Who should DU support for Pres., in 08?

[cidliz2004]

Right now we have to watch events unfold and be basically reactionary.

Kerry, from all we have seen thus far, has laid down and rolled over.
I know that some think that he is masterminding another tactic, but isn't that what we thought all thruout his campaign? From the little that I have read, Kerry is planning on running again in 08'. Who here will support him?

I won't.

If I had a choice of candidates it would be a combination of Howard Dean and Wesley Clark. (Edwards proved as a weak candidate at best).

Both of these candidates are capable of revving up grassroots support and hailing fire and brimstone to the masses. A Doctor and a General???!!!?? I think these two guys would be it.

I also think that the DU should work on further development on strengthening and having some definet goals starting like - NOW

This is a powerful group and this group can grow to be more influential withing the next four years. Why don't some of you more intelligent, well connected types start laying digging in the dirt to lay down a foundation of direction, strength and hope for the rest of us slugs?

We need to grow, gel and go forward.

cidliz2004/08

[Killarney]

1. Whoever the elected Democratic nominee is.

Before he/she is chosen, there is no way everyone on DU will agree on one candidate.

There is a wide range here from centrists to communists and we definitely will not agree in the primaries on one candidate.

[DuckFan4ever]

28. good point

there should be robust debate on DU and then when the candidate is finally chosen, people can make there own decision. No anointing.

[charlyvi]

2. Its too early to choose......

Four years is a lifetime in politics--don't we all know!! We need to develop the party as a whole, keep a watchful eye on those who have the pit bull instinct it takes and develop them. But to choose now would might omit too many qualified people.

[cidliz2004]

4. Very tru points

To grow effectively though we need a lot of time and focus. 08' will be another more effective fraud for the Republicans if we don't start effectively countering them .....like now.

We need the most effective voices out there now and Clark and Dean are two that come immedidately to mind. There of course may be others, but the discussion and the push needs to start now and needs to start from groups like ours.

Edwards was to "boy next door" for this opposing group that is positivily lethal. His message wasn't as well received as some had hoped. The Iraq question minimized his message. What he said was important, how he said it was not in the right time and the right place. Dean stirred the embers before anybody else had the courage to open their mouths, Clark was there to, both are natural leaders and built the best grass roots organizations. They could at least lead this group, then the party, then possisbly the country. It takes time, focus and work. We need to be unified now more than ever.

[AP]

12. I think Edwards's message was really well-received.

Consistently, in the final three or four days of each primary, as more people heard his message, had the greatest rate of increase in popularity.

In other words, people really responded to his message (once it was no longer mediated to them by the media).

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/btp/polls.html

[cidliz2004]

13. I'm not saying his message was bad or wrong, it just wasn't

suited for this election and this time.

[AP]

14. It was well-received though. So maybe it was right for this time.

Part of the reason FDR is my avatar picture is because even in times of serious danger, he told people that what was more important was that they had economic opportunity. He won four elections with that message and he won while we were at war and while Hitler was freaking people out.

Look at the message state Democrats won with in Montana in 2004. It wasn't about terror and danger.

[charlyvi]

16. Only problem with Edwards, whom I like,

is the experience. He only has the one term in the Senate. Don't know that this would disqualify him, but it would sure make it harder for him.

[AP]

Lincoln was a great president and had been a one-term congressman a

decade before running for president.

[charlyvi]

21. True.

As I said, it may not be insurmountable, but it will make it harder for him.

[AP]

43. In some ways, it might make it easier.

[DuckFan4ever]

29. Definitely not Edwards...

that guy couldn't deliver his home state or even his home district. Wasting time with him. Much better candidates will emerge.

[AP]

42. I trust that if a better candidate emerges, Edwards will do everything he

can to get that better candidate elected. If not, Edwards will want to get elected so that he can be the best president possible.

That's how Edwards conducted himself during the primaries and the general election. I'm sure he'll continue to conduct himself that way.

[charlyvi]

17. Self delete

Sorry. Computer glitch posted my original message twice.

[cidliz2004]

10. The person(s) that evolve as our leader(s) in 04'

Don't necessarily lock them into 08', but we need a voice(s) NOW.

Kerry has been SILENT where is his LEADERSHIP?

As a matter of fact WHERE IS THE LEADERSHIP?????????


Somebody needs to step up to the plate and we need to support them and we need to start now!

A third party is not a bad idea. Both of the heads of these parties are in bed together.

[AP]

19. "Not Edwards" "where's Kerry" "vote third party" -- well, at least we know

where you're coming from.

[leftofthedial]

3. Whoever the Dems nominate.

again.

[Warpy]

7. Sorry, but if it's another DLC candidate with DLC handlers

we can pretty much hang it up at the beginning. As long as the DLC is in there giving stupid advice and preventing the party nominee from being anything but a pallid, albeit more humane, version of whatever fascist the GOP dishes up, they will lose.

[leftofthedial]

8. do you thinka viable third party will be created

and achieve equal footing with the Dems and repukes by 2008?

I don't.

[Lefty48197]

5. Hillary.

.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[Eurobabe]

18. So using your logic, then did Kerry have blood on his hands too?

Welcome to DU BTW. :hi:

[RebelOne]

27. I third Hillary. I want to see a woman president in my lifetime.n/t

[MaineDem]

6. A Democrat

Who the hell knows at this point?

Sheesh.

[AP]

9. The person with the best, most relevant arguments.

[American Tragedy]

15. Absolutely no way to tell

Think of how much can happen in the next four years. We may be in a very different world with different priorities. In 2000, could you have predicted the pressing issues of this year?

[Ediacara]

20. I'll throw out a dark horse

Al Gore in '08

[Cheswick2.0]

37. I'd crawl 10 miles to vote for Al Gore

Or Howard Dean

[cidliz2004]

39. Al Gore is another great choice, the man has found his fire and his voice

and thank God he always had brains. Now we need to find someone and they need to be willing to start to lead us to save this country. If we don't it will be forever lost. These neocon bastards just want to destroy our Democracy and they are in the process of succeeding.

Dean, Clark, Gore...any other viable people?

Hillary is too polarizing. Actually if Big Dog got into the U.N. as he seems to want, that might really work to our favor.

[milkyway]

22. In the primaries: all of them. In the General: the nominee.

[ArtVandaley]

23. Bush hasn't even been sworn in yet

I'm not going to decide who I'll support before anyone has even hinted that they're running (well, other than that oportunist hack Hillary, who was praying that Kerry would lose).
I'd love it if Feingold ran. I think Bill Richardson would be a very candidate, and I'm intrigued by Mark Warner. I love Dean, but I didn't think he was presidential material last year and I still don't. I'd rather have him as head of the DNC. I don't think Clark turned out to be that great a candidate either, although I like him quite a bit too. I think a fresh face is needed in 2008 though. Hillary is the only person I'm really oppossed to, I'm just so damn sick of the Clinton's control our party and moving it farther and farther right. I'd be open to voting for Kerry again. During the campaign I was so tense and nervous that whenever Kerry did anything wrong I got pisssed and said I hated him. But upon reflection, I think he's a really good guy and would have made a great president in clutch situations. He ran the best campaign he could, but Bush's handlers were just a hell of a lot better than his. If he did run, he'd be one of my top choices.

[Obviousman]

24. We should do what Moveon.org did

And have a DU primary during the actual primaries, especially if Vilsack gets in as DNC chair and keeps Iowa first

[HR_Pufnstuf]

25. Obama/Dean '08

Win the primary with Obama, and pull a surprise later and pick Dean as VP candidate. Then, lets get busy whooping some ass!

[emulatorloo]

26. Some Photogenic Dumbass Dem Governor who looks good in Jeans

and has no "record" to speak of. Basically a Dem GWB.

and then stack the cabinet w Dean Kerry Clark Edwards Sharpton Braun etc etc etc

[cidliz2004]

35. In 08' (or before - God willing -) GWB's Gig will be up

Mark my words, by 08, GWB will be a pariah. The opposite type of personality will be more appealing. Clinton was still popular, so the Repugs came up with thier version of Clinton, Southern, easy way of speaking (when he is coherent).... Bush will not be popular at the end of his term..not if we stay on task and Bush stays Bush, so going after someone like Bush will not be a good strategy.

[Historic NY]

30. We need to fix our primary system first!!!!!!!!

Democrats beat themselves silly trying to secure the nonimation that it has become a joke. We put up 8,9,10 people to beat themselves senseless. We need to take a page out of the Repug playbook. Finally, let the Repugs have their faux convention first.

We really gives a rats a$$ if Iowa gets to vote first. Our system is too long and protracted and it gives the other side the ammo to beat us.

FORGET Hillary, the baggage isn't worth it.
We need a fighter, a fresh face with the folksey appeal. Unfortunately its going to have to be a red state person.

I actually shocked some Repug friends the other day when they were yapping over * . I told them we need to face facts we are still fighting the Civil War, over and over. They looked at me like I was nuts. I then asked them, when was the last time we had a northern POTUS. The answer was 1963, they look stunned. A couple did mention FDR. It left them thinking and they even mentioned it a few days later.

[cidliz2004]

36. This would all be part of what we would be doing with our chosen leader

With the right leader we would push for the primary to be fixed, for voting machines to be legit, for the media to be blown apart to smitereens, to expose every Bush trick and fallicy, we need to be prepared to march in the streets and to boycott....BUT we need a VOICE....for now to lead us to 08 and I think that Dean and Clark would be the Best Voices out there.

[cidliz2004]

38. A linkage between Move On.org/ DU/ AIM/MOB...

Pulling together and trying to identify our targets are what we need to be doing right now.

Dollar for Dollar we matched GWB in this last campaign and they stole it. So it will take more than money but of course not less than money and unification and focus and the next 4 years to beat these bastards and the establishment the helped them steal this election.

[liberalpragmatist]

31. Who knows? We're four years out

I see the following as strong candidates:

Hillary Clinton
Mark Warner
John Edwards
John Kerry
Ed Rendell
Evan Bayh
Wesley Clark

Of these, the most attention is going to be on Hillary, but I'm going to predict she doesn't get the nomination, especially b/c the Democratic nomination almost NEVER goes to the person people assume it will (see Scoop Jackson '76, Ted Kennedy '80, Gary Hart '88, Mario Cuomo '92, Al Gore '04, Howard Dean '04, etc.).

I think Edwards or Warner will be the strongest contenders. Potentially Clark if he runs and if he learns from his previous camapgin. I can se a case for Kerry too if he uses the next four years to provide strong opposition to Bush. If he does well, and if the next four years go badly, he could position himself strongly for a comeback given his credibility on foreign affairs and defense. However, he'll have to overcome the desire for a fresh face, and he'll have to run a campaign with a stronger theme, smaller circle of advisors, and NO BOB SHRUM. (That last one goes for ANY Democrat. PLEASE! Ignore Bob Shrum!).

Howard Dean and Al Gore may run as well, although I'm skeptical Gore will run. He seems to have found a new role and doesn't appear to be interested in being president again. But who knows? As for Dean, a lot depends on his becoming DNC chair. If he decides not to run for DNC chair, we can assume he'll run. If he does become DNC chair or makes a sincere effort that fails, it'll appear that his goal appears to be more to change the party rather than be President.

[HFishbine]

32. Your Picks Sound Good to Me

Until something changes my mind, that's the likely ticket.

[hippiechick]

33. Ask again in '06 ...

Now, it's too soon to tell what - if anything - will remain of this country to put back together.


:hippie:

[Stinky The Clown]

34. I actually think a long, protracted primary season could be a good thing

This past cycle, we never had our messaage out there, polling well and resonating a whole lot better than when the debates were being televised. If you recall, Chimpus Khan's numbers stayed quite depressed during that period.

The country got a look and listen to many points of view from our side.

Our candidates got name recognition.

All in all, I saw it as a good thing.

[Minstrel Boy]

40. Jeb Bush

Until Americans regain the integrity of their ballots - until they know they've even lost it - you may as well get used to the idea.

[Clarkie1]

41. Nobody until after the convention!