Originally Posted By: the G-man
 Quote:
I personally feel that someone isn't truly "almost president" or viable unless they're a nominee.


By that logic, your argument that Obama is more viable than Jackson is a sham. Obama hasn't been nominated yet either. Similarly, the implication of that argument is that McCain isn't a viable candidate by virtue of having lost the nomination in 2000 to George W. Bush.

In fact, by your logic, no one running is yet a viable candidate except made Edwards, due to having been the 2004 VP nominee.


That would be a good point to make except that the full post was:
 Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
 Originally Posted By: the G-man
The fact Jackson lost in no way means he wasn't "viable" before that. By your logic, Kerry and Gore were never viable Presidential candidates because each lost to Bush at the end.

well they were both nominees. I personally feel that someone isn't truly "almost president" or viable unless they're a nominee. I only say that Obama now (though I believe wondy actually said it) because we're in the middle of it all and he looks good to be the nominee. But until the primaries are over it's just infighting in the party.




grow up, G-man.

Bow ties are coool.