it appears Kerry is going to win.

Huh?

At this point, it's so close that I believe the combination of undecideds breaking for the challenger and Democratic electoral malfeasance will be sufficient to get Kerry the win.

“…but I mailed my absentee ballot this morning, so my vote is now locked in stone (assuming the USPS doesn't lose it or the Kerry campaign doesn't get it thrown out).”

Uh oh, you shouldn’t have posted this – I’m sure the evil Kerry operatives are on their way to Colorado right now to seek out and destroy your ballot! If you hear evil laughter later today, you’ll know they succeeded.

“… and it will only be a matter of time before a city disappears in a flash and a mushroom cloud.”

Did you take all this out of that Ben Shapiro column from a few months back?

Given the Democrats' attempts to have military votes thrown out during the 2000 election, it hardly seems unreasonable that they might do the same in 2004.

As for the mushroom cloud, I suspect that the odds are at least one in three that a city will be nuked in the next decade regardless of who wins next Tuesday. I think are odds are slightly worse under Kerry, however. As I said, I hope I'm wrong, but I'm curious why you think we're so safe from such things when our enemies have made it quite clear they would use WMDs if they could, and with North Korea and Iran both on the brink, how much longer will we be able to keep them out of their hands?

Again, it's not just the Democrats - there was something in the paper just this morning about Republicans trying to invalidate a bunch of new voter registration forms from black voters in Ohio.

I don't think we're safe from such things - it's just that your "we're all gonna die" tone reminded me of that Shapiro column. I'm not sure what Bush has done to control North Korea, but I don't believe a Kerry administration would just sit around waiting for them to nuke us. And if Kerry or Bush don't stop Iran, Israel will out of necessity.

Growing up I saw acts of terrorism occur on a regular basis, and unfortunately it didn't seem to matter whether the prime minister was from the left, right, or center - the terrorists kept on murdering random people no matter who was in charge, and neither side came up with a successful plan to stop it. Maybe that experience is the reason why I don't think there will be much difference on this issue whether Kerry or Bush win, and that's why I'm voting based on other issues.

I want to hang out with the people you do. I volunteer with the Kerry campaign and I don't think he will win. I actually think that Bush will end up with between 330 and 340 electoral votes.

My lack of confidence is not in the abilities of the candidate, but in the desire of the campaign. Where are the fighters in the Democratic Party and since when is it acceptable to just assume that the American public with just agree that you have the better ideas.

I believe that we are more likely to get attacked with Bush in charge. For the simple reasons that I don't believe he understands the world, and because he seems to rely solely on faith as a guide. I have nothing against religion and faith, but would also like someone who can rationalize and interpret information along with that faith.

You say that under Kerry, North Korea will be able to export and Iran will develop nuclear weapons. What is Bush doing to prevent it?

As for the Democrats destroying ballots, can we try to be fair. I understand partisanship and I am a liberal who supports liberal candidates, but I would never want to deny anyone the right to vote if that vote was cast legally and within the rules. Both parties have become so obsessed with winning that ethics and values are less important than elections and fund raising. We should throw both candidates and their campaigns in prison for the things they are doign just to win.

Andy - Here's some news to cheer you up:

"[...] Homeland Security analysts say when you take an in-depth look at the presidential candidates' platforms, they are strikingly similar."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,136577,00.html

Andrew,

The commenters on this post are pretty naive. I'm not sure how old you are, but I grew up reading about Mr. Kerry's exploits in the Vietnam War and its aftermath. As a soldier, you should recognize a man who wants nothing more than to advance his career on your backs.

It is also obvious to anyone who searches the web for signs of voter fraud and intimidation that Democrat party organizations are using tactics very similar to that used in Chicago of the 30s and 40s, tactics similar to Germany in the 30s, and have a much wider plan to register fraudulent voters and intimidate Republican voters in places like Florida and Ohio. Democratic campaign offices are NOT being vandalized, but Republican offices are. Both sides are trying to influence voter registration, but the Democrat effort is 3-4 times larger than Republicans. And the majority of false registrations and dual registrations are Democrat in nature as identified by Florida, S Carolina, N Carolina, and NY reporting. Democrats can complain, but it is obviously the truth.

As for a nuclear explosion in American cities being likely in the next decade, this eventuality was discussed as far back as 1995 when I was in the Pentagon. It was treated as a routine intelligence and law enforcement issue then, with significant justification. There was no way a Republican controlled Congress would approve aggressive action by Bill Clinton to attack terrorists wholesale because the political climate felt it was unjustified. Another Somalia could have occurred, for which Bill Clinton would have been blamed. Not his fault.

I don't blame Mr. Clinton for failure to kill UBL or attack other terrorists with a military offensive. He just would not have been supported. But after 9-11 any party that continues to pursue terrorists by defensive law enforcement action actively desires the extinction of the American way of life. You either support the active defense of America or you die. Simple as that. My Democrat bosses were responsible for the R&D to analyze cargo entry into the US in support of the counterdrug war. That is where cargo X-rays and neutron scanning came from. They believed in its use to support detection of drugs and drug smugglers, and encouraged its use at Ports of Entry, especially along the SW border of the US.

However, they recognized then that 100% screening of all cargo into the US would require tens of billions of dollars and extensive time requirements to screen cargo (delays which could kill the commerce and economy of the US). So when Dems say they have a better plan for the economy and jobs, but insist on 100% screening of commerce into the US, they are espousing two mutually exclusive positions. Again, they are stupid.

I love my country. I hate what has happened in the last 4 years. But the blame for the division of the country cannot logically be placed on Bush. You can be a loyal opposition who advocates winning any war we are in and concentrates on domestic differences, or you can work to defeat America through subversion, lying, and active pursuit of overthrow of the government by election fraud. I can see who is doing that. I am not fooled. I was alive in 1971, lived through the Vietnam war's influence on my country, and I haven't forgotten who was for America and who was against it.

The Democrats are against America and want power at any cost. They are closer to the Nazi party than at anytime in their history. And they better be careful or they will turn into that which they have hated forever and despised for years. Get a grip and get back on America's team. I am not wrong, and you know it.

Subsunk

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: