The Democrats have decided their guy is going to win and that President Bush is going to lose.
I say this because I've noticed a marked air of taking the election for granted among those people — mostly Dems — who despise Bush so much that seeing him gone is their fondest wish.
George Soros (search), the billionaire currency trader, is so sure the president is going to lose that he's even stopped making outlandish statements about him.
NPR hosts routinely describe the election in terms of Bush being down in the polls, with John Kerry (search) virtually the president.
It's true Bush is down, and it's true that the Iraq war has become so polarizing that it's possible to see him get the boot over it... but honestly, that scenario seems a little too Spaniard for me.
Sen. Evan Bayh (search) — a Democrat and Kerry supporter — told me that there isn't much difference between what Kerry would do if a country had WMD and what Bush did do... preemption would also be a Kerry last-ditch position.
(Bayh may get a call from Kerry to set the record straight. Who knows?)
But if that's the case, then the voters eventually have to decide if they are voting against Bush because Kerry is better, or because they just don't like the situation — a situation both would approach in more or less the same way, which is stay the course in Iraq and make sure it is stable.
The difference seems to be that Bush knows it's a job none of our friends will help us with, and Kerry seems to think they will.
Who seems more realistic? The one who’s expecting French, German and Russian assistance? Or the one who isn't?
That's My Word.
What do you think? We'd like to hear from you, so send us your comments at email@example.com. Some of your e-mails will be featured on the air or on our site.
• Looking for previous My Word columns?