Where's the inspiration?

[grannyb]

I haven't been around for some time so I don't know how much this has been discussed. I have watched the Dem debates and find none of the candidates to be either a gifted speaker or in anyway inspirational.

I have thought for a long time that the shrubs idiocy and policies alone will not win this election for us. There are just to many right wing wackos, religious fanatics, gun nuts, corporate lap dogs, etc. that are going to vote for him no matter what.

We are going to have to have a candidate that will get a lot of people who normaly won't vote out to the polls. We need someone who not only has good policies but the ability to articulate them and give people hope and yes inspiration. Just simply attacking bush isn't going to do it.

I'm sorry but in these debates dean comes across terrible in my mind. He doesn't even seem to be able to stick to his core beliefs. A good leader will make decisions, articulate policy, and convince people that what he is doing is right. A leader doesn't change policy to whatever is selling in the polls this week.

Help, I want to win I want to see bush sent back to gods little acre in crawford but I'm not seeing the guy that's going to do it in this field of candidates.

Am I wrong? What am I missing?

1. Does it have to do with the form?

That's what it seems like to me.
No one really has much time in these debates to do anything other than sound bite type flourishes.
The only one I have personally been able to directly compare in this way is Dean, since I saw him speak in Bryant Park, NYC. In that sort of venue, he was quite articulate and did not seem to flip flop; but I have to agree that in the debates he, as well as the rest of the candidates, do not consistently come off that well, with the exception of Carol Moseley Braun.
Since I found myself quite inspired by Dean in person but have found him not so inspiring in the debates, my conclusion on it at the moment that is that it has to do with the form of the debates

[ReddishPinko]

2. You aren't 'missing' anything really

There's nothing to miss yet. It's sort of like watching a game of 'kill the man with the ball'. Whichever one is ahead in the polls or gaining is the one who gets pummelled right after all the Bush one-liners have been inserted. I think the top 3 need to start pounding on the bottom 6 harder, get them out of the picture, and use the free TV time to have an honest debate.
But according to what I've read the entire field is trying to (being told to by who?) draw a sharp distinction between the Dems and the Repukes and not each other right now.
The primary season will be very welcomed in mi casa. Right now watching a debate to decide who to vote for 'is like trying to solve a math problem by chewing bubble gum'.

[newyawker99]

7. Hi ReddishPinko!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[eleny]

3. The format cheats us from getting to see the candidates...

as we should. Being president isn't about hurried soundbites and sloganeering. It's about sitting in meetings using quiet diplomacy, it's about speaking to the citizens in addresses and press conferences. The frenetic pace of the debates we're seeing renders them useless.

Each of the candidates has something to offer. Doesn't mean they all should be president one day. It's just that they have ideas to present and the debates aren't the place. I'd rather see some round table discussions with a few candidates at a time. Unrealistic, I know. but I'd sure like a Charlie Rose sort of format where they can quietly explore one or two issues over the course of 90 minutes.

[Valarauko]

4. gun nuts

I'm a "gun nut" (what a hate term!) and I wouldn't vote for Bush if my life depended no it. Now Dean...

[ReddishPinko]

5. 'Charlie Rose' format

Chris Matthews is going to be interviewing the candidates one at a time-sort of like his campus tour he did earlier this year-but I'm not sure when that begins (before or after primary).

[Zynx]

6. He's already started that.

It's interesting, even some of the ones I don't like that much(Kerry & Edwards) have performed very well. A field of nine makes even a hardcore partisan Democrat such as myself go "Ick". It's very hard to watch because of the fringe candidates and the over-abundance of establishment candidates.

[MIMStigator]

8. What? They're ALL MORE INSPIRATIONAL than Bush n/t

n't

[hippywife]

9. That was what was nice

about the Stillwater, OK forum. Each sat down with the two moderators without any of the others even in sight let alone on the same stage. It was way more relaxed and each got to speak his peace.

When I need inspiration, I just go here:

http://kucinichwatch.com/

;)

[Eloriel]

10. There seem to be an awful lot of people here at DU

who complain about the candidates when it's them who haven't dug in to do any research or experience them more directly. Like they should wander into your living room and sweep you off your feet.

No one but Sharpton shines in those crowded debates.

Have you bothered to watch C-Span "Road to the White House" series? Have you bothered to go to the candidates' websites? Have you bothered to go out of your way to read some of the press on the various candidates? Study up on the issues?

Sorry if I sound cranky; I am.

If you want excitement, involvement, sparkle, meat, inspiration, dedication, and so on -- see http://www.blogforamerica.com/

Eloriel