Who Is The Most Electable Possible Democratic Candidate

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Poll question: Who Is The Most Electable Possible Democratic Candidate

We all know that this maladministration has done more to undermine the Constitution and America's good will in the world than the forty two that preceded it.

So, which Dem has the best chance of stopping it and why

[VermontDem2004]

1. Haven't I seen this poll before?

[tjdee]

2. Voted for Edwards, should have voted for Clark--BUT

it's impossible to tell without Clark actually being IN the race.

For all I know he's as boring in a speech as a block of cheese and wants to raise the retirement age to 85.

[dpbrown]

3. All, equally - so vote for the best candidate

__Bush Re-Elect Drops to 42%-47% - Tied with Unnamed Dem

"A Zogby poll released today shows that when asked if George Bush deserves re-election, only 46% of Americans said yes and a narrow majority, 47%, said it is time for someone new. The poll, with a margin of error of +/- 3%, on a generic 2004 ballot between Bush and a Democratic candidate, Bush received 47% of support, and a Democratic candidate received 44%, putting the Bush and a Democratic candidate in a statistical dead heat still a year before the Democratic candidate is selected. The second poll, released yesterday by Fox News/Opinion Dynamics and published in National Journal's Hotline showed should the 2004 election be held today, those planning to reelect Bush had dropped to 42%."

http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=5528

Every Democratic candidate can beat Bush. We don't have to "settle." We should pick the candidate who is best on the issues.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. That Poll Is Getting Old

[dpbrown]

9. So is the BFEE

I guess that's why most people are ready to reject it in favor of an "unnamed Democrat."

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. There Are More Current Polls

than Zogby that have * beating a generic Dem

[chadm]

4. The falacy of "Anybody But Bush"

This really should be an entirely new thread, but I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post new threads.

I highly recommend that anybody who really believes the "Anybody But Bush" mantra or the "Most Electable" garbage check out this excellent piece:

http://www.eatthestate.org/07-24/NobodybutBush.htm

"But what indication have the "anybody but Bush" Democrats given that they will be able to win next time? If their strategy consists solely of frightening people away from a progressive or Green Party candidate, they aren't going to win next time either. (Fact: more Democrats voted for Bush in 2000 than voted for Nader; Fact: It was the massive vote fraud in Florida that got Bush into the White House, a fraud the Democratic leadership didn't have the guts to fight against.)"

[JVS]

10. GREAT ARTICLE! It warrents an entire thread.

I've had a lot of trouble with ABB. Even if someone is willing to vote for anyone but Bush, they should try to keep that on the down-low because it is an indicator to party leadership saying "you don't have to try to please me at all". I believe that it is very important that we make clear that we want HUGE differences from Bush, not just anybody else.

[Booberdawg]

16. I just don't buy that - ANY Democrat is better than Bush

And I mean ANY Democrat. One step at a time - get a Democrat in office and stop the forward motion of the bush regime. What about next time? We address that when the time comes, not now.

Once a Democrat is in the White House THEN work on improvements in the Democratic party. Splitting the Democratic vote is only going to assure another bush term.

The Green Party does not have enough support to carry the day. It's just not realistic to think so many centrist and moderate Democrats are going to make that quantum leap. So you have a choice - a half loaf or none at all.

[mandyky]

6. Clark is not a candidate

and it is questionable if he is a Democrat.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. I Think The Operational Word is Possible

[Noordam]

7. IMHO,,, the poll should have been WHO should drop out

because they could lose to *. I am thinking of Holy Joe and a couple others.

[Adjoran]

14. hey, I like Al Sharpton

But anybody who thinks he is "electable" in 2004 has been toking too much today.

[VermontDem2004]

17. I could have been toking for a week

but I still wouldn't of picked Sharpton as the most electable.

[VermontDem2004]

11. Ok Sharpton has 20 Votes

I noticed Sharpton/Sanders had more votes then anybody. We have some freepers in here.

[rabid_nerd]

15. Nah...

We just couldn't vote for the Al we wanted ;)

[FlashHarry]

12. Sharpton???

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

[Julien Sorel]

18. I think Sharpton's strong showing here

is a message to everyone that the polls might be coming too often. No offense to Al -- great guy, but the message is there to be seen.

[VermontDem2004]

19. I think Freepers came on here

to screw with our polls.

[rabid_nerd]

20. Nope

DG people decided to rally a "vote for Al" in polls drive

[burr]

21. To be electable, start with an alternative course for the future.

Again all of these polls have a serious problem.

First they include Clark, not yet a candidate...and we barely know what his campaign agenda will include. Also it is hardly a matter of who is or isn't electable, but whether or not shrub is still considered beatable in another year.

What do we know about Clark...he opposes shrub's tax cuts, he disagrees with the invasion of Iraq, and he wants to try a different approach on Homeland Security. What don't we know about Clark? His political party, how far he would go on healthcare reform, and what his views are on radically reducing expenditures in the DOD.

Democrats and Republicans seem to approve of throwing money at the problem when it comes to military spending, but don't give a damn when it comes to public education or healthcare. Does this really improve our nation's security?