The South

[agcatter]

Doubtful.  It would leave for zero margin of error.

[agcatter]

If terrorists were logical, they'd hold off until after Kerry is elected.  At that point, they'd have little to worry about.  It becomes a law enforcement issue once again and they have a lot less to worry about.

Anyone doubt those that set off the explosions in Spain would hesitate one second in detonating a nuclear device in a major urban area?  Anyone?  This is a war against a death cult and we need to kill them before they kill us.

But yeah, terrorist activity or inactivity might very well determine the election.  Another major attack and Kerry's "the war against terrorism has been exagerated" remark will look as silly as it is.

[agcatter]

Sorry, but when one candidate views it as a" law enforcement issue" that makes it an issue with me.  We tried that approach in the 90s after the first WTC bombing.  Memo:  IT DIDN"T WORK.

[agcatter]

Exactly

[agcatter]

I don't agree with you so I need "to grow up"?

[agcatter]

Immature would be engaging you personally and not the issue.  In no way did I do that.  You just didn't like my argument.  There is a clear difference in the approaches of both sides on the issue of terror.

[agcatter]

Back to the original thread, I think it possible that Kerry could win without the South.  Certainly Gore came close.  It will mean threading the needle however and that will be difficult but not impossible.

[agcatter]

My apologies for getting off track.  The thread was a good one.

[agcatter]

I can imagine the effect seeing that scene must have had on you.  I don't have nearly that kind of first hand connection although my sister  lost her best friend 9-11.  Her friend was a trainee for Morgan Stanley in one of the towers.  My sister is even more hard core on that issue than I am.  You don't mention say terrorism is a "law enforcement issue" around her.

[agcatter]

Hold it Gustaf.  No one said ANYTHING about anyone being "PRO-TERRORIST"

[agcatter]

I ignore those people just like I ignore the nuts on the left who go around comparing Bush to Hitler.

The debate is what to do about terrorism, and there is a clear difference in the two approaches.

[agcatter]

Because in it's Presidential voting patterns it is about as monolithic as it gets.  No non southern Democratic nominee has carried a single state from the old confederacy since 64.  Kerry won't either.  Too liberal.

[agcatter]

Obviously Florida has some cultural and social differences with the other Southern states and therefore that is where Kerry will attempt to direct his money.

[agcatter]

Differences?  Sure.  However, there is a common social and cultural strand that weaves itself through the old confederate states that account for it's preidential voting patterns.

[agcatter]

I disagree with your assertion that Nixon swept the South in 72 thru "race baiting".  It was national security that caused thousands of moderates to side with Nixon and give him 75% in Georgia or 70% in NC.  You don't get 72% of the vote in a state like Florida by race baiting.  A percentage that big in a state like Florida with it's large influx of transplanted northern moderates means something else was going on.  It was.  The hawkish South did not trust McGovern on the issue of national security - with good reason I might add.

[agcatter]

Race was not a big issue in the 72 campaign.  National security was because McGovern insisted on making it one.  "Come home America" was his big campaign slogan.
McGovern got blown out all over the country including states like reliably Democratic NY where Nixon got around 60% of the vote.  Pretty sure that kind of % in a lberal state like NY had very little to do with race.  Love your revisionist history however.

[agcatter]

Kerry has stated  that he regards terrorism as more of a law enforcement issue than a military one.  It is an approach the country took prior to 9-11.  There should be a vigorous debate on that.  Some of us think that approach was flawed and we shouldn't go there again.  Let's have that debate in the 2004 campaign.

[agcatter]

I agree.  We had a trial and threw some terrorists in jail after the 93 WTC bombing.  A lot of good that did.  We let the terrorist camps in Afganistan continue to crank out their graduates including the 19 who went back and finished the job at the WTC.  I want a President who will take out the Taliban or any other regime that harbors terrorist.  Let's kill terrorists whoever they are whereever they are.  Prosecuting AFTER they kill hundreds or thousands is a joke.

[agcatter]

I'm for killing the terrorists whereever we find them and destroying the regimes that harbor them.  What the hell is wrong with that?  Nukes?  Who needs nukes?  We didn't need nukes in Afganistan or Iraq for that matter.  Now, if terrorists detonate a nuclear device in an American city, ALL BETS ARE OFF if any country has anything to do with that little plot.

[agcatter]

Ok, we could do that.  Afterall, we've got this huge nuclear arsenal just lying around gathering dust....

[agcatter]

Yeah, why build nukes if you can't use them.

[agcatter]

Now you're talking.  We could make a new reality series out of it - "Nuke That Country"  Sort of a twist on "Survivor."  Better yet, we could call it "No Survivor" Imagine the ratings.

[agcatter]

Let the French lead the way on world disarmament.  They're good at throwing down their weapons.

[agcatter]

Gustaf,
Are you originally from Sweden and if not, how long have you lived there?

[agcatter]

Well, I think it's remarkable that you are only 16 years old, lived all your life in Sweden, and yet are so completely well versed on American as well as geopolitical politics.  Truly remarkable.  Your interest in the subjects are remarkable and your knowledge is truly amazing - not just for your age but for any age.

I teach middle school history in a suburban Houston school district and have for years -  Thirteen year olds primarily.  I give them a pretest the first day of school each year.  One of the first questions is to have them  label the 50 states on a map.  Half the kids can't label more than a handful of states correctly.  95% cannot label more than twenty.  One third can't identify their home state.  You get the picture.  Half can't name the President, almost none can name the VP, and zero can identify the governor.  

It isn't much better in high school.  I've taught summer school 17 and 18 year olds and the their ignorance of the political system is staggering.  

Unfortunately, it doesn't stop there.  My adult neighbors don't vote and never have.  They couldn't care less.  Apathy and ignorance runs deep here in America from cradle to grave.  

You are quite a contrast.