Poll Question: Which Dem can actually WIN the general election?

[Nikki Stone1]

There has been a lot of discussion about the DLC domination of political campaigns over the past few elections. The DLC clearly has ideas about which candidates can win and with what message. The progressive base, on the other hand, wants a different kind of candidate. The fact that Kucinich (my personal fave) wins in straw polls here clearly demonstrates that. But I wonder if we really think that Dennis (or other very progressive candidates) can win.

So the question is: Who can actually WIN the general election in 08?

[Bucky]

1. As your poll question implies, only one candidate can actually win.

What a shame that we don't all lockstep-agree on which sole solitary candidate is the one who can actually win.

Man, diversity of opinion will kill this party. We MUST quit all thinking for ourselves.
.

[Nikki Stone1]

12. "Who" can be plural. There might be several possible candidates

I was curious to see how people thought about this and not trying to stifle dissent.

[Bucky]

14. "Who" can be plural, but the poll only allows each person to choose one candidate.

It's a roundabout and less accurate way of asking who do you support? But given the format, there's no way this poll can answer the question you've actually asked.

[Nikki Stone1]

15. Actually looking at trends more than anything else.

Thanks, though.

[Honeycombe8]

27. Yes. I can't answer the poll, unless I can check on several. Clearly, several candidates could win

And whether each could win depends on who the Repub candidate is. But any of the Dem top contenders could win the G.E.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. If the Dems can't win in '08 with any candidate, they should disolve for sheer incompetance.

As deplorable as some of the candidates are, even they should be able to whip any Republican.

With the exception of the the real knuckle-draggers and religious fanatics, even the most apathetic Americans realize that the Republicans have made a hash of everything from Iraq to Katrina to what passes as honest government.

[iamjoy]

3. Dennis Could Win

maybe, if he looked like John Edwards.

Kucinich has great ideas. I see him as very noble and very principled. However, I also believe Kucinich is slightly to the left of mainstream America. This wouldn't really be a problem if he were a good salesperson and looked the part. Sadly, Kucinich does not. He talks about peace and a lot of people like the idea of peace. But coming from some one who does not project an aura of strength leaves him vulnerable to charges of being weak. Americans want some one who talks peace but leaves no doubt he (or she) would (effectively) use force if necessary to defend America. Sadly, I don't think people get this message from Kucinich. I think Obama sends this particular message well.

It's a sad thing, a politician must be a good salesperson to get his message across to Americans. But, when a politician is a little too good at promoting, he gets bashed as "slick." They did this with Bill Clinton and now are doing it with John Edwards.

There is another reason the truly principled don't get elected. They will always speak the truth, even if it pisses off people. I mean, Ron Paul is another example of this. The truly principled will never get elected because they will be choosy about the money they take, and when you need $100 million to get noticed in a Presidential Primary, you can't be all that particular about how you get it.

[Bucky]

8. "truly principled" = people I agree with. "special interest sell outs" = people I disagree with.

Overall I agree with you, but I'm not ready to dismiss everyone who wins elections as unprincipled. Being able to work with opponents, IOW compromising, is a pretty important principle too, after all.

[iamjoy]

11. Good Point

Perhaps truly principled is not the most accurate term as is would imply anyone else has no principles or is a sell out, which is not my intent. I don't mean to dismiss anyone who wins as unprincipled. I am actually a big proponent of compromising. But, that's pragmaticism speaking, not idealism. The grassroots bases of each major party seem to be idealistic. Most of the candidates are pragmatic.

[Tejanocrat]

35. Dennis rocked tonight (and every night)

[WiseButAngrySara]

4. Edwards and Al. ....n/t

[splat]

5. Interesting order there...

Al as VP could handle climate change and the Internet, John as Potus could handle economy, withdrawal, etc. I like it. (John would give livelier SOTU speeches, etc.)

[Bucky]

9. Gore may or may not run for president. He will absolutely not run for VP again.

Jesus and Elvis could come down in a cloud and demand he take the second spot again and Gore would still say no.

[dave_p]

6. Most of them can win

I voted Kucinich because he's the progressive who many people think can't win.

He can, if the party backs him and fights on a truly progressive platform.

Not only can he win, but his message of fighting the Republican agenda to the very core gives the party the weapon to break through the lies that stifle meaningful politics.

Enough of being wrongfooted at every turn because we accepted the premises and just opposed the means. Don't accept any of it.

A fight on the fundamental issues rather than policy details gives the party the chance to take back the playing field like it did under FDR. I want 20 years, not 4-8.

And 2008's the time to do it, with the GOP more discredited than at any time since 1932.

[Poiuyt]

7. Obama, Edwards, and Gore (if he runs)

I think if Hillary wins the nomination, there will be a huge voter turnout on the Republican side to vote against her.

[RestoreGore]

10. Depends on what system we are talking about

The one we have now where soundbites, kickbacks, special interests, and money trumps everything else, or one that actually supports good people of reason which we now don't have. If it's the former which is what we have now, it certainly isn't anyone who has morals and speaks out against the status quo.

[Nikki Stone1]

13. I hope that morals and principles aren't out completely

I have to say that I would love to see a strong progressive candidate win. (I'd like to see a Kucinich/Boxer ticket myself). I am wondering, though, if someone like Edwards could carry the progressive message successfully and CARRY THROUGH (ie, not sell us out.)

[JohnLocke]

16. Edwards, Richardson, Obama, Dodd, Gore, Clark, Biden

[illinoisprogressive]

17. head to heads usually have obama winning over all repukes. none of the others did

[me b zola]

18. Other: Gore, Obama, and Edwards

Obama already beats all rePublicans in head to head match-ups. I believe that Edwards could do the same. I don't think that they have polled Gore against the rePublicans, but if they did I believe that he already has the numbers to beat anything that the gop could pull out of their...err...hat.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

19. Edwards. Gore, Richardson, Clark

n/t

[MrSlayer]

20. Gore if he runs. Clark if he runs.

Maybe Edwards, Maybe Richardson.

[Nikki Stone1]

21. How about post debate?

?

[Colobo]

22. Remove those candidates who are NOT running and then we can talk.

[BlooInBloo]

23. There's no such thing as a candidate who isn't running.

[LSK]

25. John Kerry isnt running

[BlooInBloo]

And he isn't a candidate. Wanna do another round? lol!

[LSK]

30. why do you hate America?

:P

:hide:

[BlooInBloo]

32. I hate freedom. I suck. :)

[LSK]

24. The Big 3 + Gore n/t

[ElizabethDC]

28. Agreed. n/t

[TahitiNut]

26. Election 2008 is the Democrats' to lose - the GOP can't win unless the Dems take a dive.

Sadly, I think the corporatist vs. populist divide in the Democratic Party certainly shows the former is willing to sabotage it if they don't get their way.

[Egnever]

29. Other is the answer

Our feild is strong. Many of them could win it IMHO

[Blackhatjack]

31. IMHO Edwards and Gore would be "Repub Killers" in the General Election n/t

[Czolgosz]

36. True, but Kucinich is RIGHT on EVERY issue.

[dusmcj]

33. The Pubes are intellectually bankrupt and tards on policy - hit them there

Whoever it is, won't beat the Pubes by having savvier media handlers, or the "progressive" version of that, higher blogging bandwidth. The Republicans are about at the level of single-celled organisms in the realm of objective policy content, you know that stuff that requires rational thought based on factual knowledge. The American people understand this even if they don't know it yet (well, at least a voting majority of the American people understand this). The only way a Democrat will win in 2008 is making the Republicans fight us on our ground, rather than trying to fight them on theirs (gesture politics a la the last 25 years).

[napi21]

34. As of now, Clinton, Obama, Edwards, or Biden...any of them could win!

I'm not willing to narrow it down any more than that right now. It's way too early. A few weeks ago I would have included Richardson in that group, but I've been disappointed in his performance, not only in the two debates, but when he was on MTP last week.

It could be amazing what events that are completely uncontrolable by the candidates could do to this campaign over the next 7-8 months!