>  LL> Republicans want to nominate a billionaire for president.
 >  LL> Democrats are flirting with the idea of nominating a socialist.


 >  LL> What is this world coming to?

 > At least the "billionaire" doesn't need or depend on all the political money
 > you're talking about to run for office. No need for him to "suck up" to
 > anyone in the political arena. Including the media which decides what we
 > know about in Washington.
 
For many years the democrats and their cohorts in the media were picking 
the republican candidates. 

Like `feeding a card' to the sucker. They almost always chose a candidate
they knew even a democrat could beat.

In 2000 they didn't figure on the Supreme Court getting tired of recount after
recount after recount....and at each `recount' there was always something 
new; `hanging chad'! Tiny `indentations' on the *democrat* chad (which was
taken as what the voter really..really..REALLY intended to vote for...
Sudden discoveries of *uncounted* votes in a car trunk... or a closet!
And each `recount' brought the win closer and closer to Gore's side. It was
obvious the `recount' would go on and on till Gore won one, even if by only
ONE vote! THEN the democrats would have demanded the `recounts' stop and Gore
be declared the winner.

They fucked up bad that time. They didn't get enough `graveyard' votes out of
Chicago to do it the first time.
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
 * Origin: Telnet://valhalla.synchro.net - Richmond, Virginia (1:275/93)