And now, with his arguments hopelessly crushed, Mike Naso will never be seen again in this topic, tacitly admitting defeat.
I'm sorry, are you an American?
In all seriousness, my point stands. The 2008 Democrats are staunchly anti-war...especially Obama and Edwards...and so is the base. If the race is between pro-choice pro-war Hillary and pro-choice pro-war Giuliani...it will be interesting.
Your point doesn't stand. I've aleady proven that the anti-war candidate won in 52 and 68, and the main reason they didn't win in 2004 is because none of the anti-war candidates (Badnarik, Cobb, Peroutka, and Nader) were endorsed by a major party. However, it is worth pointing out that only Kucinich, Gravel, and Paul are genuinely anti-war. The rest are only pretending to be for political reasons.