Michael Goodwin, writing in the New York Daily News, says some things I've been thinking. Namely, that all it took for the Democrats to lose the presidency in a year where they were expected by almost everybody to win, was to nominate a loser. He concludes they are now down to a choice between two losers.
Wouldn't it have been a treat to have choices you actually wanted to vote for? I think for awhile some people believed Obama might be that person. His not-ready-for-prime-time characteristics are recently beginning to show.
Golly, once again we get to figure out who is the least unattractive candidate. BTW, I include McCain in that "choice of least worst" dilemma.
