the biggest 'surprise' state

[angus]

Second, I think you meant to say that California's economy suffered more than the national econoy.  This is in part from the major components of that economy which are poised for a major recovery.

Third, in addition to the California Presidential election history which I cited, I noted the recent trends in voter registration and the recall election.

good points.  Check out the March issue of California Journal.

[angus]

OK, I'm gonna stop the silly numbering of arguments now, if it's OK with you...

The liberal bias of Rasmussen Reports was admittedly a fact that I wasn't aware of. I have no idea how biased the Public Policy Institute is. And I moreover would like to see some proof of this alleged liberal bias.

I think that most people would agree that Texas was Democratic for about a 100 years, voter fraud or not...also whether it was due to fraud or not is completely irrelevant to the point.

Johnson was a cheat and probably the killer of Kennedy.  But hey, he's still Al Sharpton's favorite.  I gotta admit that among leftist leaders, he's one of my favorites too.

[angus]

I have Marlboro, Copenhagen, and The Patch all going at the same time.  Pretty impresive nicotine addiction.  Who needs killers, when we have ourselves?

Yes, gustaf, you're right, of course.  What party is popular today doesn't reflect 50 years ago or 50 years from now.  That's why you should look at political cultures, as opposed to political parties.  I've been saying that quite a bit on this forum, as I'm sure you've noticed.  Those don't change, but parties do.  Having two parties superimposed on three political cultures is confusing, but ultimately forces parties to evolve, so it's fun, if you're a political junkie.

[angus]

We need a Minnesota Democratic Alliance thingy

"Defending the Forum from those who think that Minnesota is trending GOP!"

kerry wins minnesota.

by the way I said my position on Iraq most closely mirrored Carol Mosely Braun's position, among those who were running for the democrat nomination, not john kerry's.  why she would later endorse Howard Dean is a mystery to me.  obviously it had little to do with iraq.  it is not illogical not to impugn or malign kerry at every opportunity, just because I have shifted to Bush during the course of his tenure.  I would say, in general, it is not difficult to imagine that personal attacks would have the effect of eliciting sympathy with the victim, even if that victim is a filthy-rich spoiled former drunken fratboy, at least among those true bleeding-heart types.  

the argument in favor of bush with regard to iraq has more to do with nationalism.  republicans are all over the place on most other issues.  quite a bit of controversy, which can be healthy.  I never believed, twenty years ago, that writing a GOP platform is like herding cats, because I too was given the old line about what a monolith the GOP really is.  But the inaccuracy of that viewpoint is very clear to me now.  Perhaps you'll outgrow that familial partisan socialization too, perhaps not.  there is only one constant that has always been the identifying characteristic of the republican party since its first national convention in Pittsburgh 1856:  nationalism.  that will have varying appeal within the three political cultures given all other circumstances, but these three cultures have thus far remained intact enough to be identifiable.  they have not changed fundamentally, though their adherents spread out a bit, as we are a very mobile people.  it is not a matter of conservative or liberal.  as you may have noticed, most americans don't even use those correctly.  with me, it's a matter pragmatism.  bush made the mess, he will clean it up.  his team is best equipped to handle the situation, for better or worse.

I'm not saying that we couldn't have done better.  on some level it is still embarrasing that in a nation of 293,051,668 people, the best we came up with was Bush vs. Gore.  I have been consistent on all these points, if you'd care to actually read.