Are the 3 best stop Hillary and win Democrats Feingold, Vilsack, & Bayh?

[papau]

There is a buzz that there is a cap on the Hillary popular and electoral vote total in a general election in 08.

It is said that the Democratic Party must "flip 2 of four midwest states and that Hillary flips none, but there are three Democrats who could make a difference in the Midwest: Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Tom Vilsack of Iowa and Evan Bayh of Indiana.

None have announced for President, but all are thinking about it.

Does anyone on DU see a better result with one of the three "not-Hillary" Democrats mentioned?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. oui, mois.

There is an undercurrent of serious dislike of her here. Her negatives are much higher than her positives.

[MODemocrat]

27. Sometimes I feel that I've signed onto a Republican Underground forum

Think I'll just jump off for a while and hope for the best for the democratic party. There are just too many negatives anymore. :hi: :shrug:

[rurallib]

2. In case you missed it, Vilsack made a statement the other day

saying that Dems better not be soft on Bush's spying program. As far as I am concerned he's out. Bayh I don't know much about. Feingold at least stands up to the admin. I love Feingold.
I don't understand the RW fascination with bashing Hillary. They seem to have a vendetta on all things Clinton that is way beyond rational. I am surprised they aren't bashing Chelsea also.

[Warren Stupidity]

3. Why would I want to vote for War Party candidates Vilsack/Bayh?

My opposition to Clinton is not based on her gender, looks, personality, or last name. My opposition is based on her political positions on issues I view as important. Offering me two other DLC War Party alternatives is offering me a choice of Feingold.

[Crazy Dave]

4. Personally

I think an Edwards/Clark ticket would not only make Hillary a non-factor but would have the same outreach and success as the former Clinton had winning over republicans.

[Clark2008]

31. Flip it.

Clark, with his foreign policy, diplomacy and economic background, should be the president. The former senator should be president of the Senate (VP).

Besides, Clark would help the Dems overcome their alleged lack of national security creds. What Edwards espouses on poverty issues - well, the Dems already beat the Republicans on those types of issues.

[calimary]

5. I am NOT crazy about Evan Bayh.

I saw him on CSPAN dismissing an elderly woman who came up to him after a local speech and asked him about the stolen elections - and he dismissed her concerns about the fraud in 2004 - flat-out. Told her, in so many words, that it wasn't even worth bringing up.

Well, Evan, NEITHER ARE YOU, then. It's a BIG DEAL to a LOT of us who've been paying attention and not trying to appease some big bullies down the block and drinking the Kool-aid like good little girls and boys - the way YOU'VE been doing. We KNOW what happened. We know enough to smell a WHOLE BUNCH of rats. When you say you don't smell anything, it leads me to conclude that you're still asleep - willfully, and not inclined even to turn over in bed, much less wake up.

[iconocrastic]

6. I'm on the fence about Hillary

Should we posture to the center, or... <grin>

[smoogatz]

7. Vilsack, by all appearances, is a limp noodle. Bayh seems finally

to be showing some spunk. Feingold is breathing fire these days--he needs somebody like Clark as running mate for defense cred. At the moment, he's my guy for '08. I don't actually hate Hillary--she's just a too concerned with political calculus and too cozy with the corporate wing of the party for me to actively support her. You never know, though--she might grow a (metaphorical) pair between now and the primaries. I hope so.

[xkenx]

15. Clark at the top, because

people vote for the top of the ticket. 2008 WILL be about national security again. No one has the security creds like Clark, and he is a true progressive on domestic issues.

[smoogatz]

23. So far, hardly anyone has voted for Clark for anything.

And he has no legislative record and no experience in government--so I'm not sure I'm ready to skip the primaries and appoint him to the candidacy. Feingold's got an excellent track record in the Senate, has demonstrated a clear understanding of the issues of the day and knows how to get things done in government, even when faced with considerable opposition. He's also probably the smartest guy in congress, very articulate, and a hell of a debater. For my money, he takes a backseat to onone of the potential Dem candidates in '08.

[xkenx]

26. I agree with everything you say about Feingold, but

he may be too suscteptable to being smeared as a double-divorced peacenik northern librul, etc. (their words, not mine). 2008 is all about flipping a few red states into our column. HRC certainly can't do it, and I doubt whether Feingold can. Clark is a progressive wolf in military uniform sheep's clothing. Many Republicans who didn't care for Bush, still couldn't vote for Kerry. Clark was the only Dem. they could consider. Clark has had more EXECUTIVE leadership roles than any Senator by virtue of his military commands where he had responsibility for the lives of hundreds of thousands of servicepeople and their dependents--the whole range of housing, education, training, healthcare, social services, sometimes in a dangerous spot. When Clark was Supreme Allied Commander Europe (Eisenhower's last military position), he had "Head-of-State" status, meaning that he dealt directly with prime ministers/presidents, not underlings. And Clark was virtually the only voice urging help for Rwanda. And Clark and Madeleine Albright were the ones who convinced Clinton to take action against the ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, where Clark carried out the military action w/o the loss of a single American life. In this he stood up to the Pentagon brass who wanted nothing to do with "saving Albanians." And it was Clark who served for more than 30 years AFTER getting shot up and winning hero medals in Vietnam, when he could have gone for the big bucks in private industry. Try Swift Boating this guy--the smackdown will be heard around the world. Clark is all about duty, honor, country. When Clark's American Dream/American Hero story gets out to middle America, watch how many red states flip. And the beauty of Wes Clark is that HE IS A REAL LIVE D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T, with a progressive agenda equal to anyone.

[Hippo_Tron]

42. I want Feingold too... Clark is unquestionably the stronger candidate

The man removed Melosevich from power without getting a single US soldier killed. All he has to do is beat that fact into every American's brain and he will be elected president.

Feingold would have to overcome the weak on defense liberal label that would be stuck onto him. I want to believe that he can overcome it and I do believe that he can overcome it but it will be very difficult. Clark does not have to start with that label, which puts him miles ahead of any democrat, not just Feingold.

[CarolNYC]

45. I love Feingold...

but, geez, it's so annoying to me to see these constant suggestions of Wes Clark as a means to prop up some other candidate. If Wes chooses not to run, or runs and doesn't get the nominiation, there are so many other ways his experience, intellect, expertise, etc. can be used to help right the mess this world has become. To me, the VP position would be such a waste of what this guy has to offer....which is a lot and is unique in many ways. (I'm assuming that whenever we get back the Presidency, we don't plan on following the Bush/Cheney model.)

How about we get a candidate who's strong enough not to need a prop?

[Noisy Democrat]

8. Vilsack won't attack domestic spying

Vilsack said that Democrats have to be careful about speaking out against the domestic spying program because they'll be perceived as soft on defense.

Let me get this straight: The man believes that America is the land of the fearful, and that Democrats should be afraid of alienating Americans by showing some courage and defending our rights. In other words, his vision for the Democratic Party is that it should be the Party of the Fearful who help the Land of the Fearful sacrifice their rights for imaginary security.

And he's being put forth for serious consideration? Please.

[mzteris]

9. Who here didn't like Pres Clinton's terms

in office?

Think he did a good job? (not perfect, no - but things were MUCH better than now.)

Then why do you hate Hillary so much? Don't you think she played a very significant role in how this country was run when Bill was Pres? So what makes you think she'd be a crappy Pres? At least she has experience! :)

Yeah, she's more centrist than *I* personally like, (but so was Bill) - but centrist was/is far superior to the total cr@p we have now, right?

I'm all for whoever the hell can get the people behind buscho OUT of power before they totally destroy our country!

[Donna Zen]

30. Hillary will not win

how's that? This election will be all about change, and she does not represent change.

Actually, Hillary is a proven poll politician. She will increase military spending and continue her militaristic spew because she believes that is what will commpensate for her lack of credentials. Another uber-hawk for AIPAC.

But for me it is this: Hillary puts her ego above what is good for the country. She knew bush was taking us to war, she knew there was no immenent threat, and yet all she was worried about was her chances in 2008. What a ridiculous woman.

DLC does as DLC does....and they could give a shit about the middle class. Just keep passing them NAFTA bills.

[sybylla]

10. Vilsack and Bayh will give you all the great Hillary flavor without

the negative vibes - if centrist politics is what you want.

As far as politics go, the three aren't even in the same boat as Feingold whose populist, progressive style clearly sets him apart. Not to mention his SPINE!

[peace frog]

11. Those snoozers the three best? Hell no.

Hillary may be a warmongering DLC puke, but she's intelligent, energetic and interesting. Those other guys will put us all to sleep.

[sybylla]

12. I disagree

I watched her speak at CSK's funeral and thought it was terrible. To be fair, she spoke right after Bill who has such a fine speaking style, but she came across sounding shrill and awkward - even with a speech that wasn't very political. She has no polish or grace in her manner. The bar is set much higher for women and she ain't there.

[peace frog]

18. Don't mistake my post...

I'm not talking up Hillary, not by a long shot. She could never win, period. And I stand by what I said, which is that she is intelligent, energetic and certainly more interesting than those three Casper Milquetoasts (well OK, Feingold shows more signs of life than the other two) you mentioned. Just MHO of course.

[Hippo_Tron]

37. Feingold is very engaging conversationally

In interviews he has the ability to sound intelligent and down to earth at the same time, which is exactly what we need.

As far as speeches go, I can't say that he has the charisma of John Kennedy or FDR, but he's not a corpse either.

[karynnj]

19. She spoke before Kerry - 3 times recently

One of the most consistent comments in the Kerry group - is that he should ask to always follow her- His eloquent, passionate person speeches contrasted beautifully with her cold, unimaginative, shrill speeches.

The three speeches were: The Rosa Parkes memorial, the RFK memorial, and the LIHEAP press conference (where Hillary was all charts, while Kerry was visibly concerned that people could freeze to death)

As to the three. I take the comments from a few Iowa people here that he really is not an exciting candidate - nothing he has done or said has done anything but confirm that.

As to Bayh, I find him a better "Warner" - an accomplished Governor, but with federal experience. His record is conservative, but he represents Indiana. (That is relevent, a President Bayh migh actually be less conservative than someone with a similar record from Massachusetts, New York or New Jersey. )

As to Feingold - I like him better than the other two. I really don't think he has a chance in the general election. I also think that if he was really serious about the various issues that will go to the SC, he would have led a filibuster. As he was on the committee, he could have started a few weeks earlier and maybe persuaded the leadership to really back it. This would mean more than a protest vote on the Patriot act.

My choice is the one the mainstream seems to want everyone to forget, but he keeps returning better each time:

JOHN KERRY

[stray cat]

13. Feingold is great and could take the midwest

A true progressive uncorrupted, fiscally responsible leader who has great cross over appeal.

[karynnj]

22. Which states do you count as Midwest?

Not meant to be snarky - I grew up in Indiana and was shoched that there are many defitions of this.
That said:
Feingold would likely win in Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota.

He would definately lose Indiana (as would even Bayh)

Iowa? Ohio?

What states does he take that Gore or Kerry lost?

[Hippo_Tron]

36. I think Feingold does better than Kerry with the NRA which helps in Ohio

[Pithy Cherub]

14. LOL! Out of the three

Feingold would inspire the Left and the activists and the primary voters. He also is loved in Wisconsin. The national security question and spectre raises the bar for needing an expert who can speak to those issues and retain the base, that person is Wes Clark.

Vilsack, Bayh are strictly presidential window dressing and seeking higher national portfolios. Vilsack's personal story is inspirational, but alas he is not. Bayh takes soggy milquetoast to a new art form.

[Hippo_Tron]

43. I think they are also hoping that perhaps stronger candidates won't run

[wisteria]

16. John Kerry could accomplish this.

Vilsack and Bayh are all of the same mold, strong DLC'ers and very weak and inexperienced on defense and foreign relations.
Feingold, is the anti-war candidate and as much as I admire his Independence on certain votes, I think he may concern some middle of the road voters who would question him on security matters.

John kerry on the other hand has the defense and foreign relation experience, the name recognition and with proper campaigning may have the best chance to chalk up wins in the midwest.

[blm]

17. The Dem who exposes GOP control of media and voting machines is the ONLY

Dem who CAN win.

[Hippo_Tron]

41. Voting machines are only in Ohio and Florida

At least those are the only swing states that they are in. The only other states that I've heard about having Diebold are some of the very red states and then of course Georgia, a state which dems should be trying to compete in but can't.

And grassroots action can get around media lies, some 75 million registered voters didn't vote last election

I'm not saying it's easy, I'm saying it's possible.

[LittleClarkie]

20. Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe?

What a motley crew. Vilsack and Bayh? Eeesh.

Now, Feingold on the other hand is pretty spiffy. I'd have to think about who I was going to support if it was between Feingold and Kerry.

But neither Vilsack and Bayh have ANY name recognition. And really, they're just Hillary in male drag.

[Uncle Joe]

21. I believe it's either

Al Gore, Albert Gore or Albert Gore Jr. althought personally, I prefer Al Gore.

[iconoclastNYC]

24. Vislack and Bayh are both DLC Democrats too

So why are they any better than Hillary. The only reason I don't like Hillary is that she's a DLC democrat, which is to say, a Republican who decided to be a Democrat because it's easier.

[saltpoint]

25. If President Gore enters the Democratic primaries I think he will

effectively revoke popular support, such as it is, for Senator Clinton.

She's got the name recognition and a pile of cash, but Al's got the fire in his belly (finally) and the moral momentum. He was cheated; the people know it; and the job should be his. The banners are hung up, and history is waiting for Gore's arrival on the scene.

If Gore stays out, then I personally believe that General Clark and Senator Edwards will either defeat Sen. Clinton in Iowa, or score so well, along with Sen. Feingold, that Sen. Clinton's juggernaut will be undone. Not all at once possibly, but eventually, and then completely. This scenario assumes that Sen. Kerry will assess his support among state party organizations and will determine that he cannot win the nomination. He's the winner of the Ohio election, in my view, but Kenneth Blackwell doesn't agree with my opinion.

The dullness in the old Gore is gone. He gets to play the Return of the King, clear-headed about Iraq and righteously angry at the wounds visited upon America by a stupid, brutal administration, namely Bush/Cheney -- the cheaters.

It's Gore's to lose if he wants it.

[Hippo_Tron]

38. I think that Gore is having too much fun not being president

I'm sure he's still pissed about having the election stolen from him and I'm sure that he's even more pissed when he thinks about how different everything would have been if he had become president.

That being said, I think at the same time he feels a sense of relief being out of elected office because it has allowed him to speak his mind without worry about the political consequences. Also, I think he's kind of glad the he doesn't have to deal with the stress of being president.

If Gore entered the race he would be one of my top choices. But honestly, I don't think that he will.

[saltpoint]

44. That could be. I wouldn't blame him either way.

But I know he was cheated by Bush/Cheney and I hope his voice continues to ring out the way it has.

[IndianaGreen]

28. Bayh and Vilsack are past and current leaders of DLC

They are also empty suits! Hillary is wrong about many things, but she is not an empty suit and she has considerable skills.

Russ is for US!

[FrenchieCat]

29. Oh....hell NO!......

Come On!

Feingold maybe.

The others? Bayh = Bye and Vilsack = Will Sack

[Cocoa]

32. "stop Hillary"

:eyes:

[leesa]

33. Vilsack and Bayh are garbage DLC/GOP

[HootieMcBoob]

34. Wes Clark

I mean...if we're interested in winning.

[Hippo_Tron]

39. Wes Clark is the strongest candidate that we have

He can't lose on defense which will get him the white women demographic and he would probably pick up an unprecedented number of veterans.

[Awsi Dooger]

35. We need to flip Florida, Ohio or Virginia

Period. The presidency is lost without at least one of those three. You're never going to pull off the straight flush of smaller states to win the electoral college minus one of those biggies.

Feingold, Vilsack and Bayh have less than 1% chance combined. Yeah, go ahead and condemn that handicap, but just make sure you're willing to remember your words come March 2008. Mine won't alter.

Mark Warner is the one candidate who reverses the electoral margin for error in our favor. If we ignore that in the 2008 primaries we'll probably lose another cliffhanger in November. Hillary or John Edwards would be very formidable nominees in what is destined to be an armageddon cliffhanger election given the history of elections after one party holds office exactly two terms. But I can't see Hillary or Edwards winning one of the three vital states I named, without at least a 2-3 point national popular vote margin, and that is extremely unlikely in 2008. We need to isolate the candidate who gives us the best electoral chance in a 50/50 popular vote atmosphere, and it's unquestionably Mark Warner.

[Hippo_Tron]

40. No, we need to flip the red states

You're right, we can't keep hoping for the straight flush of smaller states to win the electoral college. We also can't rely on Ohio, Florida, and Virginia especially considering the voting problems associated with two of those states. I'm not one of those people saying that don't bother voting, Diebold owns everything, but I will concede that it will be very hard to win a close election in Ohio and Florida.

What we need is not to win Ohio and Florida, we need a vast electoral re-alginment. We need to start competing in Arkansas, Louisiana, Arizona, Montana, Tennesee, Kentucky, West Virginia, North Carolina, and Virginia needs to be part of this as well. I'm not saying that we need to try and win Idaho and Utah, but when everything is concentrated into only a few states, the GOP always wins.

[LincolnMcGrath]

46. Feingold is my early favorite