1. Possibly not wanting Clintons to have too much power ie jealousy?
I doubt it but thats also politics. What do you think - do they really know something we don't or do they just want greater clout in the absence of Clintons?
8. Could be they don't like the tactics being used by the Clintons, could
be they're also tired of the status quo and know this country would be better off with someone completely different who delivers a message of optimism.
15. actually, its fairly logical: the Clintons represent the antithesis
of the progressive, left end of the party. Kennedy has been firmly in that end for years. triangulating between the right and the left is not consistent with Kennedy positions.
19. yeah, what the hell can she do to Kennedy or Leahy
Their stature in Senate dwarfs here. Kennedy's been in the Senate for 44 years and Leahy for 34 years. She's not in the leadership. She can't do a thing. If she becomes president and decides to be vengeful, she'd be cutting off her nose to spite her face, and I don't believe she's stupid.
24. Dream on. 4 seats won't be enough. Every Democratic vote is important.
The way the congressional races have been ignored while all the hysteria has been fixated on the presidential race, I can see the Repubbas taking back the Senate.
Look up the approval/party preference ratings for Congress.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
