Reply #50: For Gore... [View All]

[tryanhas]

...BECAUSE HE OVERHWELMINGLY WON CALIFORNIA AND NEW YORK DUH!!!

What's 500,000 freaking little votes in the two most populous and two of the most liberal states in the union?

That answer is too simple.

The electoral college decides elections, not popular vote, so get a candidate who can pile up electoral votes, like Edwards.

KERRY HAS WON MORE STATES BECAUSE DEMOCRATS ARE VOTING FOR THE DEMOCRATIC FRONTRUNNER BECAUSE THE MEDIA CONSTANTLY SAYS THAT KERRY IS ELECTABLE! Plenty of people I have heard testimonials from, say that people go to Kerry's victory speeches and go home saying, "I CAN'T STAND HIM, I just voted for him because I thought he would win."

They are just following suit and doing what they think they should do, they don't FULLY SUPPORT KERRY or care that much for him, they just HATE BUSH MORE! Kerry's "can beat bush" votes are votes against Bush, and those votes are accented in a Democratic primary, but would not be in a general election, duh!

REPUBLICANS IN CALIFORNIA ARE MORE LIBERAL THAN DEMOCRATS IN SOUTH CAROLINA, so I guess those conservative Democrats should just vote Republican, right?

When will you people realize that the world is not black and white! It's not, and EITHER OR WORLD.

Throw the freaking labels out the window! All Conservatives are not Republicans and all Liberals are not Democrats!

When the "WE LOVE LOSING ELECTIONS" wing of the Democratic party realizes that, then maybe we can win some elections. It's about appealing to PEOPLE, not just your base.

Kerry does well with the base, but he wouldn't do as well when you have an evenly divided electorate between Dems, Independents, and Republcans, and even more divisions and polarization in those groups.

That's where Edwards would thrive because he "CONNECTS" more with voters, and his support is solid, whereas Kerry's is soft.

Disagree, I'm sure, learn to think about things more, I hope.

I'm out for a while, I have to leave the house, lol...

Smile... :)