well, I STILL don't have a candidate . . .

[OneBlueSky]

and I was wondering today why that was . . . I came up with two reasons:

1. None of the candidates impress me all that much AS CANDIDATES (as opposed to their positions on issues). Not a single one of them would be as good a candidate as Al Gore . . . and I thought Al Gore wasn't all that good a candidate! The mission is to beat Bush, and at this point I just don't like how any of these guys stack up against the Shrub AS CANDIDATES. And he's gonna have a lot more money, to boot.

2. I seem to have specific problems with each of the potential nominees that won't go away. I include among these only Dean, Clark, and Kerry (although Kerry is hanging on by his fingernails). The others just aren't in the running, imo. Of those three:

- Kerry - I like his positions and his record, but he's just not handling himself well as a candidate. For example, I could forgive his vote for the war if he'd just come out and said "Hey, I was wrong." Instead, he continues to try to rationalize it with every kind of contortion, and it's just not becoming. His membership in S&B still bothers me, but I could also forgive that if he were running a good campaign. In the back of my mind, I keep thinking "If he has this much trouble running a campaign, how the hell is he going to run the country?"

- Clark - I also like Clark's positions, and at this point I'm almost convinced that he may be the only one with a legitimate shot at beating Bush. Still, his military background and past business associations put him smack dab in the middle of the military-industrial complex . . . the same folks that brought us the PNAC. I've read the negative stuff about his actions in Kosovo and the comments on his wanting everything his way or no way, and that gives me pause (although I have no way of knowing what's true and what's not). I'll support him if he's nominated, but the questions will likely remain.

- Dean - You have to admire Dean for what he's accomplished; he's added a whole new dimension to political campaigning, and done it very, very well. I'm not comfortable with some of his positions . . . gun control, NAFTA, and others . . . and something about him just rubs me the wrong way. Mostly, I see him being demolished by Bush. Yeah, he seems to have a lot of support now, but you have to remember that the only people paying attention right now are political junkies and people who actually think . . . combined, that's a decidedly small minority of the electorate. I also think Bush can tag him as the gay marriage candidate rather efficiently. All in all, I don't believe he will be a strong candidate in the general election . . . and my overriding objective is the defeat of BushCo.

jmho, as always . . . I'm sure that the Kerry, Clark, and Dean supporters will let me have it . . . just be aware that I've read pretty much all of your stuff already, so there's not a lot that you can say that I haven't already heard . . .

peace out, y'all . . . :)

[in_cog_ni_to]

1. Here is a great article

about Clark. You should read it. It's very good. :)

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16795

edited because I forgot the link. :)

[maha]

2. Frankly, I think it's healthy to have doubts.

There's no law that says you have to marry one of these guys next week. If you are uncomfortable with all of them for some reason or another -- well, at least you're paying attention, right?

I think it's more rational to be sceptical than to not be sceptical enough.

Between now and your states' primaries all kinds of things might happen that might make up your mind for you. So just watch and observe and listen to your guts, and you'll do fine.

[neuvocat]

3. Go with whoever you feel best represents you.

That includes their background experiences and how similar they are to yours and so on. That's the reason I chose Clark although Dean and others are also good candidates-Dean represents them a lot stronger in many ways than Clark does. Its the opposite for me.

Other people choose Dean for reasons that pertain to them. The whole point is that it is a personal choice.

If anyone will let you have it then they are wrong for doing so, because in essence they are placing what is good for them on you. Its still time before the primaries so you have liberty to do some soul searching to see who out there suits you best.

And whatever you do, don't search for a perfect candidate because after all, everyone has flaws.

[OneBlueSky]

4. oh, I'm not complaining . . .

I'm perfectly comfortable with not having a candidate . . . but I've been a political junkie for several decades now, and it worries me that I don't perceive any really strong candidates out there . . . again, I don't think any of them would be a strong as Gore, and I didn't think Gore was all that strong! . . . that's what's bothering me . . .

[maha]

9. My guts are telling me

... that Wes Clark could clean Shrub's clock pretty neatly. The rest of the upper tier candidates, including Dean (whom I like a lot, btw), have attributes that make me fear they could be tripped up.

[jobycom]

5. Scoot over, that boat has to hold both of us.

That's so close to how I see things that I'll just say ditto, and you're not alone. Bush won't just lose, no matter how bad his numbers are. Someone has to beat him.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

6. Well thought out concerns

I can't quibble with any of them too much.

I share your concerns about Kerry, and while I am warming up to Clark, I am still optimistic about Dean.

Some days I can envision what you see, that the vast elecorate won't pay much attention beyond Bush's smear ads on Dean and will buy the tag that he's "ultra liberal" or whatever the favorite chant is. I have the bad thoughts about getting crushed (no matter who the nominee is).

But most days I see something different...I see the perspective of having watched Bush's support steadily decline over the past 6 months...I see Dean picking up steam with unions, with southerners, with the elderly, the midwest...voters who weren't supposed to pay any attention to him. I see the suppoters and the money pouring in...

I know, it's a long long way from where we're at to defeating Bush, but I truly believe that Dean is our best chance, even if it's a longshot right now. I also think that Wesley Clark has a good chance, too, if he can really light a fire under his campaign in the next couple of months.

Outside of these two, I feel fairly pessimistic. I don't see any Washington Democrat (Lieberman, Kerry, Gep, Edwards) exciting the vast numbers of people we need to beat Bush. In 2000, Nader and many in the media convinced a lot of people that there wasn't much difference between Bush and Gore -- unfair and outrageously incorrect, but I think that type of perception remains among a great many barely-watching voters, and we will not energize our voters with a candidate who is seen as "business as usual."

Yes, Dean is a longshot, but he's the best damn longshot we've got.

[JeniB]

7. OK, I swore I'd stay away from this forum, but I'll give you a shot.

My candidate is Dick Gephardt. Despite what you see here, he really has a lot of support. He, in my opinion, is the best one to beat Bush. He has 27 years experience in Congress. He REALLY KNOWS what he's talking about. He knows how to get things done and the key to that is that he doesn't piss anybody off. He is truly a diplomat. That is something we really need right now. He doesn't have to HATE the other side to disagree with them. He is well respected and will pull votes from the Repubs who hate Bush. On top of that he has some really good plans. His healthcare plan is the best because it covers EVERYONE with the plans that are already in place. No need to gut the whole system, just get everyone covered and give employers 60% of what they spend on healthcare back. That will then help the economy. I've spent a lot of time with him and asked him the questions that I wanted answered and he answered every one of them to my satisfaction. People say he's better in person than on TV and I guess I'll have to believe that. I spent time with him early and therefore have always liked him even on TV. He is genuinely concerned about people and jobs. It's not just a ploy to pull union support. He has always been a proponent for jobs.
There's way to much to write here but you'll see as ther primaries go on that he can win a lot of states past Iowa and NH and he can beat George Bush. He has more experience than Bush, he knows the system better and he will make mincemeat out of him in the debates. I only wish he could debate Dean one on one because he would show everyone how much more Presidential he is than Dean.

[Terwilliger]

8. you must like what was said in your sig line...

you don't have a problem with it?