The W
Views: 100866041
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
26.11.14 0705
The W - Current Events & Politics - Could the Democrats Survive a 2004 October Surprise?
This thread has 26 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(1877 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (6 total)
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 513 days
Last activity: 513 days
#1 Posted on
I'm going to give the Democrats as close to their dream scenario as possible, while only throwing one (major) fly in the ointment.

Bush vs. Graham: I pick Graham for this scenario because a) Only 1 Democrat from New England has won the general election in the past 150 years (Kennedy), thus eliminating Dean, Kerry and Lieberman. b) Sharpton, Kucinich, and Mosely-Braun are eliminated because they have no realistic (or unrealistic for that matter) shot. c) Edwards is eliminated because trial lawyer is close to used car dealer in the food chain. and d) I eliminate Gephardt because, unless someone in the 1840's did it, I can't remember a sitting member of the House of Representatives winning a Presidential election.

Now, the scenario: Polls from October 23-25, 2004 (plus/minus 4%). States that have generally been close listed.

Graham with an 11 percent lead in New York, 9 in California, 5 in Florida (remember, he's never lost there), 10 in New Jersey, 2 in Michigan, 3 in Pennsylvania, 4 in Minnesota, 1 in Wisconsin, and 4 in Oregon.
Bush has an 8 percent lead in Ohio, 3 in Missouri, 4 in Tennessee, and 5 in Georgia.

Now, I presume most Democrats would sign for this scenario a week to 10 days out from Election 2004. Now, the rather large fly in the ointment: Video proof of either the capture or death of Bin Laden on October 28, 2004.
Should this occur, its extremely probable that Bush would get a (rather large) bump from this event.
NOw, would this event cost the Democrats the White House? And please, I'm begging, don't drag this into Michael Moorer/Oliver Stone conspiracy land. Legitimately, would this one event, occurring right before the election, kill/vastly diminish any hope for a Democratic victory?

(edited by redsoxnation on 22.8.03 1904)


Ok, so Ted Williams is decapitated now? What will his son do next, sell him to the Japanese dog food company that bought former Kentucky Derby winner Ferdinand?
Promote this thread!
Freeway
Scrapple








Since: 3.1.02
From: Calgary

Since last post: 339 days
Last activity: 26 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.96
I may sound like a nut here, but if I was Bush and I'd captured either Saddam or Osama, I'd probably keep it to myself until the election. Why? Because people'd be asking "What's he done for us lately?" If you capture Osama six months before an election, you run the risk of people not caring at electiontime. You do it right before the election, and nobody'd forget.

So my answer is "Bush Wins", simply because that kind of revelation would stun the world.



Your winner and 3-time Stanley Cup Champion...the New Jersey Devils! Their title defense begins in 4 months!
DrOp
Frankfurter








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 2268 days
Last activity: 1135 days
#3 Posted on
Ala, the hostage release timing between the end of Carter's administration and the beginning of Reagan's?



And Marking Out
Slashwrestling.com
Wienerville
drjayphd
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 22.4.02
From: Long Island

Since last post: 20 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#4 Posted on

    Originally posted by Freeway420
    I may sound like a nut here, but if I was Bush and I'd captured either Saddam or Osama, I'd probably keep it to myself until the election. Why? Because people'd be asking "What's he done for us lately?" If you capture Osama six months before an election, you run the risk of people not caring at electiontime. You do it right before the election, and nobody'd forget.

    So my answer is "Bush Wins", simply because that kind of revelation would stun the world.



If we've already captured either of the Happy Evil Fun Bunch, I REALLY find it hard to believe that anyone could keep quiet about it for a YEAR. That's the kind of news that WOULD stun the world, and therefore is too big to keep under wraps that long. It's not even like with Chemical Ali... you even hint that either of them might be dead, and it's OVER.



Today's Out-Of-Context Quote, Courtesy of hardygrrl:

"...between the grime layer and the Seventies game show host hair, I'd rather rim Undertaker after a White Castle/Schlitz bender."
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
#5 Posted on
I'll give you fair warning right now - if either of them wind up dead within a month of the '04 election, I will drag it into "Oliver Stone conspiracy land". (And I hope most of the voting populace would see through that kind of charade as well.) I don't believe in coincidence - not on that kind of scale.

Besides, everyone knows that if Dean (or whomever) is polling too far ahead of Dubya, the elections will need to be "temporarily postponed due to increased terrorist chatter". (I'm kidding. I think.)



"Conason said-quote-I just want people to pay attention and ask questions and not accept what I call conventional idiocy on TV and radio." Conventional idiocy? So why is it that more people listen to Rush Limbaugh than anybody else in radio history? All Ive got to say is, there are a lot of idiots out there."
---Joe Scarborough
Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst








Since: 26.6.02
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 116 days
Last activity: 116 days
#6 Posted on

    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
    I'll give you fair warning right now - if either of them wind up dead within a month of the '04 election, I will drag it into "Oliver Stone conspiracy land". (And I hope most of the voting populace would see through that kind of charade as well.) I don't believe in coincidence - not on that kind of scale.


If either Saddam or Usama turn up dead, and multiple international parties can confirm that it's really them, why would it matter? I mean, why would it matter to anyone but the Xfiles-conspiracy freaks? The important thing is that they'd be DEAD. The American people can be so forgetful and fickle that I'd say Bush SHOULD keep them on ice until just before the election. He's the guy who got the terrorists so why should he allow some slimy Democrat to say "Yeh, but what have you done LATELY?" He wouldn't even have to give campaign speaches. Just put their heads on some sticks and get Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Powell together, and they could all just dance around stage like Mummers on parade while the band plays "When the saints go marching in". LANDSLIDE victory.



'But if one is struck by me only a little, that is far different, the stroke is a sharp thing and suddenly lays him lifeless, and that man's wife goes with cheeks torn in lamentation, and his children are fatherless, while he, staining the soil with his red blood, rots away, and there are more birds than women swarming about him.' Diomedes, The Iliad of Homer

Maiden RULES!!!
Pages: 1Thread ahead: PA GOP says "Cali looks fun. Can we play too?"
Next thread: CA GCOTD: BADIOZAMANI
Previous thread: Welcome to hell
(1877 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
It's hard for me to imagine how her situation could be much more ridiculous. Not because she's protesting, not because others are jeering her for it, but because people (locally AND nationally) are making such a big deal out of it! Seriously, folks.
The W - Current Events & Politics - Could the Democrats Survive a 2004 October Surprise?Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.109 seconds.