Of potential 08 candidates, who is most Dean-like?

[Michigander4Dean]

Since Dean himself won't run, who can best inspire the progressive movement?

[janx]

1. Gore, if we could get him to run.

Other than that... :shrug:

[Larkspur]

2. Yep, Gore is the only one

[Melodybe]

4. I was gonna say Gore too

I wish he would run.

Gore/Dean that's my dream '08 ticket

[davidinalameda]

5. Gore?

how so

[janx]

10. Gore is genuinely concerned with and impressed by

grassroots politics. It's one of the reasons he endorsed Dean during the 2004 primaries. And the Gore of today (unlike the overly managed Gore of election 2000) is not afraid to speak the truth and to do so forcefully, if he feels he should.

Dean has a huge amount of respect for Gore. If you read Dean's latest book, you'll see what I mean.

[davidinalameda]

14. Gore endorsed Dean and see what it got us

Candidate Kerry

[janx]

15. That's some interesting logic! n/t

[election_2004]

3. Probably Clark

Seen as largely non-partisan, yet very vocal and confident on the issues that matter. Likable demeanor. Willing to defend himself and the people he cares about against right-wing smears.

[AntiCoup2K4]

6. Not to be redundant, but...... Gore

Or more specifically the Gore that we have seen since his infamous SNL appearance, and in his numerous speeches since then. Not the "stiff and wooden" Gore of 2000. Whether a media myth or a DLC construction, there was truth to it, and it did a lot of damage to his numbers out there in that sea of red where, sadly, some voters really DO evaluate candidates on "who I'd rather have a beer with".

I've said in numerous threads that Gore/Clark would be the strongest ticket for 2008 out of any names that have been mentioned at all.

If Gore does decide to sit this one out, and Dean does as well (which he has already said he would as DNC chair) then we are seriously in trouble. I will not support a DLC'er and their intentions won't be to win anyway.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

7. Of potiential topics is there more of a time waster than 2008? First 2006!

2008 is three years away. 2006 is one year away. Three times sooner, three times more important.

If you want to win in 2008 then win 2006 to get a better chance of ballots counted in 2008.

Let the Democrat who leads the win in 2006 be the one who leads in 2008.

[napi21]

8. My answer is NONE! NO ONE!

That's the problem! None of the people who seem interested in running in 08 have the brass ones that Dean has. They all walk on eggs to protect some dam group of voters they're afraid they might lose.

I would admit that maybe it's just me who likes to hear the truth without any candy coating, but if it was only me, the Dems carrying the bucket of sugar would have been winning elections, and they haven't!

I really don't want to risk losing another national election via trial and error, but the campaign plans of the past local, state, and national elections have fallen flat on their face. People like Hackett and Dean seem to have a very strong attraction, so I say, whoever our candidate is, GO FOR IT! Pull out all the politically correct stops!

[pennylane100]

9. Gore

and only Gore can fit that bill. I think he would be my choice even if Dean decided to run.

[Ksec]

11. Dont count out Dean.

[lojasmo]

12. Dean won't run......GORE! (with dean announced as VP)

at the convention, when his DNC chairmanship responsibilities essentially end.

[NYCGirl]

13. Gore's the closest.