Seems to me that in 2000 the Rs were united in a rabid dislike of Clinton. They were fed up with him to the gills, as were a lot of us, and came together to support the first candidate to stick his head above the pack. The biggest criteria was who could beat Gore.

This year the Ds are united in that same dislike of GWB & Co., with the biggest single issue who can beat George.

Nader got 5% of the votes in 2000, I think partly because folks thought the election was Gore's to lose, and that voting for Nader was a great way to protest green issues.

No one counted on the Supreme Court deciding that counting votes got in the way of an election, and the subsequent appointment of Bush. All at once the Nader votes took on another meaning. I think Nader is in for a big surprise this time around when voting for him isn't seen as a protest but a vote for GWB.

I suspect many Rs don't have the energy they did in 2000, and assume GWB will win. May cut into the core.

And, George is way, way ahead, in spite of momentary polls. The candidate who spends the most money usually wins easily, and no one can match the tithe he gets from the tax break for the wealthy. No one.

If there's another terrorist attack on US soil, GWB will use that to the hilt.

And he doesn't want us to know what they knew about 9-11. That trips a very red flag for everyone who can think for themselves. And then add that they can only spare an hour and won't testify under oath. If that isn't a presumption of lying, what is?

Anyway, that's how it looks tonight. We'll see. Heck, it's only 50-50 in my mind that we'll even have an election.