DEMOCRATS: Are you angry with my state?

[opebo]

Well, my own home state was even worse.  It does seem a little frustrating when states like Ohio do self-destructive things.  Do you think your state will keep gradually moving Democrat by minute degrees?

[opebo]

What's it gonna take Third World poverty go change in back to the Dems?

Precisely Flyers.  Quite a few parts of the state are there already, just not enough yet.

[opebo]

What's it gonna take Third World poverty go change in back to the Dems?

Precisely Flyers.  Quite a few parts of the state are there already, just not enough yet.

Opebo, pretending to be in touch with the average citizen.

I've lived in the third world, and driven through Ohio many times (though admittedly back in the better days).  Many parts of the latter resemble the former.

[opebo]

What's it gonna take Third World poverty go change in back to the Dems?

Precisely Flyers.  Quite a few parts of the state are there already, just not enough yet.

Opebo, pretending to be in touch with the average citizen.

I've lived in the third world, and driven through Ohio many times (though admittedly back in the better days).  Many parts of the latter resemble the former.

yawn

Go have a look round your country.  A good half of it is desperately poor.

[opebo]

Yeah. They're called liberal cities.

What does that have to do with it?  The point is that America is 1/2 'third world'.

Besides, rural areas are also very poor. 

[opebo]

I don't hate Ohio. I think Kerry's strategy in the state was brain dead, but that's hardly Ohio's fault.

Kerry was a lark.  Kerry is an excellent US senator with a fine voting record.  I think he can have that office as long as he wants it, but he is not an executive officer.  He's just not made that way.  He is nuanced and understands Law very well.  He is a legislator, and we should not apply the Peter Principle.  I'm not saying the democrats could have won with anyone, in light of the September 11, 2001 attacks which tend to help Republicans, but they certainly should have found a feisty attack dog, not the elder-statesman type that would have trouble winning even in peacetime.  I suspect Hillary and Company understand all that and in light of this it comes as no surprise that the Dems get behind Kerry understanding that this spells a loss in order to set up a free slate in both parties in 2008 which will, if things go well for the democrats, make them the party of the First Female President. 

Surely you were not surprised that Kerry lost.  (or that you lost your five quid on that silly Kerry wins Mississippi bet).

angus, I think it is completely beside the point whether Kerry was an executive officer or not.  when one votes for president one is simply voting for a party and its (and its constituencies) agenda.  The idea that some personality traits or management style matters seems frivolous to me.  However if you mean that voters fall for the idea that a 'strong leader' who is against their interests is better than a mealymouthed bureaucrat who would implement their interests, then yes, it is a huge factor in elections.  But not because of any real executive capabilities, just because of foolish misperceptions.