"Ted Kennedy is endorsing John Kerry and I'm wondering, do you really want the endorsement of a guy with a Bloody Mary mustache?" — David Letterman - Posted by muckdog at March 6, 2004 07:00 PM

QED

Well, I know how I'm going to vote, and most of the country is like that. so we're talking about swing states, right?
I know the Bush campaign going to be bloody, but the question is whether it's going to be effective.

If this is their economic plan, forget it. Ads won't make jobs materialize. An Iraqi constitution won't bring our troops home. And health care - Bush promised affordable health care in 2000. Like everything else he promised, it was a LIE.

He'll have his red states, but don't underestimate the motivation of people who have thoroughly repudiated him (many who voted for him). And how about Ohio?

I've been cajoling my "independent" friends telling them that no vote is submission to tyranny.

Here's to Wellstone!

--ventura county, ca

talking points for undecided voters, Nader voters and wavering republicans:
1. It's the economy, stupid. It's the Supreme Court, it's John Ashcroft (stupid).
2. One of two people will take the oath on 1/20/05: GWBush or John Kerry. a "protest" vote is a vote for Bush.
3. Are you better off than you were 4 years ago? Can you really afford four more years like this?

3 quick comments

-In some respects this tactic just might backfire. I mean after I read all of this, I became motivated that after I finish writing this, I plan on going over to the John Kerry , DNC, and MoveOn.org websites to donate some money.

-Just the fact that there are web sites and bloggers out ahead of the story and alerting people to what the Rethugs and Bushco tactics will be is also a positive thing.

-I know both above points might only be applicable to small portion of the general population, but the role that the internet is playing during this election cycle is much greater than in previous campaigns. Sites like this are providing information and access that was not as readily available prior to this. I think that this quick and easy communcation is to the advantage of the Democrats this time around.

Here's to Wellstone!

right on, darryl. i'll keep him in mind this year. Let's Roll!

Instead of answering back to Bush's first ad, I wish the Dems had FOUGHT back - by laying out how Bush spent those cowardly hours after the towers hit - and then pointing out the background of the phoney shot of him with the firefighter - and then, the Bin Laden family getaway by air - and then, each and every stonewalling of Bush to cooperate with the commission studying the 9/11 attack, with dates of stonewalling, delays, and refusals.
In other words, if the Rebugs are going to get tough, the Dems have to get tougher.

Dorothy-
I agree totally.
The dems need to make the ads this year that in past years they never would have made.
The ad you mention is right on the money.
There are many others that should be made.

LOL, a site with cartoons, too!

http://www.crushkerry.com/

Cartoons, muckdog? That's all you have? So, so weak.