RR> A vote for _anyone_ without a good chance of winning is the same as
RR> staying home and blowing soap bubbles. Amusing but ineffective. It
RR> denies a real opponent a much-needed vote and assures the other side
RR> that they face no real threat. Wow, what a decisive blow that is.
Well, if the probability of victory is your criteria, we should all get 
out and vote for Clinton. Surely, *that* isn't what you're suggesting?
RR> Anyone who throws away a chance to slow the juggernaut is guilty of
RR> allowing it to succeed. If Clinton gets back in he will have no
RR> reason to hold back. He'll be a lame duck and crow about his
RR> "mandate" to do more. Worse, he will undoubedly have a coat-tail
RR> effect if he succeeds. When the Dems get back at the wheel they will
RR> undo everything that has so far been won.
You're making a false assumption. The Congressional races are looking 
very good this year. The most likely outcome is that Clinton will be re-
elected and wind up facing a Congress that's more Republican, more 
conservative and more pro-gun than any in the last thirty years.
___
 X RM 1.3 02881 X I am Reno of Borg - Prepare to be incinerated.
--- Maximus/2 2.02
---------------