Dean vs Bush = 4 more years of Bush.

[CoffeePlease1947]

I fail to understand why Dean backers support Dean if they know that Dean cannot beat Bush if he gets the nomination.

Poll after poll after poll show Bush slaughters Dean in a head to head match. From the time Dean first campaigned to now, he only gets 38% of the vote against Bush.

Do Dean supporters not realize that giving Dean the nomination means 4 more years of Bush? Do they think that some how Dean can cover a 14 lead over Bush? It is not going to happen. Even when Bush's numbers plummet Dean's do not go up against Bush. Dean still stays at 38%.

I appreciate Dean supporters enthusiasm for Dean. But backing him means another four years of Bush.

At what point to they say to themselves, "Dean cannot beat Bush" and except that fact? When Dean is at 30% against Bush, at 20%, how about 5%? Will they every except this hard fact? I mean hey, I would love to have Charles Rangal for President. But I am smart enough to realize he CANNOT win.

I am not saying that Dean cannot win the nomination, I think he can. But if we nominate Dean who cannot beat Bush instead of a candidate that can, are Dean supporters not killing the chances of removing Bush from the White House? I think they are. Sorry, but at some point we need to back a candidate that can beat Bush if we want to win in 04'. Polls show, Dean cannot beat Bush.

Mike