I think there are only two ways the Bushies can win

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

The Bin Laden "capture" or unveiling as I like to call it.
Or vote fraud.
Or both, which is most likely.

Other than that they have no statement they can make. They have nothing to say for themselves that isn't a lie. I think they've gotten to the point where they can't win without this trickery.

[BigBigBear]

1. I disagree

A third way is to make Kerry the subject of the campaign, and hammer his negatives.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

3. whose negatives are worse? Bush or Kerry

Please! There's no comparison

[BigBigBear]

8. Kerry's had months to campaign

ane Bush has only just started.

Don't kid yourself - $100 million buys a lot of spin in America.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

12. Oh, no doubt, but the lies of this admin. are so obvious

even the most clueless cubicle jocks and soccer-moms I work with aren't buying it these days. Just wait till the debates (if there are any)

[BigBigBear]

17. I hear it too

A lot of people who unenthusiastically voted for Bush because the negative spin on Gore worked (claimed to have invented the internet, fibs and exaggerates alot, shady fundraising, etc) are now regretting it and insist they wll vote against Bush. Great stuff, validates what I'm been saying about these crooks for years now.

But look, voting against Bush means voting FOR someone else. That will be Kerry. All that $100 million has to do is convince people their vote is safer with Bush.

It's like the old storty of two hunters trying to escape an angry lion. One hunter thinks he has to outrun the lion. The second hunter knows he only has to outrun the other guy.

Bush needn't make the electorate happy, just suspicious of Kerry.

Frankly, what MAY turn this in Kerry's favor is the disenchantment of Bush's conservative base, on immigration and economic issues. They will NEVER vote for Kerry or Nader, but they may stay home. Bush's father suffered a similar fate in 1992. It may come dow to whoe base is more energized - by that measure, I would agree that Kerry has the edge.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

18. Agreed

Our base is very energized!

[NewJeffCT]

14. agreed

They're already doing a good job of framing Kerry as a waffler, even though Bush has raised waffling, buck passing and lying to an art form.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

16. That's my point - Bush is the ultimate Pot calling the kettle black

there's nothing they can accuse Kerry of that they've done 10 times worse

[RobertSeattle]

2. I'm starting to discount the "Bin Laden Capture" scenario

The Saddam Hussein capture turned out to be a wash politically, and there's been so much yak yak about the "impending" Bin Laden capture lately that no matter when he gets captured or killed it will have a similar effect. Even then, the Bushies are already saying the capturing Bin Laden is not that important - this is an endless war from their standpoint.

[flakey_foont]

4. Reagan goes gently into that good night

2 weeks before the election.......no 'trace' of the 'drugs'

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

5. wow - now that's a concept I hadn't considered!

Hmmmmm

[tom_paine]

13. Been saying it since 2001.

His death wil be, shall we say, "conveniently timed".

Though, fearing be called a "conspiracy theorist", I'm suuuuuuurrrrrre it will just be a big coinkydink.

[wryter2000]

7. Unless

Unless Nancy says that Bush isn't continuing Reagan's legacy (whatever that is, puke). If she disavows *, he won't do them any good. I think that's a long shot, though. I'm not the praying type, but I'm sure praying for RWR's health.

Welcome to DU.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

10. Yes - welcome

I'm holding on to my FDR dimes for after St Reagan's demise. They'll be collector's items!

[NaderIsMyHero]

6. Dems had better hire some good hackers:

SAN JOSE (AP) -- Electronic voting has made its debut in the US as election officials beefed up security for the record number of voters expected to cast E-ballots for the first time.

Scattered technical problems were reported in the early hours as voters in 10 states, including California, New York and Ohio, went to the Super Tuesday polls to choose a Democratic presidential nominee and decide primary contests for congressional and state races.

Advocates of electronic voting say paperless ballots save money and eliminate problems common to old systems. But the technology brings a new breed of security concerns, like software errors and hackers that could make the results unreliable.

In California, new security measures range from random tests of touch-screen machines by independent computer experts to a recommendation that poll workers prevent voters from carrying mobile phones or other wireless devices into booths.

Overall, some 10 million people in at least two dozen states were expected to cast ballots in primaries this year on machines built by Diebold, Sequoia Voting Systems, Electronic Systems & Software and other vendors.

And the electronic voting trend is accelerating: In November's presidential election, at least 50 million people will vote on touch-screens, compared with 55 million using paper, punch cards or lever machines, according to Washington-based Election Data Services.

One Maryland polling place had to switch to paper ballots on Tuesday because its new electronic voting machines didn't work. State elections supervisor Linda Lamone said technicians expected to have the problem fixed quickly.

Voters also had to start out using paper ballots in Georgia's Effingham County. Chris Riggall, a spokesman for Secretary of State Cathy Cox, said county officials apparently forgot to program the encoders - devices used to tell ballot access cards, which voters insert into the machines, what ballot to display.

A security issue also arose in Georgia.

Georgia Tech student Peter Sahlstrom said he found 10 Diebold terminals sitting unprotected in the lobby of the school's student centre Monday. Mr Sahlstrom photographed the machines in their unlocked cases.

"Frankly, this makes me nervous and ... it validates a lot of the concerns I already had," he said.

The paperless ballots eliminate problems like hanging chads and make it impossible to accidentally vote twice for one position. The machines also can toggle between different languages for people who don't speak English.

"The modernisation of the nation's voting infrastructure is long overdue," said Alfie Charles, spokesman for Oakland-based Sequoia, which built the machines being used by as many as 4 million voters in California and Maryland.

But computer scientists have been protesting the switch. They're particularly concerned that few of the computers provide paper records, making it nearly impossible to have meaningful recounts, or to prove that vote tampering hasn't occurred.

Politicians, voter-rights advocates and even some secretaries of state have acknowledged that the systems could theoretically fail - with catastrophic consequences.

In several software and hardware tests, critics have shown it's easy to jam microchip-embedded smart cards into machines, or alter and delete some votes - in some cases simply by ripping out wires. They've cracked passwords to gain access to computer servers and showed that some systems relying on Microsoft Windows lacked up-to-date security patches that should have been downloaded from the internet.

California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley directed elections officials last month to bolster security in 12 counties using touch-screens. Those counties account for about 41 per cent of California's registered voters. Shelley also wants independent, random tests of touch-screen machines.

Maryland, which spent $US55.6 million on 16,000 touch-screen computers earlier this year, also took precautions.

Computer experts told Maryland lawmakers in January that the hardware contained "vulnerabilities that could be exploited by malicious individuals." Among their surprises: all of Maryland's machines had two identical locks, which could be opened by any one of 32,000 keys or be easily picked.

Copyright 2004 News Limited.

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,8855446%255E15306,00.html

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

9. But spokespeople from the manufacturers said this was a non-issue

they would't be dishonest, I mean it's not like these companies contribute to any political party.

end sarcasm

[Moderator]

20. NaderIsMyHero

Per DU copyright rules
please post only four
paragraphs from the
news source.

Thank you


DU Moderator

[justsam]

11. i can't see where the

capture of Bin Laden can help Bush or any sitting pres unless the voters are as retarded as he thinks they are.. Bin Laden is going to get caught or killed by the military or CIA no matter who is in the WH.. Voter fraud is most likely but here's hoping the there are enough safe guards and people in place to prevent even that.After 2000, i think they are prepared. I believe the election is going to be close and Kerry will win if handled right--I wouldn't waist a lot of money on Bush right now,I would just keep criss-crossing America and talking to the people, especially in the states where i think i may lose..At the debates i would tear him a new A--, nothing but qs that will make him stutter and want to crawl under the podiun..About the first of Oct. is when i would start on the TV ads giving all i had against Bush and keep it up relentlessly. Let Bush blow his nest egg on ads that people are going to forget by Nov anyway. If i were Kerry i wouldn't even give Bush the satisfaction of answering his rhetoric.
People want to see jobs and security, not 2 people making a lot of promises that they already know Bush can't or won't keep..JMHO

[stepnw1f]

15. Reagans Hate Bushs

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

19. They do?

Never heard that before.