Disagree: it's a one party system, masquerading as two parties. And this party has a monopoly on the money, the media affluence, etc.
If you're serious about restoring Constitutional rule of law to this country, you can't do so by being part of this monopoly. You've no choice but to compete against it, whether it's in the guise of Democrat or Republican.
At this very instant, voting all Republican is crucial.
Crucial for "Republican control", but I've no reason to believe that's any better than Democratic control. If the reason is to empower Bush, then I can see why more Democrats would be a GOOD thing: Bush is a statist enough as it is.
My vote is going for Erskine Bowles. Between he and Liddy Dole, he's the only one resident enough of North Carolina to represent her in the Senate. Dole is an outsider who was "anointed" by the GOP bigwigs. I owe them no special loyalty, because the GOP has earned as much of my trust as the Democrats have.
That doesn't mean I'm going to like voting for Bowles, but hey if it's strictly a two-party system I'm still gonna vote for the best qualified of the two.
We must re-take the Senate and we must strengthen the majority in the House and we must take as many State Houses as possible.
Who's "we"? And how can you trust that in place of one group of idiots you're not helping to usher in another?
We have a rare opportunity to break the backs of the Democrat Party and we must take advantage of it.
Without the Democrats the Republicans will become just as arrogant.
Other than his daddy being a politician, what great qualifications do you champion?
Your balance is a cop out.