Jay Honeck wrote:

Why change horses if there's no problem The Johns can solve?

Even if we accept your premise - that there's no problem they can solve,
which is not what Peter wrote - the answer is still fairly blatent: to
avoid production (or exacerbation) of more.

I'm no fan of Kerry, but I'm a conservative voter and Bush is less
conservative than Kerry. From the Patriot Act to tariffs to education to
marriage (and so on), Bush has been getting the Federal Government into
places it doesn't belong. How much more liberal in the reading of our
Constitution can one get?

Strange as it is to write, I think that Kerry would do this less. Rather:
while Kerry would probably be as economically irresponsible as Bush, he's
less likely to be as liberal in areas involving Civil Rights.

These are definitely weird times!

- Andrew