Sorry, but I am still pessimistic.  So long as Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia etc. are a factor.  So long as paper trails are few and far between.  So long as dirty tricks are still being pulled at polling places.  So long as someones ID is not accepted as being the 'correct' ID.  So long as Democratic voters wait for hours in line while Republicans breeze on through.  So long as voter registrations are discarded for being on the wrong weight paper or because the registered voter has a book overdue at the library, or their name is similar to someone who served time in prison, or because they "look foreign."  So long as elections are overseen by partisan Republicans, who control the taking and counting of votes ---- I'm pessimistic.

Well said, MeanBoneII.   The question I'm not hearing is how much experience did B#%h have in foreign policy - and look at where we are now.  As you point out, JRE does have experience garnered from being on the Foreign Intelligence Committee, and  co-chairing the Foreign Relations Task Force to Russia.  Several trips abroad, one to give the keynote address in Brussels.  All of which make his accusers look a little silly.  

Add to that his work on poverty, which is a Global issue, and the true commpassion he has demonstrated to those in need (so unlike His Nibs' bestowing his "Compassionate Conservative" schtick only on the Rich),  all show humanity an understanding of world wide problems that has been sadly lacking in others "more experienced."

Hillary, Hillary what are we gonna do with you?   She does not make any sense.  She grandstanded the DLC gathering in Denver touting a watered down  and  severely weakened version of what John Edwards has been saying all along.  And of course it is well known that the DLC is "Democrat Lite" (no carbs, no calories, no guts when it comes to the issues).   So asside from taking a 'centrist' (do nothing) view, she has as a major backer Rupert Murdoc.  Just these moves alone on her part, make her unsuitable presidential material.   What real change can she offer from the B#%h years when her backers are a big part of the B#%h problem we need to change to right the country.

John Edwards is my choice.  By the bye - Great picture of Elizabeth, mbair.

As a former Oregonian, I have to admit that when the vote-by- mail issue first came up I was sceptical.  After voting that way a couple of times I have become an ardent supporter of the system.  Especially with the advent of the Right Wing pushing electronic voting systems down our throats.  (see Robert F. Kennedy Jr's recent article in Rolling Stone:  "Was the 2004 Election Stolen")  I will grant you that having to pay postage is tantamount to a poll tax (39c a vote) but in a national campaign the Feds could probably foot the bill for postage or the PO eat the cost.  At that, most voters can scrape together 39c to post a ballot.

Jenny Greenleaf's (above) argument is a good one...

Great Diary, mbair.  (I'm new to MyDD and don't know my way around as yet otherwise I would recommend this officially --assuming such a thing is possible).

Carter is a man that I greatly admire, granted his problems while President, but a more honest and upright person is hard to come by.   Edward too, has those qualities,  and a heart for the American people that has been lacking for too long a time.