2008 Presidential Poll (revised)

[Don1]

What kind of ideological candidate should the Democrats nominate in 2008? Conservative, moderate, liberal, even further left?

(A couple of people really flipped out over the last poll, so I am completely redoing it. I don't anticipate there should be any issues as the main complaint from the last poll was that candidates were pigeonholed. And people disagreed with which ideology their favorite candidate belonged.)

[JohnLocke]

1. Still not a good poll

Conservatives, Moderates, and Liberals can all be Progressives and Leftists. There's a great deal of overlpa among these categories. They're not mutally exculsive and in any case are totally pointless as labels.

[Don1]

2. huh?

In the last one, you said you vote for figureheads not ideas or something like that.

You're just never happy, are you?

Well, guess what? It's democracy. You don't have to like the poll or even answer it.

Cheers to you for being you.

:toast:

[Kahuna]

4. Bingo!!!!

:applause:
DU's favorite pastime is putting labels on people.

[leftstreet]

3. I think it's a good poll format

Since our country has moved so far to the right of the spectrum, it's difficult to ask questions about "leadership" based on name recognition or individual sound bites. And people are figuring that out. Today's question shouldn't be "who" would you vote for, but "what" would you vote for.

[guidod]

5. This Country is so far

to the right that I believe we have to meet somewhere in the middle. If the Dems suddenly go to far to the left it could be the last election we win. When we meet in the middle then we can slowly float to the left.

We can't scare every centrist and right wingers back into their spider holes.

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. This poll is just as valid as any poll that gets posted at DU

People argue about the meaning of these terms, but it is always interesting to see how Democratic Politicians describe themselves when forced to give themself a label (most people rightly claim that they don't fit into neat little boxes).

[Jai4WKC08]

8. I'd have been curious to know

How does the OP define the difference between liberal and progressive? I know it's been argued here before, but I've never really understood that there is a difference, other than progressive seems to be a way to run away from the liberal label and the way Republicans have branded it. Which is probably why I voted liberal here, out of contrariness in part, and because I think we need to define our own values and proudly reclaim the words that describe them.

[jackpan1260]

7. Labels aren't important.

How well the candidate would do in the general election is as important to me as their record and their goals. I am not going to work for the nomination of the candidate that mosts represents me if I think he would perform poorly in the general election for some reason.

[Catchawave]

9. If we still have our country in 2008........

....my choice would be progressive, but we need a moderate to win.

[quinnox]

10. A candidate

that is mostly liberal but can appear as a moderate to the voters.

[MH1]

11. A "Liberal" may be progressive or radical

in their approach to implementing policy.

Methinks the word "progressive" is being misused again. Try this:

Progressive Liberal
Radical Liberal

Bet you won't get too many responses for "Radical Liberal" but that is what a lot of self-proclaimed "progressives" these days really are.

Progressive liberals and radical liberals have similar ultimate goals for society and government's role, they differ in what they believe is the best way to achieve those goals - progressively (incrementally) or radically (rapid major change).

Anyone who wants to yell at me, look up "progressive" in the dictionary and ditch the definitions based on historical political parties.

[Dongfang Hong]

12. Well, if a third of DUers want a moderate,

I'd say that means about three-quarters of all Democrats want a moderate.