progress"???? Man, are you dense, or just so entirely partisan that you've opted to leave aside basic knowledge until November 3rd?

Mark,

I couldn't agree with you more. On all of it.

Mark, Tim's been nusto ever since his boy "Prince" W. Clark got spanked during the Dem primaries. He'll probably recover after the election. ;)

Anyone who says either candidate has a lock on a win is engaging in wishful thinking right now.

"Anyone who says either candidate has a lock on a win is engaging in wishful thinking right now."

That's too true. We have a long way to November and a lot can happen in that time. I wouldn't be surprised if the major third parties make a stronger showing than usual considering people are getting pissed with the two parties we have now.

John

People have been pissed at the two major parties for as long as I can remember. Countrywide, it doesn't seem that more people are more pissed than usual except of course the Bush-haters and they'll go lock-stock-and-barrel for Kerry. Nader will not get more than 1% it's predicted. George Wallace got 13% and Ross Perot got what? 10%?. Now that's pissed at everybody.

Well, we certainly are NOT better off than we were 4 years ago, and 4 years ago a piece of wood (Al Gore) got more votes than a shrub. Does anyone really think that wood beats ketchup? If ketchup beats wood, and wood beats shrub, then ketchup beats shrub. Am I insane? Of course.

Casey, nice of you to remember my early fondness for Clark - it's gone now, he's a tad askew. I'm an Edwards man but wouldn't mind seeing Hillary as Prez. If you didn't catch her on Letterman last night, you missed a good showing. She runs circles around Bush intellectually.

BTW, has Bush been hitting the sauce, because the last few times he's ATTEMPTED to talk in public, he sounded like my drunk uncle. Maybe he just needs a vacation - he could start next January.

Jane,

Never said that the third parties would definitely make a strong showing, just that I won't be surprised if they do. Usually the campaings aren't this heated until closer to election time, and I think there may be enough people who get sick of it that they may look at their alternatives. Like I said, too many things can happen between now and November to know exactly what will happen or who will win, though I think it is still safe to say a third party or independent won't win.

Casey,

On balance, the advantage lies with President Bush - incumbancy plus booming economy plus wartime tends to equal a second term in politics. For Kerry to win, he has to lay out how his policies will work better than President Bush's - and lay them out so that everyone easily understands why they'll work better. Sorry for Tim, but advocating a larger UN role in Iraq plus tax hikes/cuts depending on whom you're pandering to today just doesn't cut it as coming up with a clearly better plan.

Still lots of time for Kerry to recover - and the latest meme about Kerry is that he has to be near political death before he gets serious about things. Could be - some people do work better when the pressure is really on, so Kerry could get his act together and go on to mount a strong challenge to President Bush.

In the end, however, I still expect President Bush to prevail - by 5 percentage points if Kerry is a good challenge, by 15 if Kerry keeps on as currently.

Jane,

I'm a bit with John - with the proviso that a left-wing third party candidate has a much stronger chance of affecting the outcome than a right-wing third party. While its within the realm of possibility for President Bush to be challenged from the right, time is running very, very short for a nationally known rightist to do so - only Pat Buchanan has the national name-recognition to mount such a short-notice challenge and there is zero indication that he's interested in trying again. Nader, on the other hand, is the joker in the deck.

I'm with conventional wisdom which says that he's likely to pull 1% or less of the vote - and while even this 1% may toss a close State or two to President Bush, I doubt that it will effect the outcome - unless Kerry, by attempting to shift right, alienates left-wing voters while at the same time Kerry shows himself unlikely to win in November - a clearly losing Kerry who is pandering to the center/right might creat a 10% vote for Nader - it still wouldn't actually effect the outcome (because in this scenario President Bush is heading for a win anyways), but it could mess up Democratic party politics for quite a long time.

Tim,

So, what you're saying is that you've got nothing - no indication that Kerry will win, just wishful thinking on your part.

That is, after all, about the size of it for the anti-Bush people - just the hope that somehow something will turn up to boot President Bush out of office....its 6 months before the vote is taken; you're running out of time, very fast. Your man has to do something - what shall he do?

Mark,

Yes.

Kerry's not my man, Bush just isn't my man.
Lesser of two choices. (Not evils because I don't believe either one of them is evil. Karl Rove, now that's evil.)

Tim,

Well, then your choice better start moving pretty quick...personally, I've never seen a more inept political campaign...and I watched a guy out here in Vegas try to run for office while he was under indictment.

Used to be that "dukakis" was a Greek word meaning "worst candidate not caught in bed with a live boy or a dead girl"...soon, "kerry" will be a French word meaning same...'cept that it might be that the guy caught with the dead girl would do a better job.

Tim,
Maybe Kerry will win, but the things have been going so far it's hardly lunacy to think he will lose.

Mark, that could be. I know a fair number of Bushies who are capering over the rough times Kerry is having right now (e.g. "Man, these people are doing the Republicans work for them!" after an ABC interview), but as I keep saying: it's a long time to November. And there's always the classic "Dewey Defeats Truman." Heh.

Tim, on the other hand, depresses me. Not that I find his posts all that impressive: to the contrary. One of the smartest things Bushies can do is let folks like Tim run their mouths uninterrupted. Why?

Because Tim's Bush comments are nothing but ignorant slander. This last one was a real gem. In fact, I think it's an actionable offense under the UCMJ for a soldier to insult a superior officer. I believe calling the Commander in Chief a drunk qualifies. It's sad, really. But, as I said, all we have to do is let normal human beings (i.e. not political junkies like us) hear people talk like that and it'll put a healthy hole in the Donk Market.

Out of curiousity Tim, since you are an active duty soldier, have you been to Iraq or volunteered for it?