Clinton vows to fight beyond all reason and sanity!

Somewhat, perhaps considerably.

But some really will stay home, especially the demographics I mentioned above.

And some really will vote for McCain...his favorability ratings among Democrats are marginally higher than either Obama's or Clinton's are among Republicans. Among independents, considerably higher.

And some really will, perhaps spitefully, write-in the name of their "failed" candidate.

If that 35-44% falls to just 5-10%, that's still more than enough for a President McCain.

Third Party FTW!

Newsflash! Whoever wins is going to keep troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even Obama's acknowledged that his pledge for immediate withdrawl is, at most, a "best case scenario."

See my last post. I think of alot of McCain's favorable ratings come from Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, et al, hating the guy.

Being the dumbass party drones they are, most Dems figure that if those guys hate him, he must be their guy. I think that will change once the Dems get their shit together and start attacking McCain on the issues.

Fair enough, though I'll continue to nag you at every opportunity.

Glad to hear it. But just to make sure you should say fifty 'Hail, Madame Presidents' before you go to bed tonight. (see what I said about nagging?)

You can take that as "secret ballots are secret for a reason."

But probably not for four years. Each month less is 10 billion $.

Dems aren't that misinformed (at least not in large numbers)...not this election.

Anyone who makes you a promise NOW about withdrawing troops in the FUTURE when the situation may be very different, is PANDERING.

This is why I have to laugh at the "I won't vote for McCain because he's not conservative enough" crowd. They voted for Dubya on the basis of his being "conservative." Now, once, I can understand. They made the mistake of believing the s.o.b. when he burbled on about being a "compassionate conservative." But when they voted for him again in '04...

True, but McCain is already promising it in the affirmative.

You sir, think too highly of the American Public IMO.

He makes the case for continuing as things have improved. The Democrats acknowledge things have improved, yet they're still suggesting to their followers that there will be an arbitrary quit date.

Many Obama supporters faced with a McCain vs. Clinton contest will be drawn to McCain's already expressed distaste for negative politics, since that's what drew many of them to Obama.

And the attacks you describe that would presumably lower his prestige as the season wears on probably won't stick that much with them, ironically because the candidate flinging them will be the very same one that dispatched their own beloved candidate. He'll get considerable benefit of the doubt from at least some of them.

As I said before, Clinton will lose more voters, either to McCain or altogether, than Obama would.

I agree. As I said quite a few times I was talking about the Hillary Camp.

Bitch will cost them the election. She will cost them an election the Dems could probably have won without even campaigning much

If the Democratic voters are so stupid that they let McCain win, well, they deserve to have him.

Actually, the winner take all primary system on the Republican side nominated McCain.

Translation; a cynical lie.

I was talking about the general election.

And if the Republican voters are so stupid that they let McCain lose, well...

Yes, the system nominated McCain to run in the general election.

I'm not sure what your point had to do with mine, bro. Sorry!

Are you sure stupid is the right word to use here?

There are a number of other words I can think of, but I'd prefer to hear yours.

There's that sentiment again, that Republicans are somehow bound to voting for McCain, or voting at all for that matter.

The winner take all system made it possible (and in fact easy) for an uninspiring (at best) to downright unacceptable (at worst) candidate to float to the top of the heap while his opponents cancelled each other out.

Republicans are left with something of the opposite problem as Democrats. McCain secured the nomination with Texas, leaving the remaining states to do little more than notarize it. It already happened with Mississippi casting 80% of their votes for McCain. I'm surprised they bothered.

Then I guess I'd need to know why you "hate all three of them" - or at least why you hate McCain so much you wouldn't care if one of the other two were elected - in order to apply an adjective to your attitude, particularly since it doesn't occur to you that Democrats who sit out this election might be exhibiting behavior no more "stupid" than yours.

I was paralleling CD's post. He seems to think the only reason a Democrat might sit out this election is because they're "stupid." Apparently only Republicans abstain for moral reasons.