jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:22 PM
Original message |
Dear Hillary and Edwards ---- |
|
The last time I checked this was still America. And everybody has a right to speak.
Just because some of the candidates are not being bought by Corporations and Lobbyist firms doesn't not make them LESS of a candidate than you.
How dare you think you are better than they are.
And just a little reminder . . . the elections are 15 1/2 months away. Plenty of time for your numbers to drop.
I have lost all respect for them.
|
Cameron27
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:24 PM
Response to Original message |
1. If it's true that they were saying that, |
|
I agree with you. They don't own the primary process no matter what their popularity is right now.
|
RufusTFirefly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:26 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I don't disagree with your sentiment, but... |
|
... what action or story has led you to start this thread?
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
Grey
(933 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:32 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Thats Ms. Clinton and Mr. Edwards to you.:evilgrin: Sory (The Canadian way of speaking) Translation, Sorry I didn't mean to offend, sory.
|
msongs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:32 PM
Response to Original message |
5. guess you won't be voting for anybody in the top 4 contenders nt |
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:34 PM
Response to Original message |
6. First...they did not mention names... |
|
So you don't know who they were talking about...
And Second, they are right in the sentiment...these "debates" are unwieldy, and Gravel and Kucinich are not serious candidates for the Presidency. I highly doubt they were talking about Richardson or Biden for that matter...
You also don't know what they had in mind...could be debates with different combinations of candidates...
And free speech has nothing to do with it...Gravel, Kucinich and whoever else are free to go off and have their own debates if they wish...there is no constitutional guarantee that they will be invited to every debate that is held just because they say they are a Presidential candidate...
|
Cameron27
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. The authority to change format lies with the DNC, no? |
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
11. If the DNC is a sponsor.... |
|
They don't sponsor all of them I don't believe...candidates are free to go to any forum they wish
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. I don't care if they were talking about Mike Gravel |
|
They ARE NOT better than him.
Each candidate brings a different perspective to the debate, and it's up for Americans to decide.
And besides, aren't Edwards poll numbers tanking? Maybe he should stay home.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
12. By that standard then... |
|
Edited on Thu Jul-12-07 10:58 PM by SaveElmer
I could declare I am a candidate, file my papers and then I should be invited?
No, this is not a matter of suffrage, or of one man one vote, the process we are going through is for the Party to decide who their candidate should be. There are no constitutional issues involved...each party is free to decide who gets nominated and by what method...
There is absolutely nothing preventing Gravel or whoever from getting someone to hold debate and exclude Hillary, Edwards and Obama...
|
illinoisprogressive
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:44 PM
Response to Original message |
8. I have come across a few news blurbs saying that was the discussion, I posted one earlier. |
|
I know many candidates are frustrated because the one minute thing is simply not enough time to really say anything of importance and it's reduced to soundbites. there is just so many running. But, they are all legit candidates with something of value to say. If someone is not in the top tier does not mean their ideas are any less.
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
10. Then maybe Joe Biden was right again. |
|
After the first debate, he suggested that they do a whole debate on one topic.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
13. Gravel and Kucinich are not legit candidates... |
|
Where do you draw the line? How would you define a "legit" candidate...
|
bigwillq
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
14. According to the rules/laws |
|
they are. If people are in such an uproar about some of these "minor" candidates, then they need to act to change the laws concerning primary candidates.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
|
There is no law that requires everyone that files papers running for President gets invited to debates...
|
bigwillq
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
16. But they are still a legit candidate |
|
at least imo and I think they all should be invited. I agree with you point above, where do we draw the line. But they're in the race now because there are no laws/rules that say they shouldn't be there and shouldn't be invited. Maybe there should be. Get something on record that does draw the line. Right now, they are in the race and they should be invited.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
20. Lets say the local Chamber want to hold a candidate debate... |
|
Is it your contention that they should be required to invite every single candidate? What if they only want to hear from Hillary, Obama and Edwards...should they not be allowed to do that?
|
bigwillq
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
24. They should extend the invitation until at least |
|
after a primary has been held and then if they want to single out candidates then they should have a debate and invite only the top 3 from that primary.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
|
They have free speech rights too right?
|
bigwillq
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #26 |
|
until a primary is held that narrows the field, I think they should ask the nine candidates to every debate. Why let the media or the sponsors dictate to the American people who they think we should vote for? If they narrow the field without even a primary being held, then they (the Media and sponsors) are esstentially telling us: You have choices but just these three choices. That's not right.
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #31 |
33. but why are you narrowing it down to "the nine"? |
|
There are candidates you've never heard of running for President.
|
bigwillq
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
40. I am well aware of that |
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #40 |
55. but you didn't answer |
|
why "the nine"? There are dozens running. Why do you draw the line there?
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #31 |
34. Well again, by that standard they already are... |
|
There are literally dozens of people filed to run for President...
And they are not narrowing the choices...if Kucinich, Gravel etc are as legit as you say, they should not have any trouble finding someone to sponsor a debate for them as well...
It is not required that every group carry failing candidates...Kucinich and Gravel in particular are not going to be elected President...very few hold any delusion that they will be. Sorry, but I want to hear from those with the best chance. Right now I would exclude those two if I were sponsoring a debate...
|
penguin7
(962 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:49 PM
Original message |
What criteria are you using? |
|
Kucinich came in the top three in the last two moveon.org polls.
But you would have him excluded.
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:50 PM
Response to Original message |
38. a moveon poll is meaningless |
penguin7
(962 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #38 |
42. Why is a movon.org poll not legit? |
|
Or should we use special interest donations?
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #42 |
43. because it's not a real poll |
|
Edited on Thu Jul-12-07 11:56 PM by MonkeyFunk
it's a straw poll for one organization.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:54 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Groups can use any criteria they want...viability is a big one...Kucinich is not a viable candidate...Gravel is not a viable candidate...the dozens of others that have filed to run as Democrats that you have never heard of are not viable candidates....
Personally, if I were arranging a debate at this point I would not invite Kucinich or Gravel...
But there is nothing preventing MoveOn from holding a debate of the three top candidates in its poll...
|
penguin7
(962 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #41 |
44. Judging from DU, there is a hell of a lot of interest in Kucinich |
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #44 |
45. and like a moveon poll |
|
that factoid is meaningless.
|
penguin7
(962 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #45 |
47. What factoids are you using? Special interest money |
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #47 |
50. Surely you understand |
|
the difference between a poll and a straw poll.
If you poll Mike Gravel's family, he comes in the top 2. Is that a good enough criterion?
|
penguin7
(962 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #50 |
51. So you want to decide the election by MSM Polls? |
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #51 |
52. Groups sponsoring debates can use whatever criteria they want... |
|
And candidates are free to attend whatever debates they want...if MOveOn.org wanted to hold a debate between Gravel and Kucinich they are certainly free to do so for example...
|
penguin7
(962 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #52 |
53. So you want CNN and MSNBC to winnow the field? |
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #53 |
54. There are many gauges of viability... |
|
Poll performance, fundraising, past success etc...
There are no laws governing this, no rules codifying what people the NAACP are required to invite to their debate...
If David Duke filed as a Democrat and plopped down his 5K to file with the FEC, should there then be a requirement that the NAACP invite him to their forum?
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #51 |
56. that's one possible measure |
|
but I'm not the one proposing specific rules.
I'm curious what rules YOU would use to narrow down the field? Or do you believe the dozens of people running are all equal? Do you want to see a debate with 60-some people?
|
jefferson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
17. To say they are not "viable" is a near cetainty. To say they are "not serious" or "illegitimate" |
|
Edited on Thu Jul-12-07 11:10 PM by jefferson_dem
is another thing entirely.
Just because those not in the top-tier are not likely to win does not mean they have nothing meaningful to contribute.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
|
But it does not then follow that they should be invited to every single candidate forum held....
There is absolutely nothing preventing Kucinch, Gravel or any other candidate from getting someone to sponsor a debate that excludes Hillary, Edwards, or anybody...
If they are legit, that should not be a problem.
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
23. They filed the same paperwork that Preparation H has. |
|
They have gone thru the same process.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
25. So if you file papers that entitles you to a place at every debate...?..nt |
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
27. and file papers where? |
|
There isn't a single national registry of candidates. Candidates have to get on ballots in all 50 states.
As I've said, there are literally dozens, if not scores, of people who have "filed" somewhere to run for President. They're not all equal.
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #27 |
30. When you run, you need to file a statement of candidacy with the FEC |
|
unless you don't spend more than 5000 of your own funds.
I believe Nader was the only one that ran and didn't file because he stayed under the 5k figure.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
32. So its about how much money one spends... |
|
So anyone who spends 5000 or more should be invited?
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
35. Here are the people who have filed as dems |
|
C00423640 PRESIDENT WARREN RODERICK ASHE NEWPORT NE VA DEM P P 00 President C00431205 JOHN EDWARDS FOR PRESIDENT CHAPEL HIL NC DEM P P 00 President C00431577 RICHARDSON FOR PRESIDENT INC. ALBUQUERQU NM DEM P P 00 President C00202176 WILLIE CARTER FOR PRESIDENT COMMITT FT WORTH TX DEM P P 00 President C00345454 PRESIDENT WARREN RODERICK ASHE NEWPORT NE VA DEM A P C00384123 GEPHARDT FOR PRESIDENT INC. Washington DC DEM P P 00 President C00388165 COLEMAN FOR PRESIDENT 2004 HARRISBURG PA DEM P P 00 President C00406835 JOHN JOSEPH KENNEDY FOR PRESIDENT/F ATLANTA GA DEM P P C00423202 MIKE GRAVEL FOR PRESIDENT 2008 ARLINGTON VA DEM P P 00 President C00391441 FOR DARREL REECE HUNTER AS UNITED S AMARILLO TX DEM P P 00 President C00391680 RAYMOND FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE WEST BLOOM MI DEM P P 00 President C00386417 DRAFTMARTIN SHEEN FOR PRESIDENT SAN DIEGO CA DEM U I C00331207 JOHN JONES FOR PRESIDENTIAL PHILA PA DEM P P 00 President C00336099 THOMAS WINTERBOTTOM FOR PRESIDENT RALEIGH NC DEM P P C00339259 MICHAEL DWAYNE JENKINS (D)2000 DEMO UPPER MARL MD DEM A P C00352864 MR ALFONZO JONES FOR PRESIDENT OF U NEW YORK NY DEM P P C00356337 ANGUS W MCDONALD FOR PRESIDENT COMM CHARLES TO WV DEM P P 00 President C00211771 COMMITTEE TO ELECT MR ALFONZO JONES DET MI DEM P P 00 President C00300475 LAWRENCE FREDERICK BROWNSTEIN FOR P VAN NUYS CA DEM A P 00 President C00333997 BARNECK FOR PRESIDENT 2000 LONG BEACH CA DEM P P 00 President C00251017 KOLLEL CHAVERIM FOR MOSHE FRIEDMAN STATEN ISL NY DEM P P 00 President C00256941 JIM BOREN FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE TAHLEQUAH OK DEM P P 00 President C00258889 HIGGINBOTHAM FOR PRESIDENT CAMPAIGN DALLAS TX DEM P P 00 President C00258913 SIMMONS FOR PRESIDENT OF THE U S A STERLING AK DEM P P 00 President C00306597 TATE FOR U S PRESIDENT PETERSBURG VA DEM P P 00 President C00314534 POLAND FOR PRESIDENT ALEXANDRIA VA DEM P P 00 President C00211169 CHILDERS-WINDSOR FOR PRESIDENT ROANOKE VA DEM P P 00 President C00219469 NANCY DAVIS REAGAN LITE FOR PRESIDE RALEIGH NC DEM P P 00 President C00253914 BROWN FOR PRESIDENT SANTA MONI CA DEM P P 00 President C00305847 COMMITTEE TO ELECT MRS FRANK ROSS S PIEDMONT AL DEM P P C00309799 OSCAR SMITH JR AS PRESIDENT OF THE BROOKLYN NY DEM P P 00 President C00309807 JIM GRIFFIN FOR PRESIDENT ORCHARD PA NY DEM P P 00 President P60000171 BENTSEN, LLOYD M JR (VICE PRESIDENT MCCOOK TX DEM 8 8 00 President C00251744 ROBERTS FOR PRESIDENT STERLING CT DEM P P 00 President C00431916 BIDEN FOR PRESIDENT INC WILMINGTON DE DEM P P 00 President P00003715 ASHE, WARREN R PRESIDENT NEWPORT NE VA DEM 0 8 00 President C00382846 LUCIAN WOJCIECHOWSKI PRESIDENTIAL C SALTON CIT CA DEM P P 00 President C00384081 JAMES PRATTAS FOR PRESIDENT KAILUA-KON HI DEM P P C00385088 ZYCH FOR PRESIDENT CLEVELAND OH DEM P P 00 President C00408559 FLYNN FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008 COMMITT PHOENIX AZ DEM P P C00419176 MR ALFONZO JONES FOR PRESIDENT OF U LOS ANGELE CA DEM P P C00428599 MERCER FOR PRESIDENT HOUSTON TX DEM P P 00 President C00387027 PATRICK CAZNEAU FOR PRESIDENT NORWAY ME DEM P P 00 President C00320861 GUY VIRGIL HOUSTON JR FOR PRESIDENT MIAMI FL DEM P P 00 President C00327536 COMMITTEE TO ELECT MITCHELL MATTHEW LAKE WORTH FL DEM P P 00 President C00346510 BEN J TOMED FOR U S PRESIDENT NASHVILLE TN DEM P P 00 President C00113795 NEVADA COMMITTEE TO ELECT SHOFNER P LAS VEGAS NV DEM P P 00 President C00300186 PHILLIPS FOR PRESIDENT WASHINGTON DC DEM P P 00 President C00324970 LAWRENCE F BROWNSTEIN COMMITTEE FOR VAN NUYS CA DEM P P 00 President C00216200 VICK FOR PRESIDENT MEMPHIS TN DEM P P 00 President C00218081 JOHNNIE RILEY FOR PRESIDENT COMMITT HOUSTON TX DEM A P 00 President C00253690 CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT INC LITTLE ROC AR DEM A P C00257675 JOSEPH E HOLCOMB FOR PRESIDENT LAS VEGAS NV DEM P P 00 President C00260596 VERA WATTS FOR PRESIDENT OF THE U S LANSING MI DEM P P C00306688 CAPLETTE FOR PRESIDENT GLENDALE AZ DEM P P C00313460 CHARLES R DOTY FOR PRESIDENT TULSA OK DEM P P 00 President C00333567 PRESIDENT'S CALIFORNIA MAJORITY FUN WASHINGTON DC DEM J Y C00164350 COMMITTEE TO ELECT GEORGE RODEN PRE WACO TX DEM P P 00 President C00215087 COMMITTEE TO ELECT ERIC LINDSAY PRI DETROIT MI DEM P P 00 President C00301762 CASEY FOR PRESIDENT EXPLORATORY COM SCRANTON PA DEM P P 00 President C00307892 DR SCHOENFELD-FOR-PRESIDENT CAMPAIG SCARSDALE NY DEM P P 00 President C00433649 CHRISTINA GERASIMOS BILLINGS-ELIAS BEVERLY HI CA DEM P P 00 President C00431379 CHRIS DODD FOR PRESIDENT INC WEST HARTF CT DEM P P 00 President C00341818 BILL BRADLEY FOR PRESIDENT INC Princeton NJ DEM P P 00 President C00383653 JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT INC Washington DC DEM A P 00 President C00388496 CAMPAIGN FOR HELEN WILLIAMS U S PRE JACKSON MS DEM P P 00 President C00392878 WILL BLAKLEY FOR PRESIDENT RANLO NC DEM P P C00400473 HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT 2008 SAUSALITO CA DEM U I C00378919 SHERRY A MEADOWS FOR PRESIDENT ARLINGTON TX DEM P P 00 President C00385344 BOB GRAHAM FOR PRESIDENT INC Miami Lake FL DEM P P 00 President C00391565 CECILIA M HARDING FOR PRESIDENT COM MIAMI FL DEM P P 00 President C00390468 DRAFT HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT 2004 ARLINGTON VA DEM U I C00214403 CHRISTIANS FOR CLEGG FOR PRESIDENT DEL CITY OK DEM A P 00 President C00325233 GEORGE H BALLARD III FOR PRESIDENT PHILADELPH PA DEM P P 00 President C00350389 PETERS FOR PRESIDENT JACKSON NH DEM P P 00 President C00252841 DEAN ADAMS CURTIS FOR PRESIDENT VENICE CA DEM P P 00 President C00314369 PENNELL FOR PRESIDENT MITCHELLVI MD DEM P P 00 President C00231381 COMMITTEE FOR JOHN HANCOCK ABBOTT F SANTA CLAR CA DEM A P 00 President C00302158 KEN YEAGER FOR PRESIDENT SEATTLE WA DEM P P C00303537 FRIENDS OF GEORGE G BRITT JR PRESID PHILA PA DEM P P 00 President C99001166 COMMITTEE FOR ALTERNATIVES TO DEMOC DES MOINES IA DEM U I C00147298 HAMRE FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE SPRINGFIEL MA DEM P P 00 President C00167924 SUSAN DAKIN: AN ARTIST FOR PRESIDEN RANCHO SAN CA DEM P P 00 President C00208546 BLYTH DAYLONG'S PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAI NEENAH WI DEM P P 00 President C00214908 CITIZENS FOR GRIFFIN FOR PRESIDENT JACKSON MS DEM P P 00 President C00217844 MARRA FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE WEST MILFO NJ DEM P P 00 President C00257253 SHERRY A MEADOWS FOR PRESIDENT COMM ARLINGTON TX DEM P P C00305946 COMMITTEE TO ELECT OSIE THORPE PRES WASH DC DEM P P C00254250 KERREY FOR PRESIDENT WASHINIGTO DC DEM P P 00 President C00432898 JAMES PRATTAS FOR PRESIDENT 2008 KAMUELA HI DEM P P 00 President C00434175 COMMITTEE TO ELECT DORY FRANK FOR P LOS ANGELE CA DEM P P 00 President C00434597 THOMAS FOR PRESIDENT JAMESVILLE WI DEM P P 00 President C00384149 PAID FOR BY THE COMMITTEE BECK FOR INDEPENDEN MO DEM P P 00 President C00384347 ADAM SAFRAN FOR PRESIDENT RESEDA CA DEM P P 00 President C00384644 BECK FOR PRESIDENT OJAI CA DEM P P 00 President C00385146 KUCINICH FOR PRESIDENT INC. Columbus OH DEM A P 00 President C00389106 KEN HILL 2004 PRESIDENTIAL COMMITTE SIMPSONVIL SC DEM P P 00 President C00390898 CLARK FOR PRESIDENT INC. LITTLE ROC AR DEM P P 00 President C00415679 LAURA DAVIS AARON PRESIDENTAIL COMM MEMPHIS TN DEM A P 00 President C00429696 SAVIOR: US PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE D MINNEAPOLI MN DEM P P C00430306 TOM VILSACK FOR PRESIDENT DES MOINES IA DEM P P 00 President C00430975 KUCINICH FOR PRESIDENT 2008 INC COLUMBUS OH DEM P P 00 President C00387332 WILL BLAKLEY FOR PRESIDENT RANLO NC DEM A P C00172239 JESSE JACKSON FOR PRESIDENT WYNDMOOR PA DEM A P C00345462 PRINCE EDWARD GIBSON FOR PRESIDENT COCOA FL DEM P P 00 President C00355172 VERA WATTS FOR PRESIDENT OF US OF A LANSING MI DEM P P 00 President C00212365 GEPHARDT FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE IN WASHINGTON DC DEM P P C00247254 CULLEN MEYER FOR PRESIDENT NAVARRE OH DEM P P 00 President C00159392 CRANSTON FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE IN NY NY DEM P P 00 President C00213017 BABBITT FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE PHOENIX AZ DEM P P 00 President C00251538 COMMITTEE TO ELECT STUART M STARKY LAS VEGAS NV DEM P P 00 President C00252460 MARGOT HOLCOMB FOR PRESIDENT OF THE LAS VEGAS NV DEM A P 00 President C00255299 CHRIS NORTON FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTE NEW YORK NY DEM P P 00 President C00255935 K E KLAMMER FOR PRESIDENT 1992 GERMANTOWN NY DEM P P 00 President C00261420 JOHNNIE RILEY FOR PRESIDENT COMMITT HOUSTON TX DEM P P 00 President C00299693 FIGUEROA FOR PRESIDENT WASHINGTON DC DEM P P C00307470 PRESIDENT JUST FOR YOU BALTIMORE MD DEM P P 00 President C00108407 CARTER/MONDALE PRESIDENTIAL COMMITT WASHINGTON DC DEM A P 00 President C00165332 JOHN PAUL MASTERS JR FOR PRESIDENT KIRKVILLE IA DEM P P 00 President C00176511 GRAYSON FOR PRESIDENT 1988 DAVIE FL DEM A P 00 President C00200022 GEORGE BRITT JR FOR PRESIDENT 1988 PHILA PA DEM P P 00 President C00200212 COTNER FOR PRESIDENT BIXBY OK DEM P P 00 President C00214742 PAUL SIMON FOR PRESIDENT WASHINGTON DC DEM P P 00 President C00299966 STERN FOR PRESIDENT BRADENTON FL DEM P P 00 President C00303479 JOHN SAFRAN FOR PRESIDENT CLIFFORD MI DEM P P 00 President C00311654 NATIONAL COMMITTEE TO ELECT TED L G LAS VEGAS NV DEM P P 00 President C00140459 FOR PRESIDENT KIP LEE REDDING CA DEM P P C00273326 GET A SLIGH PRESIDENT IN 92 COMMITT MYRTLE BEA SC DEM P P 00 President C00431569 HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT EXPLO Washington DC DEM P P 00 President C00217893 JESSE JACKSON FOR PRESIDENT '88 COM WASHINGTON DC DEM P P 00 President C00336982 AL HAMBURG FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008 TORRINGTON WY DEM P P 00 President C00384073 EDWARDS FOR PRESIDENT Ringgold GA DEM A P 00 President C00384297 JOE LIEBERMAN FOR PRESIDENT INC Washington DC DEM P P 00 President C00384743 JOHN ESTRADA FOR PRESIDENT 2004 LAS VEGAS NV DEM P P 00 President C00426981 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE FOR DENVER CO DEM P P 00 President C00383935 SAVIOR U S PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE D MINNEAPOLI MN DEM P P 00 President C00390872 THOMAS WINTERBOTTOM FOR PRESIDENT POTTSTOWN PA DEM P P 00 President C00364620 MCFADDIN FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE BEVERLY HI CA DEM P P 00 President C00380329 FOR PRESIDENT KIP LEE REDDING CA DEM P P C00298042 COMMITTEE TO ELECT DR HEATHER ANNE CROWN POIN IN DEM P P 00 President C00306548 PAULING FOR PRESIDENT TAMPA FL DEM P P 00 President C00350660 COMMITTEE TO ELECT JIM TAYLOR PRESI ST PAUL MN DEM P P C00251025 BOCHURIM FOR MOSHE FRIEDMAN FOR PRE STATEN ISL NY DEM A P 00 President C00254979 MALLOY FOR PRESIDENT IN '92 CONCORD CA DEM P P C00256065 PAT MAHONEY FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE WASHINGTON DC DEM P P 00 President C00299958 STEVE MICHAEL PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN WASHINGTON DC DEM P P 00 President C00302836 NEW DEMOCRAT/96 PAUL JENSEN DEMOCRA A A MI DEM P P 00 President C00310730 RONALD R HIRSCH FOR PRESIDENT COMMI MILWAUKEE WI DEM P P 00 President C00312405 SANDRA NOBLE FOR PRESIDENT WASHINGTON DC DEM P P C00303545 DRAFT AL GORE FOR PRESIDENT VOTER'S SANFORD FL DEM U I C00172890 ANDREW PORTER FOR PRESIDENT COMMITT TUTTLE OK DEM P P 00 President C00211789 LADNER FOR PRESIDENT '88 C/C LONG BEACH MS DEM P P 00 President C00214155 MILDRED GLOVER FOR PRESIDENT ATLANTA GA DEM P P 00 President C00215103 ELECT SNOW LITE FOR PRESIDENT RALEIGH NC DEM P P 00 President C00216085 ELECT VANNA LITE FOR PRESIDENT RALEIGH NC DEM P P 00 President C00217836 WILLIAM KING FOR PRESIDENT NAPLES FL DEM P P 00 President C00315002 LEGAS-96 PRESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE FULLERTON CA DEM P P 00 President C00214213 DUKAKIS FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE, IN NEWTON MA DEM A P C00252387 GENE SMITH FOR PRESIDENT SO LAKE TA CA DEM P P 00 President C00254227 AGRAN FOR PRESIDENT 92 IRVINE CA DEM P P 00 President C00431999 JOHN JOSEPH KENNEDY FOR PRESIDENT 2 ATLANTA GA DEM P P 00 President C00432021 RYAN BRADY COUP D'ETAT PRESIDENTIAL BOZEMAN MT DEM P P 00 President C00436246 PHIL EPSTEIN FOR PRESIDENT CARLSBAD CA DEM P P 00 President
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #35 |
36. Candidates...how would you end the war in Iraq? |
|
Limit your answer to 1 second please!!!
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #35 |
37. those date back to l992 - you didn't think all those names were for this election? |
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #37 |
|
Edited on Thu Jul-12-07 11:57 PM by MonkeyFunk
I spot-checked about 10 of 'em and got all 2006 or 2007. I'll try to refine the search.
edit: there's no way to refine the search by year.
But do you think those people all should've been included in the year they ran?
|
IndianaGreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
61. Legit according to whom? The DLC? Big Pharma? Big Health Insurance? War profiteers? AIPAC? |
|
Kucinich is the only candidate for single payer universal health insurance. Who will speak for the people if Kucinich is kept out of the debates by candidates that have sold themselves to the highest bidder?
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #61 |
64. What about the dozens of other candidates |
|
who have filed, but aren't in the debates? Do you feel as passionately about them?
|
IndianaGreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #64 |
67. Strawman argument made by those trying to control the nomination process |
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #61 |
66. MoveOn can hold a debate and eliminate all but Gravel and Kucinich... |
|
What's stopping them...
What bothers you is that people see through Kucinich's holier than thou act...and have no interest in supporting him...only fringe folks like you feel the need to insist he be included in these debates because you know otherwise he truly would be consigned to oblivion...
Kucinich is a kibitzer, constantly carping and whining from the sidelines while doing precisely nothing to progress towards the goals he says he wants to achieve....unaccomplished and unimportant...
|
IndianaGreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #66 |
69. The primary voters should decide who is viable candidate, not the DLC pukes |
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #69 |
70. If there is a God in heaven... |
|
Kucinich will lose his seat next year...voters in that district deserve a candidate that actually works for a living...
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:12 PM
Response to Original message |
18. there are literally dozens of candidates for President |
|
maybe hundreds. Do they all deserve to be on stage?
|
bigwillq
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
21. I think we had this discussion before |
|
and I think I said yes. So I'll be consistent and say yes again.
Which brings me again to my point, although I am having trouble putting my thoughts together, that there needs to be a change in rules/laws to define when a candidate becomes prevalent enough to participate in a debate.
If there are hundreds of people running for prez, then yes, essentially they all should be allowed to debate. Everyone who files should be allowed to have their say unless there is a rule/law on the books that limits participates based on say amount of money they raised or signatures acquired, or something to that extent.
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
|
it's whoever sponsors the debate.
But do you really think a debate with 73 candidates on stage would be useful? Productive? Meaningful?
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
28. Exactly...the party nomination process is by definition a Party matter... |
|
Parties can use whatever method they wish to select their candidates...that's why there are caucuses in Iowa and primaries in New Hampshire...for example.
|
MalloyLiberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:28 PM
Response to Original message |
29. You didn't see any video from Fox now did you |
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-12-07 11:57 PM
Response to Original message |
46. Ms Clinton and Mr Edwards need to read this |
|
...Because voters are not required to make a decision until election day, they remain open at this stage in the race to new information, alternative perspectives and late-breaking developments — all of which render today's poll results, to one degree or another, meaningless.
Consider this: More than two-thirds of the Democrats who voted in the 2004 Iowa caucuses didn't decide who to vote for until a month before the caucuses. Four in 10 decided in the last week. In 2004, 54% of New Hampshire Democrats decided within a week of the primary. It's no surprise, then, that in the 2004 election, John Kerry was lagging in third place until only a few weeks before the Iowa caucuses. Kerry then more than doubled his vote in Iowa and nearly quadrupled it in New Hampshire — all in less than 20 days.
Iowa's Republican caucus-goers are no different. In 1996, nearly a quarter chose their candidate on caucus night or in the preceding two days; fully 42% decided in the last 10 days. And in New Hampshire, only 12% of Republicans decided in 2000 who they would support in the primary before Jan. 1 of election year.
What a sobering thought. Millions raised, then spent, thousands of staffers, all the early spin, all the early endorsements, and all the early everything else consists mainly of campaigns trying to create metrics by which the media can measure their progress. Yet the reality is that there's not much value in the measurements at this stage of the game. .....
In 2003, this cycle nearly buried Kerry.
Let's face it: While money in the bank, a strong organization, a capable staff and a compelling message will be vital next year when early-primary-state voters start deciding, trying to measure the variables now, for a campaign that for most hasn't even started yet, can lead to a net loss of knowledge.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-murphy5jul05,0,6805499.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail
It's kinda like how everyone thought Dean was going to win the nomination, and the man that was registering 4% in the polls swept the primaries. It's too early to decide who is a serious candidate! And it's definitely not up to Hillary and John.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #46 |
|
If I file papers and spend above the $5000 required to file with the FEC, am I then a legitimate candidate and there should be a rule that every group hosting a debate be required to invite me?
|
Texas_Kat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #48 |
57. Which of the current candidate do YOU think don't deserve |
|
to be at the debates?
It's bad enough when the MSM does it on their own. To be pushed into it to eliminate some of our OWN candidates is ..... disgusting.
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #57 |
58. which ones do you think should be excluded? |
|
there are dozens who've filed.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #57 |
60. If I personally were holding a debate... |
|
Edited on Fri Jul-13-07 12:24 AM by SaveElmer
At this point I would not invite Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Laura Davis-Aaron, Michael Forrester,Dan Francis,Alfonzo Jones, John Joseph Kennedy, Karl Krueger, Sal Mohamed, Jim Prattas, and Ole Savior
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #60 |
62. I want Ole Savior there.... |
|
the MSM is trying to stifle him because he scares the corporatists.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #62 |
63. Well I want him too...he's from Minnesota... |
|
And I grew up in Minnesota...and i think he's Norwegian, and I'm part Norwegian...
Go Ole!!!
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #48 |
65. I don't know what the rules are - how did the field get narrowed down to 8 for Dems? |
|
I am not sure of what the procedure is.
But if a group or organization is hosting a debate and only wants to invite a certain number of candidates, that is up to them. It is not up to the candidates themselves on who should be excluded or included.
There was a religious forum last month that only the present top 3 were invited to.
I know you support Hillary, but do you really think what she said was right? I support Biden, and there are times when I want to smack him. Like when he made a snippy comment about Moveon.org...I emailed his campaign and told them to tell him to never say anything negative about Moveon again, what a great organization they are, and how they can make him or break him.
Gotcha politics are here. They got caught saying something they shouldn't have.
The reason it hit a nerve with me is because it is too early for anyone to decide who is going to be the Dem nominee (just look at 2004) and it is not up to them who decides. It came off sounding arrogant on their part.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #65 |
68. Yeah I understand her and Edward's point exactly... |
|
I think what set it off today was Gravel, who violated the rules of the forum by directly addressing criticism to the other candidates, and they were unable, by the same rules to respond...
Gravel and in my opinion Kucinich add nothing to the debates but take time. If I were in charge of hosting a debate, right now I would not invite them...as time went by and it became apparent others were not truly viable I would winnow it down further...
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #68 |
73. I personally don't think that Gravel has a chance |
|
but he is running and deserves respect. He brings both comedy and honesty to the discussion. He is right when he calls out everyone that voted for the IWR. And Gravel did some great things when he was in the Senate.
Same with Kucinich. He is an idealist, and I wish the world could be as he sees it.
Until people start dropping out of the campaign, it is up to the hosts of the debates to decide who they want to invite.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #73 |
74. Well I think that is the point I've been making... |
|
The hosts can invite who they want, and the candidates can attend whatever debates they want...
There is no requirement that all candidates be invited to all debates...otherwise there would be 30 people on that stage...
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #74 |
77. And that's the point I've been making - that it is up to the hosts |
|
not the other candidates.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #77 |
|
They will just refrain from going to debates not to their liking...
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #73 |
75. dozens of people are running |
|
that you've never heard of. Do they all deserve to be on the stage?
|
Like It Is
(495 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #46 |
59. Hillary and Edwards have the same hat size. |
tired_old_fireman
(323 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:00 AM
Response to Original message |
49. This is such a petty thing to get upset about in my opinion. |
|
Everyone running in the primaries wants to win. The way to win is for the field to get winnowed.
If you asked anyone on that stage if they wanted a couple less of their competitors in the debate, they would all say 'yes.' If you asked anyone on that stage if Gravel had a chance of winning the nomination, they would all say 'no'...maybe Gravel would say 'yes,' but I doubt it.
|
jsamuel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:44 AM
Response to Original message |
71. Edwards said "in the Fall", which would be 3 months before the primary at most |
|
Edited on Fri Jul-13-07 12:55 AM by jsamuel
Clinton seemed to want to do it ASAP.
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #71 |
72. First...15 1/2 months is to the general election... |
|
It is only 6 months to the primary...and 2 I listened to the tape a few times and your interpretation is wishful thinking trying to wiggle Edwards out of the issue...
|
jsamuel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #72 |
76. I am not doing anything. He did say he wanted do this sometime in the Fall. |
|
How can you deny that, he says it right there.
It is the first line quoted by fox.
"At some point ... (unint) ... maybe in the Fall..."
|
SaveElmer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #76 |
79. Hillary didnot say anything in terms of timing.. |
jsamuel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-13-07 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #79 |
80. your right, she did not use timing terms |
|
To me, it sounded like she wanted it done ASAP, but it is definitely subjective.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 11th 2024, 08:54 AM
Response to Original message |