On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 10/27/00 6:36:27 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>
> > There are a lot more than eight, too; according to CNN's count as of
> > today, the too-close-to-call states are AR,FL,IA,MI,MN,MO,NH,NM,OR,PA,
> > TN,WA,WI, and WV, accounting for 154 electoral votes.
> >
> > And the Republicans plan to start running pro-Nader ads on Monday in
> > OR,WA,and WI, according to an AP article this afternoon. You're deluding
> > yourself if you think it doesn't make a difference in those cases.
>
> Again, I said *unless* you are in a battleground state, a vote for Nader will
> not affect the outcome.
And you claimed there were only eight battleground states, too. That's
what I was addressing.
> I *know* it can affect the outcome, and even addressed that in my original
> post. Perhaps you should go back and re-read my post completely.
There's no need to be snide. You had a numerical discrepancy from
the information I had seen. I corrected that. End of post.
--
Andrea Leistra [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If we could put a man on the moon, why can't we do it again?
