Dear 42, 43, 44 percent of the the USA (or whatever it is today)....

[Aviation Pro]

...have you lost your fucking minds? Do you really want another four years of wars, CEOs stuffing their pockets, job losses, home foreclosures, jobs shipped overseas, Osama bin Laden free, flag draped coffins, and the further erosion of your constitutional rights? Do you want to put the economy into the hands of an old prick who has admitted that he knows nothing about economics and whose economic guru has told Americans that they are "whiners?" Do you really want an angry man whose sole claim toward "expertise" in international affairs and the business of war is spending time being tortured in a POW camp? Is this who you want to lead the nation? A guy who is gaffe prone, confused and who lacks the prerequisite seriousness that is necessary to lead this nation in a sober time. Do you like paying $4.00/gallon at the pump? Do you really like the effects of climate change and global warming? Do you like the fact that your children and grandchildren and great grandchildren are going to be saddled with a burden of debt that will break their backs?

Do you? Do you?

Because if you do, then the analysts are right, this is a country in decline being led by the incompetent and criminal and shown the way by voters like you that are too stupid to think.


Here's a link that every American should read and thoughfully digest: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/29/opinion/29herbert.html?hp

[melody]

1. It's 24%, last polling, and you think the Americans here don't agree with this?

The people here have already dealt with these matters ... that's why they're here.

[MissHoneychurch]

2. He means the ones

that want to vote for McCain.

[melody]

4. I get that but how many of those will be here, beyond the troll contingent?

I say post it over at freeperville. That's where it belongs imho.

[DarthDem]

3. It's a Question for McLame Supporters n/t

[iamahaingttta]

5. I know a very wealthy person...

... who is a Single Issue, Low Information Voter.
He is going to vote for whomever keeps his taxes lower.
Period.
He doesn't care about any of that other stuff, because he's got his.
Period.
End of story, no discussion.

That's your 42%.
Single Issue, Low Information.
You can, and probably will, talk until you're blue in the face.
Whatever their single issue is, that's the only thing they're going to hear, and since they are low information, they will only hear it from one source. Inside their own heads.
Period.

[Mr. Blonde]

6. Abortion is another key single-issue

Look how many on Free Republic will not vote for a pro-choice candidate. I think they disliked Guiliani more than they do a lot of Democrats because of that one issue.

[bikoman]

7. It's like picking the lesser of two evils

There's a lot to dis-like about both Obama and McCain. I was happy to see McCain dump Foreclosure Phil as his economic advisor. Phil Grahm was instrumental in facilitating the evolution of the mortgage crisis by introducing legislation in December of 2000 which prevented the SEC and CFTC (Commodity and Futures Trading Commission) from regulating credit default swaps and CDO's (collateralized debt obligation). Bill Clinton also had a role by signing a bill to repeal the Glass-Steagall act which opened the doors for banks to get in the securities business.

Is the Iraq war really a war now? It's like we extinguished the forest fire and now we're putting out pop-up fires. I don't believe McCain's goal is to keep the same level of troops in Iraq forever. Even Obama said he would keep troops there indefinitely to battle Al-Qaeda. If we followed Obama's plan on the extrication of troops out of Iraq it would be utter chaos there now. He showed good judgement by opposing the war in the first place but a serious lack of judgement on how to get us out with the least damage.

[Beacool]

8. Hear, hear!!

The lesser of two evils.....

[Aviation Pro]

10. I beg to differ....

...this is not a question of choosing the "lesser of two evils" (that's a lazy, trite expression). This is a question of choosing the lesser of two levels of cluelessness. As we've seen (check the last eight years) a President is pretty clueless unless he surrounds himself with competent, sober advisors who actually understand the machinations of governance. Senator Obama has surrounded himself with a competent staff of advisors, who, against all odds, defeated a formidable opponent after being given litte chance of doing so. Compare and contrast his team with Senator Angry Old Prick's, which can't seem to find their collective asses with both hands.

The 42 - 44% that I mentioned in the OP are voting for incompetence because, well, that's where they wallow.

[AspenRose]

9. That op-ed is spot on

.