Thread for the "US" Lefties

[Traveler]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14832124%26method=full%26siteid=50143% 26headline=god%2dhelp%2damerica-name_page.html

Although still stunned by the election results, I thought I'd try to show my disappointment by letting off some steam. Although I don't agree with all that is stated in the attached article, it does convey most of my sentiments at this point in time.

[Spider]

We democrats got a small victory on Nov 2 nd , and it was on an important issue , No matter what else Happens , California saved the Day for us ........ Sure I wanted Kerry to win , but i will take what I can get ...........

[Garcia Bronco]

I'm totally happy about the stem cell funding that will happen in Caly. It can translate into better health down the road...as well as...a great economic chance for our country. Especially if we get ahead of the game. But the funding better go to Amercian companies and not foreign ones...that would be nothing short of treason.

[Spider]

I'm totally happy about the stem cell funding that will happen in Caly. It can translate into better health done the road...as well as...a great eonomic chance for our country. Especially if we get ahead of the game. But the funding better go to Amercian companies and not foreign ones...that would be nothing short of treason.
Agreed ........ My biggest fear was young girls getting pregnant , then having an Abortion for Stem cells for a Family member in need , but the more I read about stem cell, the more I know that senario would be remote .......

[watermock]

I'm totally happy about the stem cell funding that will happen in Caly. It can translate into better health done the road...

I'm not sure a partial birth baby would agree, but hell, it's allready dead right?

Fact of the matter is you can get stem cells from an umbilical cord, which I have explained repeatedly to deaf ears. It matches your DNA perfectly, and is perfectly safe, you just freeze your childs DNA cord.

Every child should have his Umbilical Cord frozen, but that would take money out of the thieves in the health industry.

[Captain_Poncho]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14832124%26method=full%26siteid=50143% 26headline=god%2dhelp%2damerica-name_page.html

Although still stunned by the election results, I thought I'd try to show my disappointment by letting off some steam. Although I don't agree with all that is stated in the attached article, it does convey most of my sentiments at this point in time.

Papi, for someone who sounds intelligent, why would you link such hateful hyperbolic piffle?

It's just more of the same angry elitist European snobbery, looking down their noses not only at the president, but at the entire citizenry. I also note, with some amusement, that the Moore-ish diatribe doesn't have the courage to name its own author.

[Spider]

I'm not sure a partial birth baby would agree, but hell, it's allready dead right?

Fact of the matter is you can get stem cells from an umbilical cord, which I have explained repeatedly to deaf ears. It matches your DNA perfectly, and is perfectly safe, you just freeze your childs DNA cord.

Every child should have his Umbilical Cord frozen, but that would take money out of the thieves in the health industry.
That would work with some cells , but not all , I dont know where you got the partial birth Baby from , But that partial Birth baby wouldnt be a cure all , the seceret is getting these Stem cells before they develope ..... I.E into eyes , fingers , toes etc ....... Those are the cells we are after

[Traveler]

Papi, for someone who sounds intelligent, why would you link such hateful hyperbolic piffle?

It's just more of the same angry elitist European snobbery, looking down their noses not only at the president, but at the entire citizenry. I also note, with some amusement, that the Moore-ish diatribe doesn't have the courage to name its own author.

I'm still smarting from the results. As I said, I don't agree with all that was said but it does reflect my anger and disappoint right now. Nothing personal against anyone on this board.

The author's name is Brian Reade.

[Garcia Bronco]

Agreed ........ My biggest fear was young girls getting pregnant , then having an Abortion for Stem cells for a Family member in need , but the more I read about stem cell, the more I know that senario would be remote .......
Well...all I can say it is a new mainstream idea and needs to be researched. Who knows...before long they might be able to get what they need through other means....but we must take these first few steps to get there.


"The first days are the hardest days...don't you worry anymore."

-Hunter

[Garcia Bronco]

I'm not sure a partial birth baby would agree, but hell, it's allready dead right?

Fact of the matter is you can get stem cells from an umbilical cord, which I have explained repeatedly to deaf ears. It matches your DNA perfectly, and is perfectly safe, you just freeze your childs DNA cord.

Every child should have his Umbilical Cord frozen, but that would take money out of the thieves in the health industry.

Well...I don't know the complete science of it....but...I would imagine it depends on what type of cells you needed. Neurons for example...and which nervous sytem cells that you needed.

[W*GS]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14832124%26method=full%26siteid=50143% 26headline=god%2dhelp%2damerica-name_page.html

Although still stunned by the election results, I thought I'd try to show my disappointment by letting off some steam. Although I don't agree with all that is stated in the attached article, it does convey most of my sentiments at this point in time.

This thing is a load of tripe. It fulfills every stereotype of Europeans that Americans have. I wonder if the same author had the guts to insult Australians when they returned Howard to power. I really doubt it.

Having the author's knickers in a knot almost makes Bush's re-election worth it.

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

As I said on another thread, If you had to eat british food, watch their movies (except monty python) and put up with their royalty crap, you would be stupid too. this guy probably thinks Hugh Grant should be the next Terminator.

[Traveler]

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/bookman/2004/110404.html

I hope to eat crow by Jay Bookman- Atlanta Journal Constitution

I agree with this piece too.

[watermock]

This clown isn't even functionally literate. The Daily Mirror is a joke. Everyone knows it. It's a damn tabloid. Why not just read the Weekly World News? The fool sounds like LABF.

Fatass Michael Moore has allready called millions of citizens idiots. He made his 150 millions lying, but that's not enough, he wanted to throw the election. The dumbocrats are still throwing out all kinds of accusations. They are so delusional they can't even hear their own candidate talk.

[Traveler]

This clown isn't even functionally literate. The Daily Mirror is a joke. Everyone knows it. It's a damn tabloid. Why not just read the Weekly World News? The fool sounds like LABF.

Fatass Michael Moore has allready called millions of citizens idiots. He made his 150 millions lying, but that's not enough, he wanted to throw the election. The dumbocrats are still throwing out all kinds of accusations. They are so delusional they can't even hear their own candidate talk.

As solemn as I am now Mock, the dumbocrats comment was funny.

[Traveler]

In Rebuilding Party, Democrats Need to Start From Scratch
By Donna L. Brazile
Roll Call Contributing Writer
November 4, 2004

Now that Sen. John Kerry (Mass.) has conceded the 2004 presidential
election, it's time for Democrats to take a deep look inside
themselves and search hard for answers.

Where do we go from here? Our presidential ticket was defeated. We have
no leader in the Senate and no ready candidate to rally around for 2008.
In some ways, this loss is more painful than our defeat in 2000. But
now, it's time to rebuild the Democratic Party.

Under normal circumstances, I would think that some of us need to be
taken out behind the woodshed. But what would that prove? After a
painful and embarrassing defeat four years ago, many of us who worked on
the 2000 campaign were kicked to the curb and no one gained from that
exercise.

This time, we can't afford to point fingers and do Monday-morning
quarterbacking. Negativity during this time of crisis will nullify the
strong support provided by an army of Democratic activists, many of them
first-time donors to the party. But we do owe them an explanation. They
will ask to look at how we spent our money. They have questions about
our strategy, and they are not going to be satisfied until they get some
straight answers.

As an individual, Kerry may be ready to concede the election to Bush
and take some time off to regroup, but these newly energized activists
who have only begun to hone their political skills and were prepared to
fight until the last ballot was counted must not leave this electoral
season in despair. Unless Democrats begin the process of
self-examination immediately and in earnest, these fired-up voters and
activists will take the initiative from the party leaders and spend the
next two years changing the Democratic Party from the ground up.

There's no question that it's time to rebuild America's oldest
political party brick by brick. This time, I hope we leave no stone
unturned. It is imperative that we empower the "new guard" of the
party by crediting their ideas. Party regulars, donors and activists
need to know that we will not - and cannot - go back to business as
usual.

In past elections, our great leaders on Capitol Hill, along with
presidential aspirants, have turned to high-priced political consultants
to ascertain what went wrong at the ballot box. This time, I would
caution Democratic leaders in Congress and would-be presidents to cease
and desist in taking yet another poll to diagnose the party's
problems. It's time we go back to the basics and start from scratch.

The Democratic Party must lay a new foundation and stop spending its
political capital defending old programs and initiatives. Don't get me
wrong, I am still for Head Start, job training programs and the
Children's Health Insurance Program, but in this day and age, running
on such programs will not win elections.

The new foundation of the Democratic Party must be built on our shared
values of both responsibility and opportunity for all. Our core
principles and our core beliefs must be firmly rooted in the rule of
law. This is what makes us Democrats. But, as we entered this, what we
dubbed "the most important election of our time," who knew that this
was what we stood for? How can we defend ordinary people when they do
not know what we stand for? How can we expand and increase our base
without offending those who have stuck it out with us loss after loss?
We must reclaim the mantle of the party of mainstream values.

Although the polls indicated that the majority of voters believed the
country was seriously off-track and needed to go in a different
direction, on Tuesday that same majority expressed a renewed confidence
in a president who, ironically, polls said they disagreed with on the
issues. This alone should require Democrats to overhaul not only how we
communicate, but also what we communicate and to whom.

Democrats also must evaluate our get-out- the-vote efforts, not only in
the so-called battleground states, but in key House and Senate races
outside those swing states. Clearly, the GOP has figured out how to turn
out voters, and we can no longer rely solely on union members and black
churches to get voters to the polls. Without fertilizing the landscape,
it's hard to harvest the vote, especially in the South and the
Midwest. The message is crystal clear - we must not only grow our base,
but mobilize it.

Master genius Karl Rove did not leave one state behind in putting
together the president's re-election strategy. If you need proof, just
look around Washington, D.C. They put up Bush- Cheney signs in areas as
blue as the Pacific Ocean. For Democrats residing in non-battleground
states, they had little aid from the national party to help defend their
turf. This is a strategy for a losing party, not the loyal opposition.

Lastly, one of my old and wise college friends sent me an e-mail from
Louisiana in Tuesday's aftermath. He wrote that he saw no silver
lining in the elections. "I am beginning to think I could hold a
meeting of all Southern white male Democrats in my house - and my house
is not that big," he continued. He's right. Democrats cannot over
rely on blacks and other minorities to turn out in record numbers when
these voters often are the last to get a piece of mail and the first to
be blamed when things go wrong.

We Democrats can and will do better in the future. But only after we
rebuild our party from scratch.

Donna L. Brazile, the campaign manager for Democratic presidential
nominee Al Gore in 2000, runs her own grassroots political consulting
firm.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/be-so-dumb.jpg

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

No surrender

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/05/opinion/05krugman.html

President Bush isn't a conservative. He's a radical - the leader of a coalition that deeply dislikes America as it is. Part of that coalition wants to tear down the legacy of Franklin Roosevelt, eviscerating Social Security and, eventually, Medicare. Another part wants to break down the barriers between church and state. And thanks to a heavy turnout by evangelical Christians, Mr. Bush has four more years to advance that radical agenda.

Democrats are now, understandably, engaged in self-examination. But while it's O.K. to think things over, those who abhor the direction Mr. Bush is taking the country must maintain their intensity; they must not succumb to defeatism.

This election did not prove the Republicans unbeatable. Mr. Bush did not win in a landslide. Without the fading but still potent aura of 9/11, when the nation was ready to rally around any leader, he wouldn't have won at all. And future events will almost surely offer opportunities for a Democratic comeback.



I don't hope for more and worse scandals and failures during Mr. Bush's second term, but I do expect them. The resurgence of Al Qaeda, the debacle in Iraq, the explosion of the budget deficit and the failure to create jobs weren't things that just happened to occur on Mr. Bush's watch. They were the consequences of bad policies made by people who let ideology trump reality.

Those people still have Mr. Bush's ear, and his election victory will only give them the confidence to make even bigger mistakes.

So what should the Democrats do?

One faction of the party is already calling for the Democrats to blur the differences between themselves and the Republicans. Or at least that's what I think Al From of the Democratic Leadership Council means when he says, "We've got to close the cultural gap." But that's a losing proposition.

Yes, Democrats need to make it clear that they support personal virtue, that they value fidelity, responsibility, honesty and faith. This shouldn't be a hard case to make: Democrats are as likely as Republicans to be faithful spouses and good parents, and Republicans are as likely as Democrats to be adulterers, gamblers or drug abusers. Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate in the country; blue states, on average, have lower rates of out-of-wedlock births than red states.

But Democrats are not going to get the support of people whose votes are motivated, above all, by their opposition to abortion and gay rights (and, in the background, opposition to minority rights). All they will do if they try to cater to intolerance is alienate their own base.

Does this mean that the Democrats are condemned to permanent minority status? No. The religious right - not to be confused with religious Americans in general - isn't a majority, or even a dominant minority. It's just one bloc of voters, whom the Republican Party has learned to mobilize with wedge issues like this year's polarizing debate over gay marriage.

Rather than catering to voters who will never support them, the Democrats - who are doing pretty well at getting the votes of moderates and independents - need to become equally effective at mobilizing their own base.

In fact, they have made good strides, showing much more unity and intensity than anyone thought possible a year ago. But for the lingering aura of 9/11, they would have won.

What they need to do now is develop a political program aimed at maintaining and increasing the intensity. That means setting some realistic but critical goals for the next year.

Democrats shouldn't cave in to Mr. Bush when he tries to appoint highly partisan judges - even when the effort to block a bad appointment fails, it will show supporters that the party stands for something. They should gear up for a bid to retake the Senate or at least make a major dent in the Republican lead. They should keep the pressure on Mr. Bush when he makes terrible policy decisions, which he will.

It's all right to take a few weeks to think it over. (Heads up to readers: I'll be starting a long-planned break next week, to work on a economics textbook. I'll be back in January.) But Democrats mustn't give up the fight. What's at stake isn't just the fate of their party, but the fate of America as we know it.

[watermock]

But for the lingering aura of 9/11, they would have won.

Yeah, the war in Iraq is a real vote getter. This guy needs to read an Economics text, not write one.

[TheDave]

I'm not sure a partial birth baby would agree, but hell, it's allready dead right?

Fact of the matter is you can get stem cells from an umbilical cord, which I have explained repeatedly to deaf ears. It matches your DNA perfectly, and is perfectly safe, you just freeze your childs DNA cord.

Every child should have his Umbilical Cord frozen, but that would take money out of the thieves in the health industry.

Though your partially right mock... Actually no you're not, the cells found in an umbilical cord are far too mature for the research being done right now, not to mention the perfect matching dna BS (the essence of a stem cell is that it's dna is undetermined) ... The cells needed are the ones found and destroyed at invitro clinics... As for a partial birth baby... Whatever?!?!?!

[Rock Chalk]

I'm totally happy about the stem cell funding that will happen in Caly. It can translate into better health down the road...as well as...a great economic chance for our country. Especially if we get ahead of the game. But the funding better go to Amercian companies and not foreign ones...that would be nothing short of treason.

Perhaps, but like all technologies, one must guard against the more sinister applications of it.

Letting them do this will, in the end, I suspect be overall good but this is opening up a can of worms that cant be closed and sooner or later ethical dilemmas will come up concerning this.

If appropriately studied and the technologies gained thereof are used to help treat disease, well it will be a good thing but what happens when the military decides to take over? It will happen. What happens when they figure out how to genetically engineer humans because of the knowledge gained from this? Where is the line drawn?

You give an inch, they take a mile. Im wary. Im all for the advancement of science, but I also understand the darker underbelly of it and it worries me as much as nuclear war or chemical attacks worry me. We said no cloning of humans and some schmucks out there are determined to do it anyway because they think they can and for some reason science seems to think that just because you can you should. Wrong.

I hope nothing bad comes of this but Im not holding my breath.

[TheDave]

If appropriately studied and the technologies gained thereof are used to help treat disease, well it will be a good thing but what happens when the military decides to take over? It will happen. What happens when they figure out how to genetically engineer humans because of the knowledge gained from this? Where is the line drawn?


Just out of curiousity why are people so afraid of science? Honestly in the 40's and 50's most religions were against the research being done on open heart surgury... Now it's stemcell research. Any advances found from this will primarilly be used for the betterment of man. Is it possible that this science can be used for bad reasons... of course.

The reason why i quoted the above is that it highlights this fear...

"What happens when they figure out how to genetically engineer humans because of the knowledge gained from this?"

First stem cell research has little to do with "Genetic Engineering" Now if that's your fear start picketing the resarch facilities working on the "human genome". That's where all your science fiction scare stories are comming from... Odd that no one has a problem with current Genome studies. People need to spend a little more time figuring out why they are afraid of something, why are religous and political leaders standing againt progress? Just because the president or your church group is afraid of it does not mean you should.

[watermock]

That's a total line of crap and you know it. If you can't see the difference between invasive surgury and chopping up an aborted fetus to get stem cells your insane. It's unbelievable how delusional the left is.

I am mostly against partial birth abortions, I think it's totally inhumane. I'm not against stem cell research either. But to compare open heart surgury to stem cell politics is literally amazing. There was some resistance from the ignorant to heart transplants, but you were dealing with a dead person, not an innocent fetus. But whatever. :bash:

[TheDave]

That's a total line of crap and you know it. If you can't see the difference between invasive surgury and chopping up an aborted fetus to get stem cells your insane. It's unbelievable how delusional the left is.

I am mostly against partial birth abortions, I think it's totally inhumane. I'm not against stem cell research either. But to compare open heart surgury to stem cell politics is literally amazing. There was some resistance from the ignorant to heart transplants, but you were dealing with a dead person, not an innocent fetus. But whatever. :bash:


Nobody said anything about chopping up fetuses idiot! The only cells that are in question for research are embryos not fetuses. So unless you plan on picketing fertility clinics get off of it. And mock while your at it you might want to educate yourself a little on just what stem cell research is... Chopping up fetuses... what a tool.

[watermock]

Your the stupid tool. I said I wasn't against stem cell research in my post dimwit. I said I was against partial birth abortions. Are you illiterate, ignorant and arrogant at the same time. That's the trifecta that I don't know if even LABS can surprass. The coup de gras is showing yourself as a drugged out Nick Nolte.

And yes, I know the difference between an embryo, zygote and fetus. It's a blurry line.

[TheDave]

chopping up an aborted fetus to get stem cells

Thats what you said moron... thats not whats happening

There is a massive difference between a 48 hr old embryo and 6 week fetus... the only blur is due to the alchoholic haze you live in. Like i said if you have a problem with embryo research better start picketing the fertility clinics.

Let me know when you sober up and we can work on educating you :alky:

[watermock]

Fine, I didn't get the comment perfect. I'm not going to go thru mental masterbation with an idiot. Do you deny they chop up fetuses? Did you read where I said I was against partial birth abortions? Did you read how I wasn't against stem cell research? Whatever Dude. Your whining like a broad on the rag.

Your the moron that compared open heart surgury to stem cell research.

[Kaylore]

TheDave, do you know that when I see Nick Nolte now, I automatically think his name is Dave because of your avatar? Sorry. I know this comment has nothing to do with this argument. Maybe I should get out more...

[TheDave]

TheDave, do you know that when I see Nick Nolte now, I automatically think his name is Dave because of your avatar? Sorry. I know this comment has nothing to do with this argument. Maybe I should get out more...

It's all good Bro, i've just never seen a more perfect picture that describes how i feel some times... Actually there is a mug shot of james brown that's pretty good too...

[TheDave]

Your the moron that compared open heart surgury to stem cell research.

Yep and as far as people being afraid of something they know nothing about... it's a solid comparison.

[Kaylore]

It's all good Bro, i've just never seen a more perfect picture that describes how i feel some times... Actually there is a mug shot of james brown that's pretty good too...
LOL Maybe you should get out more.

[baja]

Your the stupid tool. I said I wasn't against stem cell research in my post dimwit. I said I was against partial birth abortions. Are you illiterate, ignorant and arrogant at the same time. That's the trifecta that I don't know if even LABS can surprass. The coup de gras is showing yourself as a drugged out Nick Nolte.

And yes, I know the difference between an embryo, zygote and fetus. It's a blurry line.

Mock stand with your feet together look up at the ceiling extend your arm straight out and touch your finger to your nose.

Did ya fall down?? :)

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Mock stand with your feet together look up at the ceiling extend your arm straight out and touch your finger to your nose.

Did ya fall down?? :)

ROFL!

[RaiderH8r]

That would work with some cells , but not all , I dont know where you got the partial birth Baby from , But that partial Birth baby wouldnt be a cure all , the seceret is getting these Stem cells before they develope ..... I.E into eyes , fingers , toes etc ....... Those are the cells we are after
"So, if you put stem cells next to a Shaky's pizza they will grow into another Shaky's pizza?"

[Spider]

"So, if you put stem cells next to a Shaky's pizza they will grow into another Shaky's pizza?"
No , you would make Changes and have a Chuckie Cheese or a Dominoes , even a Godfathers .......... if you wanted ...... isnt having a choice great .... :thumbsup:

[RaiderH8r]

No , you would make Changes and have a Chuckie Cheese or a Dominoes , even a Godfathers .......... if you wanted ...... isnt having a choice great .... :thumbsup:
I just thought the episode of South Park where Cartman did all of that work to get stem cell research legalized to help Kenny (presumably) overcome his terminal illness was great. The melodrama was hilarious. And then when Cartman did the Shaky's bit and Kyle laid into him about "hugging you you fat a##" I laughed til I near pissed myself.

But that aside, I'm cool with Stem cell research. Not cool with partial birth abortions, figure the ladies can figure out what they want to do in the first 2 months and that's reasonable. After the 3rd abortion the uterus comes out with the fetus. 3 strikes and you're out. Course, we could just harvest stem cells from homeless hookers and such. Hmm, money to be made. The Evil Republican committee shall be informed.

[Spider]

I just thought the episode of South Park where Cartman did all of that work to get stem cell research legalized to help Kenny (presumably) overcome his terminal illness was great. The melodrama was hilarious. And then when Cartman did the Shaky's bit and Kyle laid into him about "hugging you you fat a##" I laughed til I near pissed myself.
That was funny as hell , I laughed so damn hard my sides hurt ......

But that aside, I'm cool with Stem cell research. Not cool with partial birth abortions, I dont think there are many people ok with partal Birth abortions , Iam against abortions in general , way I see it that is between me my wife and my daughter .......

figure the ladies can figure out what they want to do in the first 2 months and that's reasonable. After the 3rd abortion the uterus comes out with the fetus. 3 strikes and you're out. Course, we could just harvest stem cells from homeless hookers and such. Hmm, money to be made. The Evil Republican committee shall be informed.
I could go with that , 3 rd strike rule ......... When I talk about Embryos , I speak of those that are frozen , along with Frozen sperm , they get tossed out after awhile , So pick a few . AI the eggs and wait for a few weeks , then get the stem cells ....... I would never condone abortion for stem cells , there realy isnt a point taking a life to save a life ...... The Unborn may just grow up to be a better person , then the Person that needs the stem cells .......

[Raider Bill]

This is a difficult moral question no doubt. There is a slippery slope argument to be made when talking about creating life for the express purpose of destroying it.


"Honorable people will draw the line in different places because this is not an issue of reason vs. ignorance, as the Democrats have portrayed it, but of recognizing two important competing human values: the thirst for knowledge and cures on the one hand and, on the other, the respect for even embryonic human life and a well-grounded respect for the proven human capacity to misuse newly acquired powers, in this case, the power to manipulate, reshape, dissect and redesign the developing human embryo. "


http://www.time.com/time/columnist/krauthammer/article/0,9565,683012,00.html


This guy is paralyzed and a Dr. so he has a horse in the race so to speak.

[Spider]

That artical is mis leading , very misleading , Bush put a freeze on future Stem cell research saying that we can work with what we got , well 22 of the cells are contaminated and are of no use , leaving only 6 that are good ......... Then he put a cieling on the funding ....... I feel for the doctor , and his Moral compass isnt defined , he would want to walk again but not at any price , well what is his Price ? ...
Now if he is talking about a designer human , the perfect being , well we do that already with cosmetic surgery , Diet Pills , work out regimine , Setriods ....
I agree there should be lines that we dont cross ........ What we need to hammer out is not that Stem cell is evil , but what lines do we or dont we cross ......

[watermock]

agreed we need to continue research. I think that is being done. Aborted babies should be allowed to contribute, it's just not out of sight out of mind. *wrings hands*

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Although the polls indicated that the majority of voters believed the
country was seriously off-track and needed to go in a different
direction, on Tuesday that same majority expressed a renewed confidence
in a president who, ironically, polls said they disagreed with on the
issues.

I'm surprised that Donna Brazille hasn't realized that right track/wrong track appears to have become an irrelevant indicator of voter preferences. We all know where Bush's numbers were, Clinton couldn't even hit 40% right track in '96 and won easily.