'04: Election a Watershed event??

[theski]

There are two watershed scenarios:

1) Howard Dean wins having run as the most unabashedly left-wing candidate since George McGovern in 1972. Or:

2) George W. Bush wins in a landslide.

A Dean victory would be a watershed because it would be seen as a national rejection of the hard-charging Bush-GOP approach to governance.

Dean would ascend to the Oval Office having sworn to raise taxes - ending the doctrine in place since 1984 that says nobody can win an election by promising to increase the American tax burden.

And (far more important) Dean's election would be seen as decisive repudiation of Bush's approach to the War on Terror. His victory would bring an end to the Republicans' unquestioned 35-year dominance on the question of which party does a better job of keeping America safe and strong.

or

But if the president wins in a landslide - by eight points or more - then the November election will be the undoing of the present-day Democratic Party. Such a victory would almost certainly ensure that the Republican majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate would grow.

Americans would be making a clear and decisive ideological choice - not only embracing the president and his agenda, but tossing Howard and the Deaniacs onto the ash heap of history

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedc ... /15541.htm

This election will be the most devisive and ugly in history, because of the huge differences in each party... The country and the population are very divided... IMO..

[Iceberg]

A conservative pundit is banging the "Leading Democrat is Embarrassingly Liberal" drum? Who'd have thunk it. It's only a tactic that was old when Rudy Boschwitz tried unsuccessfully to use it against Paul Wellstone in 1996, resulting (in part) in Wellstone's landslide reelection.