Let's see: Lott says that he would've liked to see Thurmond win the presidency way back when (coincidentally Thurmond was a Democrat back then) at Thurmond's 100 year anniversary party and he was forced to resign. Though I don't agree with that assessment, nowhere did Lott say that he wanted to see segregation reversed.

On the other hand, we have a prominent Democratic party member who was embraced by the progressives and who's a flaming anti-semite. That's right, I'm talking about Al Sharpton.
An honorable mention goes to Sen. Fritz Hollings.

In recent years, it seems, the Democratic Party has become the haven for anti-semites. Not that it automatically means that all Democrats are anti-semites, but spare me when you talk abotu how all Republicans support taking rights away from people.

Oh, and the patronizing attitude the Dems have towards "the minorities" does nothing to help them.

Clinton looked pretty good today at the Kerry/Edwards rally in Philadelphia, PA. I couldn't imagine speaking to such a large crowd 6 weeks after heart bypass surgery.

When you have no heart, you'll understand ;-)

JAY KAY

Bob Woodward asks John Kerry tough, yet unanswered questions: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... ge=printer

He'd be stupid to answer them. In a time of change, being the less defined candidate pays off. Even if he had exact answers, which he probably doesn't, but even if he does, it is better to be seen as a little undefined and vague.

Yesterday, I saw Edwards' wife, Elizabeth Edwards, speaking at a town hall meeting in Harrisburg, PA (C-SPAN)...

Let me tell you, she is a very good speaker and can explain lot of the Kerry/Edwards policies better than those two together, in lot less time...

My first impression of her was: "Damn, she would make a great President (not the First Lady, the President!!!)", but then I woke up from 'a dream' and realized that we in the U.S. live in such a 'bigoted' country that a woman can never be a President...

Surely. But I think that underscores the problem: I know what Bush's policies are; I've seen him in action for the past 4 years. Kerry's only position sofar is that he would do things differently from Bush.

Take this as an aswer to your thread about why I can't trust Kerry to do the right thing.

Kerry rally in Philly:

If you are comfortable with George Bush's go from the gut and ignore evidence decision making style then more power to you. But frankly I'd be more comfortable with you as president than Bush because I know you would at least ask some people some important questions before you do something big.

To me it isn't all about their policies, its simply that Bush doesn't know how (or doesn't want to) make informed decisions balancing different ideas and weighing different possibilities like any serious leader of either party should and usually does.

Bush took a big lead on Electoral Vote today.

He snatched Florida and Ohio from Kerry, and is still leading by 1% in Hawaii

This race is going to come down to only a few key states.

Kerry MUST win PA or he can't win the election. Most polls have him up there by 1-3% and if democrats turn out I think he will be OK.

Bush MUST win FLA. I think the recent federal aid, the oversampling of dems and bush still being on top, and his brother Jeb, should lead to a slim victory here.

Ohio doesn't half to be won by anyone, but I think whoever takes it wins the election, I also think it is the hardest to call. Traditionally republican, but also hit hard by job losses, and a dead heat in terms of polls, I am unsure of how this one goes.

This whole election shapes up to be crazy, I know that I for one am getting 2 6packs and settiling in to enjoy the chaos all night.

KJ

Now now, we're getting into the realm of Bush-bashing. I read quite a bit about his administration, and while he is a gut-player, he also listens to his advisors very carefuly. And frankly, sometimes decisions have to be made from the gut.

Bush's decision to go to war with Afghanistan was made on September 12th; within two months Taliban was gone.

Do you believe Kerry would be as steadfast?

Yep, I do. So would Clinton or McCain. And all 3 of them would have done it without endorsing or permitting the rampant torture that went on there.

Clinton or McCain - I do not doubt; Kerry or Gore - I do.

Btw, what's that torture you talk about? Abu Ghraib?

Presidential Tracking Poll: Bush-Kerry

Updated Daily by Noon Eastern Election 2004

Presidential Ballot

Bush 46.4%
Kerry 48.4%
Other 1.7%
Not Sure 3.5%
RasmussenReports.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monday October 25, 2004--The latest Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll shows Senator John Kerry with 48% of the vote and President George W. Bush with 46%. The Tracking Poll is updated daily by noon Eastern.

This is the first time Senator Kerry has held the lead since August 23. The 48.4% for Kerry is the Senator's highest total since August 17. Data for this update is collected on a three-day rolling average basis and Senator Kerry held the lead on each of the three days of polling...

MORE AT LINK...

Rasmussen Reports has Kerry ahead for the first time since August 23rd.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm[/url]

Polls have become dead even in Florida Again. (CNN)
Kerry has 1 point lead in PA now.
Ohio is still dead even.
Kerry appears to be winning Florida early voting. (Just saw most of this on CNN)

The lead in polls can be hugely attributed to Clinton campainging for Kerry... :wink:

CNN has Bush at +5. So?

You gotta look atall the available polls, not just the one you pick to fit your desires.

Sounds like the same strategy the vote-master employes. :wink:

National polls don't matter anyway. See Bush v. Gore 2000 for details.

Better the Devil you know eh?

I agree. As CNN recently put it, the candidates are running for governor of 11 swing states instead of President of the US.

Kerry Leads Bush in Paper Endorsements

Mon Oct 25, 5:45 PM ET

By SETH SUTEL, AP Business Writer

NEW YORK - The polls may be too close to call, but there's one area in which Democratic challenger Sen. John Kerry seems to be pulling well ahead of President Bush: newspaper endorsements.

According to an ongoing tally by Editor & Publisher, a newspaper industry magazine, so far 125 newspapers have endorsed Kerry — including at least 35 that had endorsed Bush in 2000 — versus 96 for Bush. Meanwhile, only two newspapers that went for Al Gore in 2000 have endorsed Bush.

What's more, several papers that had backed Bush four years ago are now declining to make any endorsement at all, including several in key states: The Detroit News in Michigan, The Tampa Tribune in Florida, and The Patriot-News in Harrisburg, Pa.

I dread of the day when paper endorsements decide elections.

On another note, it that the leading news station which "Crossfire" show happened to be embarassed by Jon Stewart???

(BTW, read a decent article regarding "Jon vs. Crossfire", see below...)

I just happened to visit the site first time today upon hearing on the local news... (Don't believe that much in polling, esp. if it's w/in margin of error... :wink: )

Regarding the Jon Stewart vs. Crossfire fiasco (esp. for Crossfire), I referred above to, see the article here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6315747/site/newsweek/

TV, Money and 'Crossfire' Politics

There's no ideological coherence to partisan positions. But you must support your team. If you don't, it screws up the TV show

By Fareed Zakaria, Newsweek

Nov. 1 issue - There are no unscripted moments in American politics anymore, certainly not seven days before the presidential election. That's why the talk of Washington last week was a few minutes of spontaneous unrehearsed drama—among TV personalities, not politicians. Comedy Central's Jon Stewart, host of the wicked political satire "The Daily Show," had gone on CNN's "Crossfire" as a guest and complained about the show. "It's hurting America," Stewart said, explaining that "Crossfire" and programs like it were not discussion shows but theater. His hosts seemed stunned—"Come on. Be funny," Tucker Carlson said plaintively. Perhaps it's unfair to single out "Crossfire" for scorn, but on his broader point, Stewart is exactly right. The structure of political life in Washington is increasingly made for theater, partisan fund-raising, polling and consulting—but not for governing. And after a close election the problem is only going to get worse.