Thoughts on Dem candidates and 2004

[judy]

To me, the 2004 elections, assuming that they are fair which is already a long shot, are an easy problem to solve:

1 - In the primaries, I will support my favorite candidate (Dennis Kucinich). I will not base my vote on his "electability", but his message. Why ? Because whomever the delegates elect, will be the most electable candidate, so it is not my job at this point to decide who is the most electable.

2 - In the general election, I will vote for ANYONE who comes up against Bush, be it a used gum wrapper or a ham sandwich. At this point, defeating the BFEE is the most we can hope for.

As for Clark, I cannot imagine how a 4-Star general could ever be anti-war.
However, I believe that NONE of the Dem candidates, whoever they are, even Lieberman (whom I strongly dislike) can match the disingenuousness, stupid arrogance, malevolence, destructive mania and lack of moral fiber of BushCheneyAschcroftRumsfeld et al.

I guess you can call this a vanity post, but I think sometimes we spend so much time discussing whom we should vote for, and I don't think it's that much of a hard question. Let's just wait and see how things develop...

[rabid_nerd]

1. Right...

There's no point in supporting someone you don't agree with in the primary when there is someone you do.

[no name no slogan]

2. Right on Judy

Vote your heart in the primaries, vote your head in the general election. Although IMHO it's much easier to vote your head in Nov 2004 if you've got a candidate that's worth voting for.

[dolstein]

3. "I Cannot Imagine How a 4-Star General Could Ever Be Anti-War"

You'd be surprised. Eisenhower proved to be far more reluctant about committed US troops to Vietnam than Lyndon Johnson was. Powell was more reluctant about putting US troops in harms way that Madeleine Albright was (apparently, Albright was once heard to say "what's the point of putting having a huge military if you aren't willing to use it?").

[judy]

7. Oh, I agree with you Dolstein

A general would certainly be more reluctant to commit US troops than a chickenhawk neo-con who has never been in any more danger than getting a hang nail.

I just mean he would not be as anti-war as I would be...

[gottaB]

4. right on

:toast:

[JohnKleeb]

5. right on Kucinich

[Cheswick2.0]

6. support who you like, fight against you don't like

I have no problem with people discussing what they don't like about other candidates.