Bah, Sephiroth...probably the most disappointing final boss in the history of Final Fantasy. His only rival is Necron from FF9 in that Necron was just this random thing that fit nowhere into the story line whatsoever.

Never mind Sephiroth himself; I always found that supernova whatever attack that he had to be the lamest and dumbest attack ever in any game that has been created.

"oh look here comes a meteor it crashed into the sun and now for no particular reason the sun has gone supernova and now it has burnt the entire freaking earth to a crisp which means that everyone is now dead

lol j/k it did 1000 damage and the world is fine

and he can also do this attack again"

Yeah, that is another dumb thing about that battle. For starters, why screw around summoning meteor when he could have just wiped out the entire universe with Supernova? Would have saved me a hell of a lot of time.

Though, I am not sure if he can do it again. I think it drains too much of his MP to cast it again, which is sad given how lame a move it is (it's not even real damage, it's percentage based...meaning that it can't kill you). The reason I say this is that I have never seen him cast it twice, though once I accidentally used a Megalixer on him and sure enough he casted it again.

Bah, Sephiroth...probably the most disappointing final boss in the history of Final Fantasy. His only rival is Necron from FF9 in that Necron was just this random thing that fit nowhere into the story line whatsoever.

Something tells me that Nader will be entering the race sometime soon.

Haha, John Cox.

I mean, why wouldn't they let a guy into the debates who's political experience stretches no further than school board? Cox is just one of those rich, 4th tier candidates who thinks that they are more important in the primary than they really are.

One question, why would Bill Clinton (who is in rather poor health) be re-entering the political arena again?

I like Richardson, not as much as I used considering his comments on nationally banning public smoking, but the truth of the matter is that he simply isn't interesting enough to catch fire with the voters of shorter attention spans. Listening to him talk is like watching flies , I think the debate proves that point well enough. People are looking for more than just competence, they are looking for someone who is articulate and inspiring...especially after 8 years of Bush. Richardson simply falls short in that department.

I don't see anyway that a polarizing candidate like Hillary Clinton could win a state that is trending Republican. I'm not going to say it's impossible, just highly unlikely. Perhaps against a Brownback, Tancredo, or Hunter. Against any of the likely GOP nominees however, I don't see it happening.

Economic: 1.80
Social: 5.80

Bush

Al Gore, easily.

As someone else pointed out, Ralph Nader wouldn't have done half as well as he did if Al Gore would have:

A) Tried harder not to look like an uptight ass.

and B) Stuck to his environmentalist roots, rather than reforming himself into some sort of pseudopopulist.

A lot of people point to early polls of Al Gore trailing 30 points. It's not a remarkable feat if you think about it. In 1988, Bush Sn. trailed Dukakis by 23 points (or some such) after the Democratic Convention. We all see how that one turned out. I don't put a lot of stock in the fact that candidates rally from behind unless their opponent is a good one. Neither Dukakis or Bush were strong opponents.

Nixon/Nixon

Tacredo would never accept a ticket with McCain.  It's a matter of honor.

That's what I was thinking, but for the sake of the thread.



McCain is a senile jackass, I have lost all faith in his ability to win a presidential race. The selection of Tancredo wouldn't be helping anything.

The map would be even more lopsided if it weren't for Bloomberg who would pull around 5%.

I would be thrilled if Dewheart were to step in and boot that horse's ass off of the ticket. I will still be voting for whatever Democrat is put up if Cornyn remains on the ticket.

Tancredo would be my guess. Paul's too soft spoken, and none of the other candidates are that crazy.

Clinton, most likely. Giuliani may have quite the long shot's chance in New Jersey...but outside of that, I see nothing that would change course from 2004.

Tancredo will be entertaining.

McCain will probably make numerous gaffes, and come off as senile.

Romney will look good and sound robotic.

Hunter, Thompson, and Gilmore will vanish into the colors not to long into the debate.

Brownback will come off as a derranged yokel.

Ron Paul will be interesting, but ultimately forgettable.

Huckabee will arise as the ultimate winner of the debate. He'll be well spoken and just conservative enough to appeal to the base and not look like a loon.

Giuliani will do all right on the whole, but will leave much to be desired. I expect him to play it safe and dance around his minor suicide issues.

Giuliani, easily. What would convince the typical southern conservative to take a wishy-washy,  liberal on social issues Democrat over the pro-war, moderate on social issues Republican?

I found Gravel to be hilarious, "who the hell are we going to nuke!?!?".

Kucinich was well spoken, but all of his articulation and speaking skills is lost in the fact that his ideas are that of a crazy socialist stuck in the 60s.

Richardson and Dodd both bored the piss out of me. The worst of the pack, easily.

Biden was witty and rather well spoken, I was rather impressed.

Hillary didn't suprise me. Her answers were robotic and predictable.

Obama proved that he isn't such a great speaker when he has to think on his feet. His answers were dull and slow.

Edwards looked like a slow yokel of a fool. Unimpressive.

I see nothing inaccurate about it.

TX-10, Lloyd Doggett

I see no reason as to why he wouldn't be considered "safe".

The oddest part is that Calero wasn't even a legally viable candidate for the presidency (not a citizen), nor was his vice-presidential candidate who was underaged.

I'll go out on a limb and say Edwards. It's only a matter of time before Obama burnsout and Clinton opposers finally come out of the woodwork in the polls.

What Dodd campaign?

hey now!

he just surpassed mark warner in the tradesports listing!

0.3 and rising.

I hope you were being sarcastic here...otherwise, it would be very sad to see you take pride in the fact that your candidate has surpassed a non-candidate who disclaimed interest last year.

I don't support age limits on any substance of that nature. Seems a rather silly concept to me that they just pulled a number out of their ass and determined that it was the proper age in which to allow people to begin drinking alcohol. Same with cigarettes.

We've had this topic before...

1. New York City - confirmed Kerry
2. Los Angeles - confirmed Kerry
3. Chicago - confirmed Kerry
4. Houston - likely Kerry
5. Philadelphia - confirmed Kerry
6. Phoenix - likely Kerry
7. San Diego - confirmed Kerry
8. San Antonio - likely Kerry
9. Dallas - very likely Kerry
10. San Jose - confirmed Kerry
11. Detroit - confirmed Kerry
12. Indianapolis - obviously Kerry
13. Jacksonville - obviously Bush

As for the rest of the top 50, these ones either or obvious or are confirmed. Can anyone else confirm the ones I considered 'lean' or 'likely'?

Austin, TX - lean Kerry

I can assure you that Kerry won Austin. Quite solidly.