Here's an exercise, and maybe we'll get the answer next week at the RNC... If W was asked what were the major accomplishments of his four years as president, what would he say?

My question is why do I only hear about this here (on blogs), and not much in the media, or from the Kerry campaign? I know that Bush never formally came out and stated that he would veto the bill, but is the charge so difficult to support that it's not worth making? I mean, just making the accusation on flimsy evidence seems like a good move to me, yet it's not out there. Why?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/30/politics/main580877.shtml

According to MSNBC, the Kerry campaign plans to go forward with evidence that Bush is in bed with special interests, noting specific donors and the favors they've received. They also will reportedly provide a list of members of the current administration who formerly worked in the industries they now oversee

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5724959/

Kerry touched briefly on the fact that having a nuanced opinion is not a bad thing, but I think that the flip-flop label has to be shot down more forcefully still. Perhaps the acceptance speech is not the place to do it because it looks defensive. Also, ideally you do right to the other guy's face, which is why the debates are fertile ground for this.

This is my first diary here, but hearing some of the anecdotes in the diaries of people who voted Bush in 2000, and recalling some of the campaigns to keep people from voting Nader again by noting that his former supporters are no longer behind him and regret their vote (e.g. dontvoteralph.net), well, it got me thinking...

What would it take to put together a site where people who voted Bush in 2000 and other Republican leaning folks could come and post about their disaffection and how they refuse to vote for him again.