Who should we nominate in 2008?

[BlueAwards]

Should we nominate someone completely in line with our values as democrats, or compromise on someone who we feel has a better chance at getting elected?

[saltpoint]

1. "We" means a lot of different kinds of voters. There are Bayh Dems,

Biden Dems, Clinton Dems, Gore Dems, Kucinich Dems, Clark Dems, and so on.

People are going to have their favorites going into the primaries.

But only one of the candidates is going to come out of that convention with the delegate total to win the nomination.

I plan to support that candidate and that ticket, and let's kick a few red butts out there.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. FOCUS ON NOVEMBER 2006!!!

[bdamomma]

5. this is what we should focusing on

November 2006 get out there and VOTE.

[BlueAwards]

6. Good point....

I should have phrased the question to include all candidates.

[Kerry fan]

3. I am a Kerry/Gore dem. Or, Gore/Kerry.

Or, Kerry/Clark if Gore doesn't want to run.

All the others just really seem Not ready for prime time. In the general of course it will be ATAR...Anyone That Ain't Republican. LOL

[RethugAssKicker]

4. Gore/Feingold.... thats the ticket !

[zann725]

12. Either Kerry/Gore or Kerry/Feingold are fine by me...

Though if some are still considering Women Prez/VP (i.e. Hilary), there IS always Barbara Boxer...

Choices, REAL choices....we have 'em...at last!

[Jai4WKC08]

7. I vote "other"

Oops, you don't have an "other" to choose. ;)

I'm closest to number three. I do think we can find someone with has both values and a good chance of winning. I think it's the guy I support (but that a topic for another day).

The way I see it is, you pick your candidate based on progressive values, but electability gets a veto. If the guy or gal you like best doesn't stand a decent chance of winning, you go to the next best on the list. He or she may not be ideal, but the best candidate is worthless if he/she can't get into office. And another Repub as president is the worst possible result.

Old Russian saying: Best is the enemy of good enough.

Besides, we have lots of great Democrats on the national stage right now. Some are better than others... some are a LOT better. But most of them would be fairly good presidents and almost any of 'em are better than the best Republican.

Now, back to 2006....

[Jack Rabbit]

8. We could go with the incumbant Democrat in the White House

Unless Nancy Pelosi decides to step down after serving as a caretaker President.

[MH1]

9. Best.answer.yet!

:thumbsup:

[Jai4WKC08]

10. Wonder who NP will select as her VP... n/t

[Jack Rabbit]

11. That could be a wild one

This is assuming that she will be elevated to the presidency about this time next year after the Senate convicts both Bush and Cheney in their impeachment trials.

One possibility that might be discussed would be picking a Republican for Vice President and forming a national unity government. The logic would run that Bush has been a divisive president and that it will take time and effort to heal the wounds of the last several years. Picking a few Republicans, at least from among the ones who are willing to turn on this crooked regime, would be a good gesture. Those who stick by Bush and Cheney to the bitter and continue to charge that to attack a "war-time" president is treason or argue for the Nixonian version of the unified executive theory need not apply.

Triumphalism may well be a mistake in this instance.