It's official-"Bush will beat Kerry in a walk"

[underpants]

:eyes: Is this guy actually awake? :eyes:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/218595p-188030c.html

Right now the polls look even. But that's an optical illusion. The President has a Republican convention coming up and the power of incumbency to shape events between now and November. In other words, he's way ahead.

Kerry is a weak campaigner. Barring some kind of national disaster, his best shot is the debates. Democratic true believers think he'll kill Bush, one on one. That's what they thought about Al Gore, too.

Calling a presidential race in August is risky, especially a race that's supposedly close. But no guts, no glory. Bush will beat Kerry in a walk. If I'm right, you read it here first. If not, well, even Pauline Kael got it wrong once in a while.

[David Dunham]

1. This guy is a nut.

[KurtNYC]

2. I can't believe he ran that piece of crap again

I wrote this to him last time:

You contradict well-know facts in your op-ed piece. Some of which include the fact that no incumbent has won after having a polling position similar to Bush's at this point. You turn to obvious exaggeration in order to avoid dealing with the real facts. You seem detached from reality so lets see if we can reel you back in a little.

Oil is at a 28-year high. Jobs are being outsourced rapidly. Your boy is using information that was developed by the Clinton administration (2000) to try and cover for the fact that he has done nothing significant to make this country safer from terrrorism. And we have lost more than 1 million jobs net since Bush took office. The jobs which have been created pay far lower than those lost.

Let's talk for a moment about your electoral analysis. In 2000, in a high turn out election, Bush lost the popular vote by 500K+ votes. He has pissed off many of the people who voted for him last time. Why? Because he is NOT a fiscal conservative and he lied to the country repeatedly in order to get us into the Iraq quagmire. $100 million in negative ads have failed to stem the tide. People see George Tenet getting fired and Paul O'Neil coming out with unflattering information and CIA agents being "outted" as political punishment -- it doesn't make them feel safer OR better about Bush. How in the world do you expect Bush to get more votes this time than he did last time?!

Your piece includes all the talking points ("no bounce" etc.) so we get the impression you don't have much to add to the dogma. Do results matter? Are we turning the corner? I think we are and you better get ready to start writing come November about why we should impeach John Kerry rather than this obvious, desparate fantasy about Bush bouncing back.

You better start writing better propaganda or Zuckerman will boot you put a Hannity column in your place.

He didn't have any answer for any of that.

[underpants]

4. outstanding letter

He has ran this before? Oh I got it from the Richmond Times-Disgrace (Dispatch).

[KurtNYC]

5. Thanks - and it says at the bottom it ran on August 4th

Maybe my letter froze his brain for the last 3 weeks.

[Frodo]

3. Well, he got ONE thing right

His best shot IS the debates.

As for almost any challenger.

[olddem43]

6. Are we turning the corner or staying the course?

Now which is it?

[flordehinojos]

7. The author of "Bush is way ahead" is simply REFRAMING the contest

Definition of REFRAMING:
"ALTER THE MEANING OR VALUE OF SOMETHING BY ALTERING ITS CONTEXT OR DESCRIPTION".

That is just what the author of the New York Daily News article 'WHY BUSH IS GOING TO WIN" is doing. He is making Kerry's positives look negative and Bush's negatives look positive.

[Cocoa]

8. Ken Adelman agrees

:-)

[jackieforthedems]

9. I'll Believe That B.S.

When I see it. It's not over 'til it's over.