2008 Senate Outlook vol. 1

[Keystone Phil]

Saxby anything but safe?  What could possibly be the logic behind that?

There's a good bench of Dems. Marshall and Barnes can run, but I doubt either would.

Why would the former Governor who was defeated for re-election five years ago by about five points be considered a strong candidate?

[Keystone Phil]

Saxby anything but safe?  What could possibly be the logic behind that?

There's a good bench of Dems. Marshall and Barnes can run, but I doubt either would.

Why would the former Governor who was defeated for re-election five years ago by about five points be considered a strong candidate?

He was very popular, he just got swept away in a bad year for his party.  Blah Blah Blah.  Jeez, Im starting to sound like you Phil. 

That's really a stupid question. Anybody who knows anything about current events today, the state of the national GOP, the 2002 election, and pretty much anything about politics would know why he would be a good candidate. I never said strong but come to think of it, he would be a strong candidate. If he lost it wouldnt be more than 55-45%.

...then tell me why he's a good candidate. I know why he lost last time. I know how the GOP is now. That doesn't tell me why he'd be a good candidate though. Both of you told me why he lost, not why he'd be good in 2008.

[Keystone Phil]

Anybody who knows anything about current events today, the state of the national GOP, the 2002 election, and pretty much anything about politics would know why he would be a good candidate.

Ok, again, the 2002 election is an excuse for why Barnes lost, not why he'd be good in 2008.

Newsflash - Just because things aren't that great now and the national GOP isn't where it once was doesn't mean they'll be losing in states that are increasingly more Republican.

Keep making weak points like "Uh, basically if you know about politics you know why he'd be totally awesome." You're only proving that you have no susbstance.