MikeG
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-08-04 12:50 PM
Original message |
Bob Casey, Jr. will be the end of Rick Santorum. Write it down. |
YEM
(553 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-08-04 12:51 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Is casey going to run against him??? |
|
I heard Barbara Haffer may run against him.
|
MikeG
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-08-04 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. Casey will get the nomination. Hafer's not well liked in the East. |
jean
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-08-04 12:52 PM
Response to Original message |
2. will that be in '06? Tell us about Bob Casey, Jr - |
|
Does he have anything organized yet and can we help in any way?
|
MikeG
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-08-04 12:53 PM
Original message |
Ran and lost against Rendell. |
rabid_nerd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-08-04 12:53 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Yeah but would be supported by Rendell in 06 |
rabid_nerd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-08-04 12:53 PM
Original message |
|
If so, it'll be a cake walk.
|
PROGRESSIVE1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-08-04 12:53 PM
Response to Original message |
4. How can I help Casey win??? I'll do whatever it takes! |
RPM
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-08-04 12:56 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Mon Nov-08-04 12:56 PM by RPM
NOT
I am as disinterested in a pro-life Dem as i am in Santorum.
Anyone else out there who is interesting for this race?
(edited for spelling)
|
MikeG
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-08-04 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. It's OK to be pro-life if you are never called on it. |
RPM
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-08-04 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. I don't like the caseys at all |
|
voted 3rd party in his race this year... don't want to have to use my vote for senate the same way in 2 years
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 03:27 AM
Response to Original message |