Are there any Democratic candidates you would have a hard time voting for in the General Election?

[Clarkie1]

For me, the answer is yes.

There is one in particular who's judgment I simply do not trust. Their nomination would create a very difficult and unpleasant dilemma for me.

[Rusty MacHenry]

1. General election in what

President, House, Senate? cause if it's Preaident your talking about then the answer is yes.

[Clarkie1]

2. President. nt

[orleans]

3. richardson. n/t

[Clarkie1]

6. Really? Wow.

Richardson I definitely would have no trouble voting for (based on what I know about him now).

[skipos]

39. Some DUers feel he didn't do enough for the NM recount, but since then

he has done a lot more for secure voting than most governors imo...

Santa Fe, NM - Governor Bill Richardson yesterday signed a bill making New Mexico the fourteenth state to require voter-verified paper ballots (VVPBs) for its voting systems. As amended and passed, New Mexico Senate Bill 678 also requires audits to compare a portion of paper ballots with electronic vote tallies.

"New Mexico has swelled the ranks of states requiring voter-verified paper ballots across the country," said VerifiedVoting.org Executive Director Will Doherty. "Election administrators, policymakers, and the public recognize the need to prevent the malfunctions, errors, and failures of paperless e-voting machines that occurred repeatedly across the country during November 2004 and prior election cycles."

"We are pleased to have worked with Verified Voting New Mexico and organizers throughout the state to raise awareness about election system reliability and security," commented VerifiedVoting.org Nationwide Coordinator Pamela Smith. "Passage of a bill that requires voter-verified paper ballots and election audits will encourage public confidence in New Mexico's election results."

http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5697

[MrSlayer]

4. Yes.

Hopefully it won't come to that.

[AshevilleGuy]

5. No, however,

I know that some of them could not possibly win, especially against Rudy, so I would not be exactly excited about it in those cases. But I have voted for the Dem nominee since 1972 (talk about hopeless cases!) and expect to again next year.

[illinoisprogressive]

7. who is yours? You gotta tell. For me, I refuse to vote for Hillary

[Clarkie1]

8. Alright...I'll spill the beans.

It's not Hillary, although I would be VERY unenthusiastic about her candidacy.

It's Edwards.

[robinlynne]

17. why?

[ruggerson]

22. Because of an insignificant spat some Clarkies had in '04

with something Edwards said/did relating to Clark.

Clark's whiny little son has never forgotten it and pops up occasionally on various blogs to rehash it for the umpteenth time.

[CarolNYC]

31. I can't speak for Clarkie1

as, apparently, you feel you can but if you're talking about the Hugh Shelton thing, it's interesting and quite sad that you would consider a candidate's character and integrity to be insignificant. But maybe it's something else you're talking about between you and Clarkie1 that I'm not aware of. I wasn't around here much during the last primaries.

[Donna Zen]

38. Actually, do you realize how funny this is?

The OP asks a question that would seem to open the debate to some sense of candor. OK. So I read the thread to see if this were true; was this indeed a "safe" zone.

As soon as someone mentions Edwards, wham, bam, the net-police come roaring out to diss the poster of the comment. And then further down thread, someone calls ALL Clark supporters mean spirited. Do you not see the ridiculous irony in this? Oh well, I'm sorry if you are missing it.

As for the Shelton smear: we all know there are Swiftboaters in the world; however, to endure those slings and arrows from another Democrat, should give one pause. As Gert Clark once said without attaching names, "Wes left the Army with nothing but his reputation, and now they are trying to take that away."

"Clark's whiny little son..." Whoa, now there's a intellectually challenged comment. I happen to like and respect Wes Clark Jr. very much, and watch for his appearances on "Young Turks." His objections to Edwards are based on foreign policy and Edwards' past performance.

General Clark decided to serve his country and turned down some million dollar jobs. True. What Shelton did was beneath the pale, and told us more about Shelton's integrity than it told us about Clark's. Shelton is a republican bastard who supported bush's war. I have a real problem with a candidate who kept him on his team.

I do not intend to answer the question posed in the OP.

[CarolNYC]

44. Amazing...

The jabs against Clark supporters are not surprising. In fact, they are to be expected at this point, in spite of the ridiculous irony.

And I agree with what you say about Shelton and Wes Jr and General Clark.

What amazes me, though, is someone having no problem coming on this thread and declaring that they feel a person's character and integrity are insigificant issues. Wow! It does kind of give you some perspective on where that person is coming from when considering their posts and their choices, etc....

[ruggerson]

53. This entire thread looks like it was designed to be a hit piece on Edwards

as the OP has indicated, time and again, how much he/she detests him.

I realize you guys loathe Edwards, it says nothing to me about his character, but reams about yours.

[CarolNYC]

64. interesting response

I don't see how you could know if I loathe Edwards or not but whatever....I believe you once threw me in with some supposed Warner-trashing group even though the only thing I'd posted about Warner at the time was that I knew someone who'd seen him speak and came away mightily impressed. I'm still scratching my head trying to figure out how that was trashing Warner.

That notwithstanding, I'm still blown away by the fact that you find a person's character and integrity insignificant and have no problem admitting that...and that has nothing to do with my feelings about Edwards.

[ruggerson]

65. You set up a red herring and then wring your hands about it

Nowhere did I say that I find a person's character insignificant. Matter of fact, I've been arguing for years that we have to concentrate far more on candidate's characters and personalities when choosing our presidential nominees, much to the dismay of those who think a laundry list of policy positions is the ticket to the White House.

And of course, you're ducking the fact that this thread was started not to generate candid and healthy debate, but to yet again highlight the OP's disdain of Edwards.

It gets really, really old.

on edit: (How's the weather in NYC today, btw? My SO is there and just called and said it's a beautiful spring morning.) :)

[CarolNYC]

67. So then the "insignificant spat" you refer to

was not about Shelton, who did impugn Clark's "character and integrity"? What are you referring to then?

Thanks!

[ruggerson]

72. You're the one who is characterizing Edward's response

(or lack thereof) to the Hugh Shelton/Clark incident in a negative light. I disagree with your basic premise that this somehow impugns Edward's character.

[CarolNYC]

74. Edwards' character...

Geez, I have in no way indicated anything about what I think of Edwards' character. If that's really what you think I'm saying here and not just trying to deflect, think back about what happened at that time (not here but in the real world, what Hugh Shelton said, etc), then go back and read yours and my posts in this sub-thread and see if you can really figure it out....And try to keep the 'all Clarkies loathe Edwards no matter what they say' filter off if you're able while you're doing so. It might help you...or not.

[Jai4WKC08]

112. If you can't see how the Shelton incident reflects on Edwards

I suggest you may need to examine your own values.

What if Ann Coulter were working for a Democratic candidate and that candidate refused to disavow or disassociate with Coulter? What would you think about that candidate?

Not that the only character problem Edwards has is Shelton. FAR from it.

[Dinger]

79. Same Here Donna, Same Here (nt)

[jcrew2001]

120. Why do Clark supporters blame Edwards when Clark QUIT

the 2004 race even before it began. For someone who quit Iowa in 2004, he's not much of a candidate who was born fighting.

He may be a general, but he needs a campaign strategist who doesn't tell him to quit before the game starts.

Clark GAVE Iowa and the 2004 to Kerry. There's no point in arguing about 2nd place with Edwards, that's a fool's game.

If Clarkies should be mad at anyone, it should be at Clark for shooting himself in the foot - no pun intended, oh that was kerry haha.

At least Edwards is still campaigning, fighting for the presidency.

What will Clark do if another republican wins in 2008 and we go into Iran - here's a good idea, if you want to stop an Iran War, become president!

[mnhtnbb]

41. Gee, what a surprise. An anti-Edwards thread from you.

[job777]

27. me too

and probably for the same reasons.

[countmyvote4real]

9. Biden and HRC actually repell me from voting DEM in the general.

But I always vote, so I hope there will be a Green alternative for POTUS if I am ultimately asked to choose.

[Rusty MacHenry]

11. Oh if it's President were talking about...

Then it's Hillary, i'll still vote for her if she gets the nom but i'll have to bring a giant clothes pin with me when I vote.

[countmyvote4real]

15. And will the clothespin be engraved on your tombstone?

Some smells stink longer than you'd expect.

[razors edge]

16. Welcome to DU Rusty

Do they still sell clothes pins, and if so can spare one brother?

[Rusty MacHenry]

21. I think you can get some at a dollar store

[Monkeyman]

10. Nope but I would want to see a Obama Clark Ticket

[Clarkie1]

14. My top choice right now would be Clark/Obama

but I could enthusiastically support Obama for the top spot.

[robinlynne]

19. I'm liking Edwards' more and more every day. why don't you like him?

let's see: he ahs a concrete plan for socialized medicine, and wants to use the billionaires tax curs money to fund it.
refused to let the dem debate happen on "fair adn balanced'.
He is the ONLY candidate who publicly promised to make dres illegal in the US....

[Mass]

46. A concrete plan for socialized medecine? Please, tell me you are speaking of Kucinich,

not Edwards here. Socialized medecine has no place for private health insurance.

I cannot speak for Clarkie1, but I simply do not trust Edwards. May be I will be warming to him, but, right now, I cannot, which does not mean I would not support him if he was the nominee.

[robinlynne]

55. single payer health care. He put out dvds and sent them out to Iowans.

If you do a search on Du, there will be a link to the DVD. And recently he said it would paid for by rescinding the bush tax cuts to the wealthy.

[Mass]

56. This is NOT what he is proposing. read his plan by yourself

http://www.johnedwards.com/about/issues/health-care-overview.pdf

He is proposing universal healthcare, which is what we have in MA, and I can assure you the MA plan is not single payer, neither is his.

[robinlynne]

61. you're right. He suggests a combination single payer and private.

Choice between Public and Private Insurers: Health Markets will offer a choice between
private insurers and a public insurance plan modeled after Medicare, but separate and apart from it.
Families and individuals will choose the plan that works best for them. This American solution
will reward the sector that offers the best care at the best price. Over time, the system may evolve
toward a single-payer approach if individuals and businesses prefer the public plan.

[Jai4WKC08]

76. You can't have a "combination"

Single payer means SINGLE payer. You start giving the insurance industry a cut, and you've lost the whole point (and all the advantages) of a single payer system.

But I'm not surprised Edwards wants to feed the insurance industry. It's fed him pretty well thru the years.

[robinlynne]

103. got it.

[Czolgosz]

107. Edwards health care plan give single payer a chance to evolve by beating private health insurance.

I believe in single payer universal health case. If you think that's going to come about in one giant leap, then you are more optimistic than I am.

What Edwards proposes is setting up the government run health care plan and competing it against the private health care plans and subsidizing participation. If the government run plan is more efficient (and the single payer universal care advocates like me say it will be), the government run plan will run the private plans out of business and we'll have single payer universal health care.

I like Kucinich's plan, but I think Edwards plan is more likely to get passed into law. Besides Kucinich and Edwards, no one else has any plans worth a damn.

[Jai4WKC08]

110. That's an over-simplification

The government does end up subsidizing the insurance companies in Edwards plan.

Have you seen Clark's plan yet? Didn't think so.

[Czolgosz]

113. Is Clark running for something? I hope so, but if he's running, it's news to me.

I you want a more detailed version, see for yourself: http://johnedwards.com/about/issues/health-care-overview.pdf

[Cameron27]

126. You've got that right:

"Single payer means SINGLE payer. You start giving the insurance industry a cut, and you've lost the whole point (and all the advantages) of a single payer system."

If the insurance company's aren't shut out, your just spinning the wheels.

[jcrew2001]

125. I sure hope Clark doesn't settle for VP

on a Obama/Clark ticket - I know some people around here who will be pissed off at that.

[TwilightGardener]

12. I'd hold my nose. Of course, it also

depends on who the 'Pug is. If it's Hagel...hmmm......no, I guess I'd just hold my nose. I mean, the war has to end SOMETIME, right?

[Roland99]

13. Hillary is the only one that would push me to either not vote or vote 3rd-party

[Der Blaue Engel]

18. I will vote for the Democratic nominee, period.

There is no candidate who could be terrible enough for me to deliberately weaken the Democratic vote and make it easier for the Republics to steal.

[HappyWeasel]

20. yeah...8 years has been hell...12 years? come the fuck on

[KingofNewOrleans]

23. Nope

that is all

[OneBlueSky]

24. Hillary Clinton for me . . . she seems to have no moral or ethical center . . .

but is an expert as responding to the prevailing political winds . . . a human windsock, if you will . . . I'd probably vote for her if she is the nominee, but every ounce of intuition and political savvy I may have tells me that that's simply not going to happen . . . particulary if Al Gore gets into the race (as I firmly believe he will) . . .

[Trajan]

25. Not a one .....

But IF I were to vote against a candidate who's supporters were the most divisive in DU, I would have to vote against Clark ....

[Eurobabe]

26. No, because the alternative is unthinkable

I'll put a bag over my head and vote for a Dem who is not my choice if I have to. Otherwise the USA IS toasted. Think long and hard about this people.

[HappyWeasel]

47. fuck....

the only exception would be if Lincoln Chaffee was running against Zell Miller. lol. Otherwise, our country will be thrown into permanent decline if we cannot win even the congress in this election.

[leftofthedial]

28. no

considering the alternative

[Eric J in MN]

29. While I lack enthusiasm for the Democratic front-runners during primary season,

...I'm definitely voting for the Democratic nominee in 2008.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

30. Hillary will not get my vote & I have always voted Dem since JFK.

[bklyncowgirl]

32. Clinton, but I'll most likely hold my nose and do the right thing.

I will not vote in the primaries for any candidate who voted for the IWR. This will not effect my vote in the general election. I could, however, live with Edwards, Dodd or even Biden.

Hillary Clinton is a special case because she is a recent convert to the notion that the Iraq war is a disaster that should never have happened. Be that as it may, if she is the Democratic nominee I will most likely vote for her.

The only way I would consider not voting for the Democrat is if there are strong, viable third party candidates on both the left and right. Even then I'll most likely go for the Democrat. Another possibility would be in the highly unlikely circumstances in which the Republicans were to nominate an antiwar moderate and the Democrats nominated Clinton.

[wyldwolf]

33. against a Republican? Not a single Dem would I have an issue with in the general

[sarcasmo]

34. Hillary.

[elizm]

35. If Hillary Clinton is the nominee..

I will not vote. I will be one of those mysterious voters who votes in state races but there will be a no vote for President. I would also have a hard time voting for Biden.

[nevergiveup]

36. I would vote for any

of them but I would likely become involved in an Obama, Clark or Richardson campaign. Hillary, Edwards and Gore are old hat and bore me to death but I would certainly prefer them over any Republican nominee and this includes Hagel.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

37. Of the "serious" candidates, Hillary is the only one

for whom I couldn't vote with great enthusiasm. I would still vote for her if she were the candidate because all the Republicans are far worse, but I wouldn't be very excited about it. I'd also have to hold my nose if Joe "MBNA" Biden were the candidate, but that's not going to happen.

That said, I'm going to try to bite my tongue, metaphorically speaking, about the Dem candidates as the primary season heats up. I do not wish to participate in another circular firing squad. All of our possible candidates, even Hillary, would be a huge improvement over any of the assorted Republican thieves and lunatics. Let's support our favorites without tearing down the others too much, OK?

[PresidentObama]

40. I wouldn't have a hard time voting for him, he's just not too Presidential....Biden...

But he'd have my support if he got the nomination.

[mnhtnbb]

42. If Hillary is the nominee, I think that will cinch our retirement to Panama.

[derby378]

43. Any Democrat who supports HR 1022 (introduced by Rep. McCarthy, D-NY)

There. I said it. Any Democrat who declares hostility towards our Second Amendment rights will not get my vote in the primary.

[HappyWeasel]

48. This also is something that hurts really bad for me...

being forced to choose between the 2nd and every other right in the constitution (with the exception of the XIVA protected "freedom to contract" that hasn't meant squat in 70 years).

[derby378]

52. I don't see it as an "either/or" scenario

Here's the way I see it:

The First Amendment says you aren't required to salute the American flag. It also says that you're free to speak up against the abuses of our government.

The Third Amendment says that soldiers don't get to commandeer your home without your explicit knowledge and consent.

The Fourth Amendment says that your phone calls, mail parcels, text messages, e-mails, and all other correspondence are your business and not the government's. If the FBI or NSA feels the need to tap your phones, let their errand boys argue the case before a judge.

The Fifth Amendment says that you cannot be tortured or otherwise coerced into confessing to any crime, whether or not you committed said crime.

The Sixth Amendment says you're entitled to a fair trial for the aforementioned crime, no matter how heinous it is or how overwhelming the evidence is against you. Peer review has this uncanny ability to exonerate innocent folks who would otherwise be locked away for life - or worse.

I can go on. But suffice it to say that I take all of the Bill of Rights very seriously. And even though I'm pro-gun, I'm not quite as single-issue as some people might think.

[skipos]

57. Guns are the last thing I would ever be a single issue voter about

Though I own one. I think you would like Richardson (who even has a concealed-carry permit), though there are plenty of other reasons to like him besides his gun ownership.

[benEzra]

90. Ditto.

Any Democrat who supports HR 1022 ... Any Democrat who declares hostility towards our Second Amendment rights will not get my vote in the primary.

Ditto.

[JNelson6563]

45. Any Dem better than the R

I may have to self-medicate but by golly I will go and cast my vote for whoever the Dem is. If it turns out we get a candidate I absolutely do not like I will take solace in the fact that my county party and, with our assistance, all our neighboring counties will raise some big funds off of said candidate's swag. This cash can then be donated to other, more local Dem campaigns.

One must strive to find the good in every situation.

Julie

[HappyWeasel]

50. be careful...

There ARE exceptions to this....I mean, would you vote for Ben Nelson over Rudy Guliani? HELL NO, but for all the mainstream candidates, I will never vote a republican or a minor party and I will always vote

[JNelson6563]

69. Possibilities are so remote

This warning borders on silliness.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

49. Hillary "gas station stereotype" Clinton

I am sorry but if she is willing to stereotype an entire group publicly I can't help but to wonder what she says privately...Still, I would vote for her over any Republican because we cannot afford four more years on this disastrous course, both domestically and abroad, but it will be a sad day if the best our party believes it can field is someone like this. Can you imagine Edwards or Obama ever making such a remark? Of course not.

[Forkboy]

51. A couple I'd have a hard time with...one I won't vote for.

[stuartrida]

54. Kucinich and Clinton would be weak presidents

for different reasons but I would still hold my nose and vote for them. Even the worst democrat is better than the best republican.

[Learn2Swim]

58. Yes, there is ONE...

Hillary. She will not get my vote.

[rep the dems]

59. Yes. But I'd vote for her anyway. nt

[ncteechur]

60. Nope.

I will vote Dem. I don't care whether the demcratic party nominates a cardboard cutout, I will vote for it over the repub. I used to say I would give all candidates a fair shake but not this time. I have had enough of this lying, cheating, shitty GOP and will absolutely NOT vote for Rudy, McCain, Mitt, Fred Thompson, Newt, or anyone else with a freaking R behing their name.

[sampsonblk]

62. Only Edwards - nt

nt

[OhioChick]

63. Hillary n/t

[ChiciB1]

66. I'm Not A Hillary Fan... I Just Wish She Would Go Away! I don't

know what I'll do, it will be difficult for me to vote for her now. I used to be very "high" on her, but she really scares me now!

[jcrew2001]

68. Hillary cannot win the general election

but I would support her if she were the nominee. I hope Clark re-considers being VP - he would be a great asset.

I think Clarkies are just jealous that Edwards is in the race, while Clark is on the sidelines. You guys are free to hibernate until the Fall, please don't destroy our best chance at winning the General Election.

[windbreeze]

81. I am a Clarkie...

and I haven't got a jealous bone in my body towards any of them...I figger that IF Clark decides to run...he'll let us know...and that's all that matters to me, and I don't care when...but thanks for all the extra credit...I am truly surprised you think we are capable of, intend to, or would even want to "destroy our best chance at winning the general election"...who exactly are you speaking about?
wb

[election_2004]

70. Clinton and Biden

Clinton because I believe she will say and do anything solely to become the first female president.

Biden because he made the stupid comments about possibly bringing back the draft.

Everyone else in the Dem field, I'm fine with.

[IndianaGreen]

71. I will NEVER vote for Joe Lieberman for President!

I might have to hold my nose for some of the candidates currently running, but as long as we don't put the protest signs away, I would vote for even the worse of them simply because they are better than the alternative.

Of course, our mission is to make sure we get a nominee that can unite the country, the party, and that we can all we be proud of (and there are a few of them that do fit the bill).

[Pushed To The Left]

73. No! The only way I would be conflicted is if the Republican

was more liberal than the Democrat. With the current crop of Republicans running, I don't see that happening.

[Milo_Bloom]

75. I would NOT vote for...

Clinton, Biden, Dodd or Edwards no matter what they did or said from this point forward.

[Moderate Dem]

77. I would never, ever vote for Kucinich

Period.

[Jai4WKC08]

78. Not any that have a prayer of winning the nomination n/t

[bluehighways911]

80. Hillary Bush

And her partner in crime Flip Flop Edwards.

If Hillary's name was Jones, you think you would vote for her. Not a frickin chance.

And Edwards was useless in his Veep run.

Now I ask myself. Hillary and Bush, both couldn't suck Bush off fast enough in his war built on lies.

You know he was lying. So why wouldn't these two mensa dropouts.

So ask yourself, were they really stupid. Or just too afraid to tell the truth.

And what makes you think these two lame brains wouldn't fall for it again.

Put those two in. And it will be all flip flop all the time.


And Hillary is the same as Bush. Just a puppet with a name.

[Nutmegger]

82. Yes, Clinton

I hope we do get someone else for the Dem nomination.

I will vote for Kucinich during the primary based on principal. He may not have the "glitz and glamor" that Americans crave but he is consistent on the issues.

[dekerivers1]

83. Hillary. I'll just stay home.

[sendero]

84. I will almost certainly vote for the Dem ...

... nominee. But suffice it to say that I find none of the current front runners appealing and it leaves my faith in the Democratic party and Dems in general somewhat shaken.

If this is the best we can do, then my overall hope for things getting substantially better is not high.

[lojasmo]

85. HRC/Edwards/Biden

War enablers, all.

[NoPasaran]

86. Kucinich

It'll be a cold day in Hell before I put a tofu-eating crackpot in the Oval Office.

But it's not like there's any chance of that happening.

[GreenArrow]

94. "tofu eating crackpot"

As opposed to ego driven, poll driven, amoral, blood drinking IWR supporters and corporate ass-lickers like Clinton or Edwards?

But you're right, it will be a cold day in Hell before Kucinich gets elected.

[Clark2008]

96. Wow, Green. Tell us what you REALLY think about HRC and Edwards.

:rofl:

(But, I have to agree with you. :) )

[Zorra]

117. OMG! A tofu-eater? Must be one a them librul pinko comminists.

thur's sumthin' real wrong with them people what don't eat the flesh and blood o' dead animals.

[NoPasaran]

121. Even more troubling

Is the denial that the taste of yummy dead animals can often be improved by adding cheese.

[qwlauren35]

87. So far...

I haven't seen a Democratic candidate that I'm in love with. I think the field was much broader in 2004, and I'm dismayed at the choices we have right now. If the Republicans can hoist an anti-war, socially moderate candidate then I'll have a hard time voting for any Democrat who is wishy-washy about our presence in Iraq.

I don't think I'm alone in holding back, and waiting to see the full slate of players. I think there will be more before the end of the summer. My opinion is that people are focusing on Clinton and Obama because they see no other candidates they like, but NOT because they wouldn't jump ship if a *better* white male candidate came on board.

I think the Republicans are in the same boat. A lot of them don't like McCain or Guiliani or Romney or Brownback. Right now, they are "beatable" because no one has stepped forward who can claim the mantle. I think that too will change within the next 4 months.

[Czolgosz]

88. I'd vote reluctantly for Richardson (or his ideological DLC twin Hillary) but I would vote for them.

[mtnsnake]

89. So why don't you trust Edwards's judgment?

I'm not arguing with you, just curious.

[stuartrida]

91. Kucinich and Clinton

though I would hold my nose and vote for either of them if nominated.

[GreenArrow]

92. Edwards, Clinton, Dodd, Biden

or anyone else that voted for IWR. Dodd's probably the best of the lot, but I wouldn't trust the other three as far as I could throw them.

Our still very young country has some hard lessons to learn.

[Clark2008]

93. Same here. Same reasons. Same candidate. Don't think I could.

And not because of some perceived spat that someone upthread mentioned.

I'm from the South. Have Dem family in North Carolina. I KNOW what a political opportunist that candidate is.

I don't trust him as far as I could throw him.

[jcrew2001]

124. You don't think entering the race late in 2004

made Clark an opportunist? He must be ego-less and have the selfless motives to save us from Dean's presidency.

I at least admire someone who is out there meeting with the common vote, listening to them and asking them for their vote. Not everyone can leave their high horse.

I'm not going to just give my vote to anyone, even if they have a famous name or fought in a war.

[SaveElmer]

95. Being part of the "actual" base...

You know...that portion of the party that can be counted to vote for the Party candidate every time...as opposed to those that think they are the base, but who threaten to bolt the party, or withhold their vote for one reason or another (see this thread for examples)...

Of course, I will unhesitatingly vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is!!!

[Forkboy]

98. There's another term for this

"that portion of the party that can be counted to vote for the Party candidate every time"

It's called "sycophant".

I'm sure they love the fact that they can do anything and some will never question,just follow behind like good lapdogs.

[SaveElmer]

99. How cute...

A non-Democrat on a board for Democrats!!

I work for my candidate in the primary, and then vote for the party's choice...exactly what all the "progressives" were whining here should be done when Lamont won...I guess party loyalty is only required when it is one of their anointed ones...

I believe our government is better off in the hands of Democrats than Republicans...

So...in order not to weaken the party's hand I vote for Democrats...

The ONLY case where I would not vote for someone calling themselves a Democrat, is if that candidate actively supported or advocated the election of a Republican...or disavowed the Democratic Party by their words or actions...

Politicians falling into this latter category in recent years...Zell Miller, William Donald Schaeffer, and Joe Lieberman

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SaveElmer]

105. How cute...another "progressive" who can't stick to the point...

"Once again you illustrate the attitude that anyone who doesn't sufficiently bow down and praise a Democrat must be something else.No "real" Democrat could possibly find anything wrong with them."

Never said anything of the kind...you can criticize Democrats all you want...in fact I encourage it...however at the end of the day, if you do not vote for the duly selected candidate of the Democratic Party, you are not a Democrat...

"Tell me,have you ever once looked inward at either yourself or the party?"

Again off point, but I do constantly...and it has led me to two conclusions. First, centrist candidates best represent my personal philosophy...and second...the government is in FAR better shape, and better represents the interests of the American people when Democrats are in charge.

So, whatever differences I may have with the philosophy of someone like Dennis Kucinich (far too liberal), or Ben Nelson (too conservative), I would not hesitate to vote for either as it contributes to the overall goal of Democratic control of the government!

[Forkboy]

114. I stuck to your first "point",as it were,which was that I was a "non-Democrat".

If you don't want something addressed on a message board it's usually wise to not start the bloody post off with it,isn't it?

Now,to the valid points you replied with.

My honest apologies for assuming you haven't thought through your positions.I was wrong to do so.But you make the same assumptions about progressives.We've thought out our positions too,and for myself,my dislike of the "mainstream" candidates isn't out of some kneejerk reaction to them being a women,a black man,what accent they use where,or any of that nonsense.

For me,I see them as Agents of Continuation more than as Agents of Change.We're rapidly approaching a cliff and I have a hard time seeing the difference in driving over it at a hundred miles an hour or driving over it at eighty miles an hour.Sure,the Democrats are better than the Republicans.Bread and water is better than just bread. :shrug:

I'm almost forty years old and in my lifetime I've seen all the bad things just keep getting worse,regardless of which party is in control.More wars,more corruption.More homelessness,more poverty.We're rightly pissed off about the amount of Katrina victims that still haven't been taken care off,yet there's millions of homeless people that hardly anyone ever talks about.Maybe if some punks kill one they make the news.Over 50,000 in NYC alone,a fifth of which are under the age of twenty five.

Why on Earth should I have any faith that any of the candidates,especially the ones taking big money from the very people,the very mindset,that has just kept this downward spiral going for decades now,will acknowledge the problem with anything more than lip service?

The gap between what we are and what we could be as a society is truly sad,and I'm tired of voting for different degrees of mediocrity.The longer we settle for it the more damage is done.

[SaveElmer]

115. I too apologize...

For lumping you in with others I do have problems with. Drives me bonkers when folks that say they are Democrats say they will not vote for the Democratic nominee, and it is difficult to conduct a poll of everyone before I post. To be fair, those of us that subscribe to a centrist point of view are generally characterized as Vichy Dems, LieberDems, DINO's etc, with no worry on the part of those casting us that way that too broad a brush was being used. I do not take a centrist view as a compromise, I truly believe that is the best way forward on most issues.

We are about the same age (I'm a bit older :shrug: ), and have seen in my lifetime great progress made when the right people are in office. Invariably those people are Democrats. There hasn't been a Republican since Teddy Roosevelt that has accomplished anything positive worth remembering. In contrast, under Democrats, we have a long laundry list of notable and historic accomplishments, from the New Deal, to our victory in WWII, from the success of the Apollo program to medicare, peace corps, medicaid, social security, and Civil Rights...just to name a very few.

In my view a steady concerted effort at electing Democrats to office will result in the progress everyone wants.

An internecine war among ourselves only serves to leave the country divided, and empowers Republicans. Every faction of the party will always have trouble with other parts of the party...that has always been the case, and always will be in a two party system. I prefer to focus on the 80% of issues that nearly every Democrat agrees with, and have no problem debating the other 20%...but at the end of the day I have very little tolerance for people who use that 20% of disagreement to abandon the party, or one of its nominees.

I have one very simple rule...I will always vote for the Democratic nominee unless that nominee has advocated support for a Republican candidate, or has in word or deed abandoned the Democratic Party.

[truebrit71]

97. Yes. She is married to the former President.

..and she bugs me...

[jacksonsprat]

100. Would never vote for Clark. Nor Hillary Clinton.

Two conservatives.

[Sparkly]

102. LOL

:rofl:

[skipos]

104. Yeah...

Clark is so conservative. :eyes:

[Jai4WKC08]

108. Read the chart -- Clark more liberal than anyone

in the race* now on economic, trade, civil rights and liberties issues. More liberal than most on all the rest.



*on edit: the authors of the website apparently didn't include Dodd, Kucinich or Gravel, possibly because they assembled the data back about a year ago.

[bluedog]

106. yes........ Kucinich.......n/t

[PresidentObama]

111. Why? If I may ask n/t

[rinsd]

109. Hard time? Not especially.

I think I would be ok with all of the slate offered by Democrats even those I have disagreements with.

[Arugula Latte]

116. Hillary.

The more I see of her, the more I resent the people pushing her "inevitability" on us.

[Hippo_Tron]

118. Not after I look down the ballot and see who the Republic Party nominee is

[AtomicKitten]

119. No.

[DesertRat]

122. Anyone who voted for the IWR. n/t

[jcrew2001]

123. I would not vote for Clark

if he were the VP - because that would make him a hypocrite.

He said he didn't want VP - its nice he wants to ruin his political career, not that he ever had one or will have one.