|
Conventional wisdom told us that John Kerry was "electable" enough to win in '04. We all saw how that worked. The situation is the same in '08. Dennis Kucinich can win, and can have that win made official, with a good campaign and a post-election fight for the vote count, if necessary.
The same can be said for most of the other candidates. I think that DK is more likely to stand up and fight corruption and fraud than some if it comes down to a post-election vote count battle.
If a good campaign and a clean election gives Democrats a win, why wouldn't they nominate the candidate best on issues? It makes no sense to give up the issues before the battle even begins.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
