[Overpaid Slacker]

Sebring -

1992 --
BJ: 43% P.V. at 44.9 mm -- 370 EC
GHWB: 38% P.V. at 39.2 mm -- 168 EC

If the 1992 margin is "large in anyone's book" at about 5.5 mm, how is W's defeat of JK by almost 5 mm not "large" in yours?

1996 --
BJ: 49% P.V. at 47.4 mm -- 379 EC
BD: 41% P.V. at 39.2 mm -- 159 EC (eerie that it's almost the same as GHWB)

Now I don't care about EC votes -- it's a synthetic mechanism whose importance begins and ends at 270.

Remember, in 1992, 57% of the population of the United States did not approve of BJ Clinton and voted against having him in office. By your measure, that was REALLY not great for BJ, I guess. Yet this was hailed by our media as an "overwhelming mandate for change." And -- more on this in a moment, he had no coattails.

Also, in 1996, 51% of the population of the United States did not approve of a 2nd term for BJ Clinton. Was that "not great for" BJ? In 2000, "only" 50% of the population didn't approve of W.

Now it's 2004, and a clear majority of people voted for W, something that never happened for BJ. However, not only has W won a 2nd term, during the 2002 elections the GOP picked up seats in the Congress -- when does that happen? About every fifty years or so.

AND, more importantly, the GOP this year picked up 5 seats in the Senate, looks like 2 (maybe 5) in the House AND knocked the biggest obstructionist piece of feces out of the Senate (Daschle).

W's re-election is big news, but the tectonic shift in national elected government is HUGE and bespeaks an ascension of Republican virtues.

Dems' gotta get used to the fact that their attack tactics, lack of any meaningful suggestions and obstructionism are counterproductive -- they're attacking and obstructing what the majority of people have affirmed as their policies, their ideologies.

And this shift didn't occur on Nov. 1, 2004. It's been occurring since at least 9/11 but the Dems refused to see it when it bit them on the jackass in 2002. They played the same media/deceit games this time 'round, oblivious to the fact that nobody (but their partisans wearing the thickest tin foil hats) bought it or wanted to hear it in the first place.

You can't cover utter lack of substance on your platform by attacking the other guy -- America has seen the Man Behind the Curtain and it's not impressed.

You can't dangle the prospects of Plans contingent upon your election like Christmas presents to be given "only if you're good" and have no substance.

Ther Nae feooolin' anybaddaeh. Well, nobody worth listening to.

And don't fool yourself into believing this is no big thing, when it's a much larger mandate, in toto, than any Democrat has had ... well, since FDR, if not earlier.

JP