Edwards - the paralyzed will walk

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Well tonight Robin Williams, a very close friend of Chris, said he was proud that Kerry and Edwards brought Chris into it because it nows brings the work that he was trying to do to the public.
 
Yes, iota. I can appreciate that and I am not berating you if he didn't change your life oh so dramatically.

What I was pointing out was that Kerry more than knew how to spell his name - he was a dear friend, and that there was nothing wrong with bringing him up, especially when talking about an issue that Reeve himself felt strongly about and campaigned for.

Ant.
 
"When John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve will get out of their wheelchairs and walk!"

Sorry. Out of all the sincere attempts that have been made in this thread to justify such a pathetic, cruel remark; it's just not possible. I know this campaign is based on emotional rhetoric and little Johnny Edwards gets carried away from time to time, (it must be the inexperience) but I guess that's how it is when you're 2 weeks from the election and you've never led in the polls even once. You get desperate. Even with Kerry's "stellar performance" in the debates, the best he can do is tie Bush, when Bush barely even bothered to show up to the first debate. These are the words of a trial lawyer with time running out, and no real connection being established with the jury.
 
Well, the quote alone does sound pompous....taken in context, and all meaning is context dependent, I think you can see he meant that stem-cell research etc would be approved and utilized. I can see some people's points though...
 
By the way...the race isn't exactly a tie anymore.

Averaging out the latest polls, Bush has about a 4 point lead, and a much better electorial edge than Kerry. Bush clearly still has the advantage...even with all this talk of Kerry "winning" the debates. (The vote determines who won.)

check it at realclearpolitics.com.
 
The race is a statistical tie.

The 4 point lead is within the margin of error, and when you factor in oversampling, it can swing either way.

There is a brilliant article about polling in the LA Times. I should go dig it up. Basically it says that historically 67-85% of undecided voters end up going with the challenger, and that the incumbent needs 50% support going into the election to win. 49% is questionable and 48% or below, he loses.

So nobody here has the lead. It will come down to voter turnout, and there have been some polls done to suggest that newly registered voters are swinging to Kerry in a ratio of 4:1. And in some counties (like in Ohio) which have some 1 million registered voters, they are seeing 160,000 new registered voters, so these are the folks who will decide this election.

I already have my response figured out either way.

If Bush loses: Mars, bitches!

If Bush wins: Hillary: 2008.
 
Also, read this assessment from a top Republican pollster:

Step by step, debate-by-debate, John Kerry has addressed and removed many remaining doubts among uncommitted voters. My own polling research after each debate suggests a rather bleak outlook for the Bush candidacy: many who still claim to be “undecided” are in fact leaning to Mr. Kerry and are about ready to commit.

Can Mr. Bush turn the tide in just 18 days? Absolutely, but his candidacy must address voters who still harbour economic and national security concerns. But that requires a fundamental shift in the president’s strategy and message. Asserting that the economy is strong and Iraq a success is simply not credible to the majority of Americans or to the stubborn 5 per cent who remain uncommitted.

Giddy up, it's gonna be a long November 2nd!
 
If Bush wins...it's Hillary vs. either Guliani or McCain in 2008!

Isn't that reason enough for a democrat to vote Bush???

Do you really want to get stuck with Kerry again? Guliani'll (or even McCain) blow him out of the water. So vote Kerry now...guaranteed republican win in 08. Vote Bush and dems might have a chance next time.

The question is...does anyone like Kerry THAT much?
 
Last edited:
iota said:
Vote Bush and dems might have a chance next time.

Smooth.

Apocalypse now.

The question is...does anyone like Kerry THAT much?

Let me answer that one personally:

When this election started, I was not a fan of Kerry. I didn't dislike the man, I just didn't feel very strongly about him as a candidate and felt he did not have the best chance of winning. He didn't seem charismatic enough to get the voter turnout to be as high as necessary, and I am in principle far more leftist than the Democratic party. However, as I have followed him, read more background, watched the debates, read the platform and just listened to him speak, I can actually say I quite like him now. He's not the perfect candidate, but he's a lot better than I initially believed.

Bush is the worst president of my lifetime. He's gotta go back to Texas or off to Mars where he is keen on exploring. Away with him, now.
 
Last edited:
iota said:
If Bush wins...it's Hillary vs. either Guliani or McCain in 2008!

Isn't that reason enough for a democrat to vote Bush???

Do you really want to get stuck with Kerry again? Guliani'll (or even McCain) blow him out of the water. So vote Kerry now...guaranteed republican win in 08. Vote Bush and dems might have a chance next time.

The question is...does anyone like Kerry THAT much?

Are you insane?

Who the hell would vote Bush based on 2008 based on the way the last 4 years were??

4 more years of recession, lies, and war...but then Hillary might have a chance in 2008!

That's the faultiest logic I've seen in a while.
 
Dave,

You fail to realize that the ability to obtain a party's nomination is far more difficult against a sitting President from your own party. If people really want Hillary in 2008, she will have a far better chance of getting the party nomination in an open field than trying to take it from Kerry (assuming he wins).
 
Hillary may run in 2008, but I think she's too controversial to win the nomination. The Democratic candidate may be someone who's paying their dues now, serving in a lower office, who becomes a star then. You never know.
 
DaveC said:


Are you insane?

Who the hell would vote Bush based on 2008 based on the way the last 4 years were??

4 more years of recession, lies, and war...but then Hillary might have a chance in 2008!

That's the faultiest logic I've seen in a while.

I'm just trying to give those in the desperate Kerry camp an opportunity to save face as the dud with the democratic nomination continues to lose ground (Bush up 8 points in the new Gallup poll...up in all the other polls...only a tie in Zogby.) So obviously more people would vote for Bush based on the last 4 years than not.

Kerry had a jump during the debates, but he's starting to slip again into obscurity...and has no more opportunities now that the debates are over to regain lost confidence. "4 more years of recession, lies and war" = over-emotional rhetoric deserving of no response. The logic isn't mine...vote for Kerry once, or even multiple times as many democrats are attempting in FL with voter fraud, but it's no use...just look forward to Hillary in '08 as a consolation.
 
Back
Top Bottom