If the '08 nomination came down to Kerry or Edwards

[WI_DEM]

which one would you support? That would be interesting if the two men who were team mates in '04 ended up challenging each other in '08.

[DaveinMD]

1. Edwards

I don't believe in nominating people who've already lost.

[blackangrydem]

11. If you don't believe in nominating someone who has lost

why would you choose Edwards?

His name was on the ticket too.

[DaveinMD]

14. VP's are different

no one votes on the basis of who the VP is. Regardless, as of now I'm backing Warner or Clark.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Neither.

[Higans]

9. It's looking more and more like Republicans and Democrats

are the same beast. Third party any one? won't matter. they will keep controlling our population by tricking us into thinking that we voted when infact they don't even count votes.

[mycatforpresident]

15. Exactly what I was thinking...

when I finally got around to registering.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1442174&mesg_id=1442448&page=

[RafterMan]

3. I wouldn't find it interesting

at all.

[Radical Activist]

4. With Edwards we

could have fought the Republicans on their turf instead of spending most of our resources defending states that Gore won in 2000. Edwards had a message with more appeal other than just a good biography and not being George Bush.

[Crunchy Frog]

5. Neither. n/t

[muse]

6. Edwards, because then we would also get Elizabeth! nt

[Forkboy]

7. Cobb

[Peak_Oil]

60. Another vote for Cobb

The man's got balls. More than I can say for Kerry these days.

[w13rd0]

8. I said Edwards...

...because I like him more, but I don't see how that happens. That and just because I "like him" more, doesn't mean he'd be a better candidate, or more capable of surmounting the pervasive corruption in the one party nation and one corporate media state...

[genius]

10. Kerry only gets my vote if he's already President. I won't trust him again

[gmoney]

12. But isn't Edwards out of government now?

He gave up his seat and all... I know he doesn't HAVE to be a sitting senator or anything to run, but one term in the senate and four years "on the bench" won't look too impressive.

And you're acting like there will even BE an election in 2008.

[blackangrydem]

16. Edwards needs to find "gainful employment" for 2 years.

Is there a think-tank he can run or a Law School in need of a prof?

Or he could head a charitable organization or become a CEO, but he's wasting time!

[serryjw]

17. My exact sentiments on BOTH counts

n/t

[BattyDem]

13. If we don't get the machines fixed ...

WTF is the point of voting? The repug is always going to win, no matter who the Dem is. :(

[sadiesworld]

18. Green

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[sadiesworld]

26. Ooh, what a smackdown...

you really GOT me with that response. :crazy:

[Forkboy]

28. Either that or it's the party he's planning on joining

:D

[KSAtheist]

19. Hobson's choice.

Kerry needs at least another eight years for the stink of last November to wear off. Besides, his whole campaign, its flaws, and what it shows about him are being dissected and disseminated. If he runs in '08, I doubt he'll make it past the primaries.

Edwards is almost as weak, but at least as a mere VP candidate, he has some measure of deniability that Kerry lacks.

[high density]

20. Kerry, by far

Even with the slew of negative attributes that Kerry has for the Republicans to attack, he has so many more positive attributes than Edwards has.

(That said, I hope I'm not forced into having to vote for either of these men in November 2008.)

[IndianaGreen]

22. Edwards will never concede the election before all the votes are counted

but if Edwards still supports the war and PATRIOT in 2008, he won't get elected.

[robbedvoter]

41. Unless he gets prime time for his speech, in which case he'll do it BEFORE

voting is over (see primary super Tuesday)

[mazzarro]

23. Neither will come close IMO

I want someone with the nerve and desire to go all out for the ordinary people regardless of what the pundits(right, center or left) say.

[Sleepless In NY]

24. Neither . Next time its Wes Clark or I'm not voting

Clark was always my first choice, I really like the way he handled himself, never backed off, always defended what he believed in. Loved watching him put Sean Hannity away one night. But once Kerry was picked, I gave both him & Edwards my support, with both my time and my money. Can't tell you how many times I called & emailed Kerry's office about rebutting the Swift boat vets, the dissing of Massachusetts, the flip flopping, the pulling of the McCain ads, not so much as the courtesy of a reply. Only emails I received were the ones asking for more money. And with all the money Kerry has left, he can't even make sure all the votes are counted? What is he doing? Saving it for his next run? No thanks, I'm passing on both of them. Dean also showed alot of courage. More than Kerry or Edwards, I'm sorry to say.

[Ms_Mary]

36. My hopes in the primaries were for a Clark/Edwards ticket.

[msgadget]

32. Absolutely,

the dems need someone as angry as those who vote for them, not a wishy-washy, where's-the-line-so-I can-teeter-on-it candidate. Someone who isn't afraid to call a liar a liar or to offend corporate sponsors, the DNC or DLC.

[TheDonkey]

25. Kerry

[Leilani]

27. Neither

I refuse to vote for either...I made my compromises this election, & a lot of good it did.

[sampsonblk]

29. Neither

I'd write in someone

[Robeson]

30. Neither

[Hippo_Tron]

31. Edwards on the condition that he hires Carville, Begala, and Lockhart...

And does exactly what they say.

[Silverhair]

33. Neither. H Clinton has the inside track. NT

[Ms_Mary]

35. There is no way she could get elected

The right has a real hate for Hillary, much stronger than for any other potential candidate. They don't want a strong woman and the definitely don't want Hillary. No matter what my feelings are on her, a Hillary nomination would make for a shoe in Repub president. Sucks, but I don't see any way it could happen in 08, not with the current state of things.

[NewJeffCT]

47. they already turned out en masse to vote against Kerry

The Religious Right already turned out en masse to vote for their God - George W. Bush... and, Hillary has been demonized for 12-13 years now. What more could they do to her? She & Bill have already been accused to every crime since the crucifixion of Christ.

I'm not saying that Hillary is my top choice, but I do think the nomination is hers to lose.

[Ken Burch]

49. Not only the right..a lot of us leftists hate here too.

Hillary was the one who killed any chance for universal
health care, and who refused to even allow single payer
to be put up for consideration(despite the fact that it would
have had at least as much chance of passage as the
mess she came up with)

Hillary was also the one who famously bragged
"there is no left wing of the White House."

And she's just as much of a death penalty fan as
Slick.

She was never progressive, and progressives
should feel no loyalty to her.

[Silverhair]

53. Agreed. But I was talking about the nomination, not the election.

Let's face it. We put up Kerry, with all his war protester baggage, instead of Clark.

[Kilkenny5]

57. Oh God No!

She's too polarizing.

The conservatives will have a field day if she runs.

Do everyone a favor Hillary, run for re-election in 2006 and stay a legislator. PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[lateo]

34. Neither.

[manhattanite]

37. Edwards couldn't even win his own state.

He couldn't even win re-election as a Senator in his own state. He contributed nothing to the campaign. If Kerry picked a running-mate from a swing state, he would be President-Elect right now.

[Hippo_Tron]

52. What running mate should he have picked?

Edwards was a strong campaigner and helped Kerry accross the board. Out of all of the choices from swing states, I doubt any of them could've actually swung their state. Gephardt couldn't have brought Missouri, Graham couldn't have brought Florida, Landrieu couldn't have brought Louisiana, Lincoln or Pryor doubtfully could've brought Arkansas, and Bayh certainly couldn't have brought Indiana. The only one that might've brought his state is Vilsack, because Iowa was so close, and Iowa's electoral votes wouldn't have been enough to put him over the top.

[manhattanite]

58. Russ Feingold.

He would have carried more weight in the Midwest, at least more than a one-term Senator, former trial lawyer who couldn't even carry his own state and who didn't run for re-election as Senator because he knew he would lose.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. I'm already planning to vote Green, that would confirm it.

There are decent Democrats available but they won't get near the nomination.

[Walt Starr]

39. Third Party because the Dems will have already lost

:shrug:

That's how I see it.

[robbedvoter]

40. Neither.

No more war sponsors/supporters who shit on my voting rights.
I felt rotten about my vote this time around.
Your "undecided" option is worthy of a Faux poll.

[Cheswick2.0]

42. Neither

Sorry but if those are my only two choices I am not a democrat anymore. I will be writing in some democrat I do respect.

[ally_sc]

43. We are going to have a hard time

Finding a qualified person other than Edwards. He is qualified and has no problem raising the money he needs for a sucessful campaign

[HootieMcBoob]

44. baloney

Wes Clark was the most qualified person last time and will be the most qualified person in 2008.

[Pithy Cherub]

45. Firmly in the neither camp.

It will be all about the backbone and the embodiment of principles for me.

[kodi]

46. I support Al Gore

and I think most here would if he continues to speak out as he has over the last 2 years excoriating the Republicans.

[LoZoccolo]

48. Kerry - better resume.

I was a Dean supporter for a long time, but later I realized that Kerry's resume was probably the best we could do. I'm impressed with Clark as well, but there's something to be said for how Kerry has worked with all three branches of government. I think his experience is impressive, and I don't think we could have run someone better.

[liberalpragmatist]

50. Don't Know - WAY too Soon

I like both of them. I actually like Kerry better, but I like Edwards a lot too and I think he may have a better chance next time around. But a lot depends on the next 4 years, and I like Mark Warner and some other candidates too.

[NoPasaran]

51. Edwards on the condition that he tosses Carville, Begala, and Lockhart...

...into a tank full of hungry sharks and doesn't leave until the business is done.

[Leilani]

54. Seems to me, you should have included "Neither"

as an option.

It seems to be doing very well.

[mtnester]

55. Neither, and since we will still be at "war" somewhere

My choice is Clark and whoever.

I would not pick my nose with Hillary's finger, so forget about her.

My own, personal opinion is that the biggest mistake Kerry made was not a slow response to Swift Vets, etc....it was his very first decision to not take Wes Clark with him to the WH. What idiot picks a nobody during wartime when there stands a perfectly good, 4 star general who hates the neocons, is good looking, articulate, and popular? Here in Ohio, we knew who Wes Clark was....Edwards...who the hell is that? Yeah I understand Kerry was looking to pick up some of the South..see how that worked out. What a stupid move.

My vote for Kerry was an ABB vote...period. He was not my selection in the primary. Kerry will not get another vote from me, nor will Edwards or Hillary.

[RobbyRoo]

56. Kerry

I just voted for Kerry last month. We ALL did.
He's the most qualified person to be president. He's smart. He's got integrity.

Why are "we" so quick to turn on our candidates who don't win?
Dukakis anyone? Al Gore?

Nixon lost the 1960 election to JFK. Then he went on to lose the race for Governor in California. Then in 1968 his party nominated him again. And he got elected TWICE.

That being said, perhaps Kerry will earn our nomination again. In fact Al Gore could be a strong candidate in 2008.



http://www.cafepress.com/bsofa

[MODemocrat]

59. I am so disappointed in John Kerry

He was the one that I ultimately supported, but because he was not a good fighter, he would not get my support again. It would be Edwards.

[elderly man]

61. Neither

[MileHiStealth]

62. Cobb has my vote ....

[njdemocrat106]

63. Kerry's still the man

Yes, he "lost" (thanks Diebold!), but I didn't lose all respect for him just because he lost, and he was my first choice in the primaries (even though I pretty much liked all the candidates in the primary). Anyway I don't think he could ever run again because the right-wing scum have irreparably tarnished the good Senator's reputation (Rove and his boys will find a way to do it with whomever we nominate in 2008, also). I think a Clark/Warner ticket is our best bet in '08.