Of the Following Three Whom Would you Support in 2008?

[Corey_Baker08]

Poll question: Of the Following Three Whom Would you Support in 2008?

[iamjoy]

1. None Inspire Me

And I don't think any of them have national appeal.

[electropop]

22. Can't trust any Dem who voted against the Constitution on Jan 6th

Boxer/Conyers is my ticket.

[pauliedee]

39. Kerry a GREAT American patriot and hero

Will go with him any day! :kick:

[mitchtv]

2. I would support any one of them

also Dean, Edwards, Clark.

[libhill]

12. Especially

Dean - he's got the balls to take the Repuke smear tactics and throw it right back in their faces. When will Dem's learn, this Mr. Nice guy no negative campaigning crap won't get it done.

[liberalpragmatist]

3. Probably Kerry but I won't decide until later

I'm conflicted on a Kerry candidacy. I think Kerry would make a fantastic President. But I also worry that he'll become the 21st Century Tom Dewey. And I'd rather have an influential Kerry around in the Senate or even as Secretary of State than the humiliated twice-loser.

Hence, I'll only support him in '08 for the nomination if the political climate appears favorable to him and he truly seems to be a stronger candidate than he was this time (he was strong, but he did make mistakes).

[pauliedee]

40. Kerry a better choice for president

He's still fighting after all the smears...can't knock him down...
Will be ready to kick ass in 08

I got his back anywhere anytime...:kick:

[benny05]

4. John R. Edwards n/t

[pauliedee]

41. Edwards ignored voters / hurt campain

Passed over towns in Arkansas..without stopping ....

Cordoned off with family in restaurant...ignoring voters....

NEVER AGAIN !@#$%^&*

Kerry still the man in 08!

:kick: :kick:

[cobaindrain]

5. John Edwards, then Bayh, then Gore

[pauliedee]

42. Kerry still in Bush's face / fighting hard for us

He's got my vote!

:dem: :kick:

[sellitman]

6. Boxer.

She is the only one with balls.

[electropop]

23. You got that right.

Her name is fitting. We need a Boxer if we expect to win the title.

[elleng]

7. There is only one, in my opinion.

General Wesley Clark

[elleng]

8. Because

"If there's one thing I learned during my 34 years in the Army, it's
that real leadership comes from acting and doing. Not talking and
debating. It comes from setting real goals, and being held
accountable for achieving them. It's about putting the nation's
interests above any personal or political interests. And I simply
couldn't stand by and watch the country I fought for unravel before
my eyes, while the people in Washington did nothing to stop it. I
had to stand up for the ideas and the values I believed in."
-Wesley Clark

[elleng]

10. AND

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

11. And is looking

GOOD!

LOL

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[Jeebo]

9. Gore, because if we had fair and honest elections...

...in this country, Al Gore would be beginning his second term now.

Ron

[RickWn]

13. Joe Biden

I like the guy. He's smart, experienced and has guts. He also has the presidential look and charisma which is kind of important to the unwashed mass of voters who never hear a word, but like what they see on the TV.

I contributed a good chunk of change to Wes Clark's run in '04 and still like him too, but I think he has the stigma of presidential loser as do Kerry and Gore.

Hillary, with whom I would forever like to share a cigar or a desert island would make a great president, but I don't think she can overcome the obstacle of being the first female president, not to mention her high negatives in the red states. It would be inspiring to see her run, but I really think we would lose that election also.

As we consider who will be our candidate in '08, let's not forget this will be a wide open race. Bush can't run and Cheney doesn't have the health or personality to make a go of it. The rethugs know that and you can already see slime like Rick Santorum fluffing the media and boys with big bucks.

Jeb is another possibility, but the dynasty negative probably precludes him. Shwarzenneger, here in California, for all his bravado, has failed to produce and still needs a constitutional amendment to make a run. Don't bet on that unless the rethugs are really desparate.

Our Dem party is not without depth, although we are currently in the depths of despair. We have many brilliant and talented candidates to put forth who believe in the principled politics of a progressive cause. If, upon careful evaluation, we whince (and let's be honest about that) at a presidential run, that doesn't mean there is not another leading position for that person to assume within a restructered government keyed to a progessive political agenda.

For now, my hope is Joe Biden steps up to make a run for president. He's in his prime.

[liberalpragmatist]

14. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

I will add that I disagree on Biden. I don't think he's a DINO and if he's the nominee I'll fully support him. He's obviously smart and he would have made a great secretary of state for John Kerry. However, I don't really like him that much personally - he strikes me as a quite pompous and full-of-himself, with a heightened sense of his own importance. It seems like he's always in one interview or another talking about how great he is or how he had the right idea and other Democrats the wrong ones.

But maybe he'll impress me and I'll change my mind. We'll see.

[RickWn]

20. Thanks for the welcome

You are not the only one to disagree with my take on Biden as can be seen below.

What is interesting to me is that Wes Clark generated a few positive comments. As I said in my first post, I contributed quite a bit of money to his first run and still like him very much. I remain on his mailing list and would certainly support him again. I think he would do very well in the red states and that has to be considered in the next election.

If Clark won't run again (and his Wespac makes me think he will, but if he doesn't) I still think Biden is a viable candidate. Sure, he might seem pompous and full of himself sometimes, but look where that got the brush-cutter from Crawford.

Biden would have to overcome a perceived Nor'eastern elitist heritage in the red states, but I think he's plain-spoken and matter-of-fact enough to do that.

One thing I don't want to see next time around is a brutal, name-calling, smear-the-other-guy Democrat primary. What we don't need is in-fighting. What we need as a party is a general consensus of who the candidate will be long before the primaries even get going. We need to appeal to fringe candidates who don't have a prayer of winning to bow out early after they've received some play and air time for their views. I thought the Sharpton side-show this last election was extremely damaging to an over all unified front and went on for way too long.

Here's hoping for a tighter, more controlled, Democrat Party campaign this next time out.

[ZootSuitGringo]

15. Joe Biden?

Get out of town!

He's as transparent as they come, and what I've seen through ain't pretty.

Sorry, but I disagree about Biden. The fact that he is just another northeast Senator with failed candidate plagerizing "Loser" stench going way back but still stinking strong.

I think that General Clark is stellar, though. One can't come into a race one year late never having ran for any office; raise more money than Dean in January ('03); be the only candidate other than the nominee to win a state that was not his home state; have a healthy grassroots still active after one year of his dropping out; endure the media blackout and RNC attacks and still come in 2nd in many southwestern states during the primary, bow out gracefully when the writing on the wall was clear, and smell like a loser.

What Clark won was the experience that he will need next time he readies to do battle, and since he didn't contest in Iowa, he lost nothing but the momentum that the winners of that contest won. In a nutshell, out of all of the 2004 candidates, Clark is the most viable because although not enough voters knew him, he still, to this day, stands as the strongest in the area we lost the last election on: National Security.

Meanwhile, Biden is nothing but an MBNA bought off fool.

[FrenchieCat]

16. Correcto mundo!

Biden, his plugs and his resin bonded whites can stay in Delaware. Like we need to be assured Delaware in the next Presidential election?

Randi Rhodes makes fun of him just about everyday. ...."I really, really like you. You are one of the good guys."--Biden to Gonzales during AG confirmation hearing.

About Clark, I can't say enough great things about this guy (as some already know). He may not have won the primaries, but he would have done great in a General Election. Maybe the Dems will concentrate on that next time....who has what it takes to beat the Repug at their own game without sacrificing our Democratic values.

General Clark is the only one that actually planned, led and won a real war. And our 2008 Presidential elections will be just that; a War!

Here's a tidbit!
The Note reports:
Spotted on Capitol Hill yesterday: Wes Clark, speaking, according to a source who was there, to a standing-room-only gathering of Democratic Senate staffers with a national security bent. Clark gave an upbeat account of the Party's fight to forge policy alternatives to President Bush's plans. He urged Democrats to stop talking about exit strategies and timelines and focus on how to win in Iraq.

He also joined Leaders Reid and Pelosi for a closed-door meeting of their newly announced National Security Advisory Group, including bold-faced names Perry and Albright.

They frame this as an early, early, early look at the '08 field which is very Note of them. The important thing here, though, is less that Wesley Clark was on the Hill than that his appearance attracted a standing-room-only gathering of Democratic Senate staffers eager to here what he had to say. This seems to indicate to me that the National Security Advisory Group concept will actually go somewhere, with its members actually doing stuff, and staffers and legislators actually paying some attention. Ezra Klein is right to say that the politics of security are largely about image (the politics of everything are), but the important thing to note is that you can't just whip up some issues and an "image" cooked to order when it comes time to run a presidential campaign. You need to have some idea of what it is you're trying to market, and some experience with various people actually trying to market it. And perhaps most important of all, one key element of "image" is not looking uncomfortable discussing these topics, and one easy way to do that is to actually be comfortable and confident that you know what you're talking about and understand where you want to take the country.
March 15, 2005 | Permalink
http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2005/03/signs_of_li...
Original story:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/story?id=156...

[renate]

17. I like the way you think,

ZSG and FrenchieCat!
Wes Clark has the background to win in the red states--the only nominee, I would place a bet, to have lived in a trailer or to have had to fix his own car because he couldn't afford to take it to a mechanic. And why did a brilliant West Point valedictorian and Rhodes Scholar have an income so low, when he could have had any career he wanted? Because he was serving our country. (And so, by extension, were his lovely wife and wonderful son.)
He knows what it's like to be an average American. He knows what it's like to make real sacrifices for our country. He is our best chance in 2008--a custom-made candidate couldn't be better.

[Lena inRI]

21. Clark won't be ignored anymore. . .

as much as the entitlement Dems like Biden, H Clinton, Kerry, and Edwards would like him to be.

No more, "Clark who?"

No more, "Well, he wasn't in Iowa yada. . yada"

In, fact Clark has been doing more substantive participation toward solving world issues than any of these other in-crowd Dems who spend as much or more time making those political $ connections.

I ditto all that elleng, Frenchie, renate, and you have already cited as Clark's total immersion in solution-oriented work; just like to emphasize that the way Dems seek out his help/advice really convinces me that Clark has finally been heard and seen for what he really is: a natural-born leader.

Here are some sayings about leadership. . .all picked with Wesley K. Clark in mind.

Reason and judgment are the qualities of a leader. (Tacitus)

Nothing so conclusively proves a man's ability to lead others as what he does from day to day to lead himself. (Thomas J. Watson)

Leadership is the capacity to translate vision into reality. (Warren G. Bennis)

Leadership is solving problems. The day soldiers stop bringing you their problems is the day you have stopped leading them. They have either lost confidence that you can help or concluded you do not care. Either case is a failure of leadership. (Karl R. Popper)

These Dems keep on bringing their problems to Wesley K. Clark. . .don't they!

:think:

[Counciltucky]

18. Re-elect Kerry!

Well of the three mentioned I'd choose re-electing Kerry.

That said, why not Edwards this time around? An Edwards/Feingold ticket could propel us all the way not only to the White House but also to true Democratic accomplishments.

[pauliedee]

43. Kerry is better than ANY candidate in the country

Kerry is better than ANY candidate in the country ...


Edwards for cabinet....not VEEP!! Campaigned lazily..ignoring people in Arkansas:kick:

[Is It Fascism Yet]

19. Where is other? Because, it doesn't make any diff if diebold counts

[RaRa]

24. Well even though both Gore and Kerry

were literally robbed, they should still have won. With Clinton's economic legacy, Gore should have creamed Bush. With Bush's legacy, Kerry should have creamed hime too. (unless Diebold was going to fix an overwhelming victory). I think they're are both fine human beings, but I'm so pissed at weak leaders. I want someone with Al Sharpton's fire and attitude running next time.

[Stop_the_War]

25. Barbara Boxer '08

[Splinter Cell]

27. LOL

NOT A CHANCE IN HELL.

JOHN KERRY IN 2008!

[Stop_the_War]

28. LOL to you too!

:eyes:

[sellitman]

29. LOL?

Kerry is history my friend. We saw how a bush lite candidate can do against the Pukes. Now we need a candidate who has gonads. Funny thing is it seems it's Barbara Boxer who bests fits that description.

[Corey_Baker08]

30. I Don't Think Kerry is Gone

I would like to see him run in 2008 but I have to say Barbara Boxer is no joke and I would love to see her run in 2008 also.

[pauliedee]

44. Kerry instills fear in the repugs!

Just remember the look on their faces as he pummeled Boy George into submission in that 1st debate and the others too...

He's rugged campaigner and I'll be there for him in 2008.

:kick: :kick: :dem: :9

[Splinter Cell]

32. LOL

Don't try holding your breath until Barbara Boxer wins the presidency. Hell, don't try holding your breath until she wins the nomination, cause she doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell. :think:

[Corey_Baker08]

33. I Support Kerry

I know what you mean and I support Kerry...I have ever since the results of the last election came in and in 2008 Ill be of legal voting age.

[Vadem]

26. John Kerry screwed up when he refused to rebut those a**h***s

on his Viet Nam medals, etc.; Hillary has been turning right by the minute!...I have no use for rightwingers, including Hillary! In my opinion, you do not support anything to do with the Repub party or the rightwingers, and Hillary, surprisingly, has been spouting right wing retorhic (sp).....

If she doesn't have the courage to promote the left/progressive agenda, then she is NOT MY CANDIDATE!!!!! And that is it!

[sellitman]

31. Hillary is a Puke in Dem's clothing

Nothing more....nothing less. If you want a real Democrat then Boxer is the choice. Who else is standing up to the Fascist bushies? Certainly not Bill's wife.

[PresidentObama]

34. Kerry Of Course

You Kerry bashers are slim when it comes to the average American voters. People still trust and like Kerry.

KERRY 2008!!!

[pauliedee]

45. Kerry still fighting hard for us

Kerry still the strongest democrat who's got our back ....I admire his guts and will always back him...

:kick:

[Deaniac20]

35. Gore all the way

Al Gore proved himself 4 years ago and beat George Bush once, while John Kerry ran a terrible campaign and lost. He should thank God for MOveon.org, and Michael Moore because if it were only his senate record and god awful personality, he woulda been cremated. Hillary has not stood up to George Bush during the entire four years she's been there, yet Al Gore has been with us all along. He did not go off and be like "yeah I fully support President Bush and his 'war on terra'". He never hesitated to attack Bush, and if he were to go out and campaign with the energy he did in 1992, he'd win in 08, especially if he runs against a pushover like Bill Frist, or Jeb and picks a VP candidate who can rally the base. Also, use Bill Clinton

[marcologico]

36. Unfortunately, Gore gave up politics for 4 years. Kerry hasn't, which is

why I think the buyer's remorse which is finally setting in will convert to support for Kerry in '08. Kind of like "Gee, we could have had a real president instead of a robotic Chimp."

But I'll support any of these in '08 if they get the nomination.

[ophelia1027]

37. Obama in 08!

I think Barack Obama would make the best candidate... =)

[pauliedee]

46. Kerry a GREAT leader who'll fight the repugs to the death

That's why I know he's the one to lead our country...

:dem:

[marcologico]

50. you got that right!!

:headbang:

[aintitfunny]

38. I will always support the candidate

barring something outrageous. But of the three, I would take Al Gore 1st. He is the one that actually beat Bush.

[pauliedee]

47. Kerry pummeled Bush in debates...Gore couldn't

Kerry is simply stronger than Gore
:dem:

[aintitfunny]

48. I can see from your postings that

you are a die-hard Kerry fan. Good for you. I supported him in the election and if he is the candidate in 08, he will again get my whole-hearted support. He has been speaking out, I am on his email list and I agree and appreciate much of what he is doing. However,I do not choose him as my candidate because too many people simply did not like him. I am not one of those people. If he is going to win he will have to vastly improve his likeability quotient or we don't have a chance.

[Joey Liberal]

49. I like Boxer

Kerry had his chance and blew it, Gore had his chance and Bush stole it, Hillary has not been supportive enough of Sen. Boxer and she would arouse such hatred from the GOP that she would never get a fair election (but that goes for ANY Democrat) - they would simply rig the voting machines or Congress would ask a Federal Court to review the election and over turn it (now that Congress is into that sort of thing).

I like Barbara Boxer. I also like Clark. But believe it or not, the republican ChickenHawk bastards would even trash the military record of Clark - an Airborne/Ranger, Infantry Officer, West Pointer and Vietnam Veteran. Let's not ever forget the sight of republicans walking around at their convention in 2004, wearing fake Purple Hearts in an effort to insult Kerry. I never thought I'd ever see any Americans making fun of the Purple Heart.........That's the sort of people the republicans are.

[rolltide322004]

51. Hillary 08

I would support Hillary. She would make a great President.

[NYdemocrat089]

52. I like all three

but I would trust Kerry the best. I really liked his turn around after the election.

[Hippo_Tron]

53. Russ Feingold

I think that he can unite the party and the country.

[tomreedtoon]

54. Kerry is desperately holding onto his fanboys.

All the e-mails I've been getting from Kerry's campaign since I contributed are trying to show he's "on the side of the good guys." Well, it would have helped if he had FOUGHT when it counted. He's essentially apologizing for his weak, apologetic campaign. Too late.

I'm sorry, but if he gets the nomination again I'll hold my nose and throw away my vote on him...and prepare for four years of whatever Bush clone the Republicans choose to run. And that may be the last election ever held for President in this country.

[Langley85]

55. Kerry off the list, but would like a new fresh face

I would vote for Kerry out of those choices, just because Gore is old news and I don't think we're gonna have a female President anytime soon. I'm not sexist, I just don't think she'd get enough votes from male voters. But I think it would hurt Kerry that he already ran once and lost, so I would prefer a new, strong candidate.

[nickshepDEM]

56. None... Governor Mark Warner

Why?

Obviously, I like the fact that he has a proven ability to win in a state that most Democrats would struggle in. I think Mark Warner is very telegenic and comes across as an honest and sincere man.

I was impressed by his "Why I am Democrat speech"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/8/03116/3996

I was also impressed by his State of the Common Wealth address...
http://www.draftmarkwarner.com/StateoftheCommonwealth05

Mark Warner is more inline with my social views than most democrats.

-Supports the death penalty for the most vicous of criminals.
-Supports the second amendment.
-Tough on crime.

All of which are winning issues in the General election.

On Economic issues he is a little too center for my taste, but I can deal with that.

Yes, he reformed taxes in the state of Virginia, but it was in the name of fiscal responsibility. Something that the current Republican party knows nothing about.

Here are some of his achievements I was impressed by...

*Chairman of the National Governors Association
*Chairman of the Southern Governors' Association
*"Navigated Virginia through a $6 billion revenue shortfall, and making choices and investments in education from pre-school to graduate school to create a Commonwealth of opportunity for all."
*"Education for a Lifetime." The pre-school through grad school and beyond into workforce training measures are designed to move students another rung up the ladder of educational achievement, demonstrating the linkage between degrees and other markers of academic achievement and economic prosperity. The Governor also committed to fully funding the $525 million needed to re-benchmark the Standards of Quality for K-12 education, as established by the State Board of Education."
*"Governor Warner has also brought common sense business principles to the way the state purchases goods and services, manages its vehicle fleet and real estate holdings, and maintains information technology functions, with an appropriate emphasis on including those who own small, women- and minority-owned businesses."
*"Governor Warner is working hard to build a foundation to bring economic prosperity to all corners of Virginia. Economic development and job creation are top priorities for Governor Warner. Since January 2002, during difficult economic times, he has helped recruit more than 100,000 jobs and $9.5 billion in new investment in every region of Virginia."
*"He helped found the Virginia Health Care Foundation, which has provided health care to more than 476,000 underserved Virginians in rural and urban areas."
*" In 1997, he developed the Virginia High-Tech Partnership, which helps students from Virginia's five Historically Black Colleges and Universities pursue technology careers through a summer internship and job placement program."
*"Provided the largest increase in education funding in Virginia history."
*"Increased the personal income tax exemption and standard deduction enabling 140,000 to no longer have to file any state income tax, and will cut the food tax from 4% to 2.5 %
in July, 2005."

Read more about Governor Mark Warner (VA) here:
http://www.governor.virginia.gov/Governor/GovBioHome.html
http://www.draftmarkwarner.com/
http://www.draftmarkwarner.com/Warner2008.pdf

[LSK]

57. Kerry or Gore

I think Kerry is very much qualified although I dont know how much damage was done to him from the vietnam BS and the IWR issue.

I like Gore especially considering Peak Oil is near.

[Debliberal]

58. We need to fine someone

[sharonking21]

59. Rankings

Actually, although I selected the “None of the Above,” I do not dislike any of them at all and would support any of the three were they to be nominated.

My top ones though as to current preferences are ranked in the following list:

1.Wes Clark—by far my number-one choice.

2.Howard Dean--but he said he would not run.

3.John Kerry—I came to respect him but am currently exceedingly ticked at him and the other D. Senators for not speaking up to defend the rule of law during the Schiavo-Delay end run around the constitution.

4.Perhaps, Russ Feingold,--I have to find out more about him-but see # 3

5.Hillary Clinton—see above plus controversy of persona.

6.Al Gore—I like him, but then have to admit that he is not too exciting.

7.Barbara Boxer, see comment in 3, 4, and 5, but otherwise under investigation.

8.Barack Obama, but I think he is too young to win and see comments under 3, 4,5, and 7.

9.Did anyone notice House Representative Wasserman-Schultz from FL when she spoke on the floor very well against the out-of-bounds Schiavo legislation? Perhaps for VEEP?