>  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)