My guess is the independent vote won't have that much an influence on the election outcome.

This won't be 2000. This won't be down to the wire.

Here is the likely determining value: for seven years the liberals have strongly voiced their opinions. Now the liberals have Barack Obama as their standard bearer.

How large is the liberal number in reality?

The liberal numbers seem large on the internet and the media. Except have you noticed that the airport crowd greeting Barack Obama in Los Angeles has been pretty much the same set of faces as the airport crowd greeting Barack Obama in Cinicinnati.

The floating passionate entourage could be little more than an illusion. A thousand liberals here, a thousand liberals there, and pretty soon it looks like there are ten thousand liberals. But there's still only a thousand in the entourage.

Unless the liberal agenda can prove there are really that many of them. And that they can create a voting bloc that makes a dent in the electoral system.

Well, when we get Hillary out of the way, we can begin to assess the reality of the liberals versus the conservatives.

Or moderates....cause we still have to assess how many conservatives and how many moderates will be backing McCain.

fred camorra call

Sent by fred camorra call | 12:20 PM ET | 02-28-2008

Amen! Fred.

Sent by Harold | 1:12 PM ET | 02-28-2008

Fred, These definitions are in themselves illusory. Liberal? Conservative? Moderate? We all have the same hopes for the country, prosperity, liberty, and honor.

We are divided over irresolvable non-issues, immigration, abortion, marriage rights, taxation, etcetera. All of these divide our will as a people, and give the powerful the leverage that they need in their work to relieve us of our sovereignty.

To brand oneself as a conservative or liberal, democrat or republican, is to be complicit with tyranny. Are we not men?

Wake up.

Sent by Jody Sol | 1:29 PM ET | 02-28-2008

Jody - well said. Careful, however, with your use of big words and abstract philosophy. It appears many neo-conservatives have never consulted a dictionary as evidenced by their pejorative use of the word liberal. Gosh darn it - there's another big word.

Sent by Sean | 2:19 PM ET | 02-28-2008

Jody,
As you mentioned earlier (to Fred), the labels (Liberal? Conservative? Moderate?) are not only illusions, but also being hijacked by Ultra-Nationalists (Conservative), Hyper-Permissives (Liberal), and Fence-Riders (Moderate). For their private uses.

At the same time, these "hi-jackers", want you to seee them as "just like you", not as the scary whack-jobs they really are! This is why a Kansas Republican had to switch parties, get the democratic nomination for A.G. and run against the "single-issue, wack-job, semi-militant, ends-justify-the-means, idiot who had the A.G. job in the first place! Silly, but true.

However, I disagree that the issues are irresolvable. The extremists (in both major parties) are going to be disapointed, but thats what COMPROMISE means (each side has to give some).

These partisan, "my-way-or-no-way", mono-polar politicans need to be taught that leasson. Anti-Incumbent anyone?

Sent by Harold | 2:27 PM ET | 02-28-2008

Sent by Harold: Amen! Fred.

Careful, Harold. Separation of church and state and all that.

Which leads me to a speculation: Why is it that many black leaders are also black ministers? Yet, there is the ongoing argument about separation of church and state?

Sent by Jody Sol: Fred, These definitions are in themselves illusory. Liberal? Conservative? Moderate?

Very Buddhistic of you, Jody. I am never one to argue against reality being an illusion. Are we the dream, or the dreamer?

Actually, Jody, I don't believe liberals exist anymore. They've so skewered the definition of liberalism that the animal is as illusive as Bigfoot.

I'm watching on Youtube a 1960s 'Meet the Nation' clip of William Buckley debating then New York Mayor John Lindsey. Lindsey was the liberal. Lindsey was a Republican.

Anyway, Buckley was running for mayor of New York. In the old video he is lambasting the Liberal Republicans who were running New York into the ground with their liberal Republican programs.

Yes, you heard me. Bill Buckley denounced the very LIBERAL REPUBLICAN John Lindsey to no end.

John Lindsey also ran for president on the Repbulican ticket.

I went to a John Lindsey presidential rally. Singer Richie Havens introduced Lindsey to the liberal crowd. We all had our photographs taken together. Rickie Havens of Woostock fame, the LIBERAL REPUBLICAN John Lindsey and me and a whole bunch of other LIBERAL backers of the LIBERAL Republican John Lindsey for President.

So, there answers your question if I have ever supported a Republican for president.

Yes, the extremely liberal Republican John Lindsey.

Because Republican candidates like Lindsey and Barry Goldwater were the LIBERALS back then.

So, yes, it's all an illusion.

But this year's illusion is that Barack Obama is the liberal candidate. So far John McCain is more the moderate candidate who is waiting to see if he can be the conservative candidate.

fred camorra call

Sent by fred camorra call | 2:52 PM ET | 02-28-2008

Technically, moderate and conservative are the same thing (Webster's).
The difference comes only from context!
If you are opposed to reform, change, or progress your Conservative.

If your in favor of the above (and also want to be more tolerant), your liberal.

The republicans, having been hi-jacked by the ultra-nationalists (on immigration)and stern ex-prosecutors ( abortion), is generally in favor of "liberal business policies".

The camera-seeking, label-sticking, sound-bite-producing politicans of today are just doing what comes naturally to them. Paste a (less than flattering) label on "the other guy" to make "the other guy" so unpalatable, no one would ever think of voting for them.

And confuse the rest of us (until now)!

Sent by Harold | 4:32 PM ET | 02-28-2008