Ok. '08 presidential poll

[LWolf]

Poll question: Ok. '08 presidential poll

of candidates that would actually get my support; if you have an "other" that I don't know about, that fits this group well, I'd love to hear about him/her.

[MrModerate]

1. If we want to win . . .

Clinton or Edwards.

. . . if it's McCain on the other side. If the wingnuts drive McCain away, I don't see who they have who could beat Homer Simpson.

[LWolf]

4. They don't fit the profile given for other:

"Never, or rarely, proposed at DU." I want to hear about other worthy Democrats.

[MrModerate]

10. Sorry, my typing fingers engaged before my brain.

How about Warner?

[LWolf]

15. At first glance, no.

Has Warner always been a Democrat? His "yea" vote on the IWR resolution lists him as "R." Is that a typo?

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237

[J-Hen]

16. I think that's the wrong Warner

John Warner is a Republican senator. Mark Warner is the Democratic Governor. Though Governor Warner may have supported the war also.

[LWolf]

20. Thanks for the clarification!

That helps somewhat, lol. :hi:

[Clark2008]

45. Neither of those candidates has a chance

Hillary's too polarizing and is female, thus she won't flip a single red state - and may even lose a blue one or two (Pennsylvania comes to mind).

Edwards has no FP experience and, frankly, is seen as kinda "poofy" in the South and mid-West (again, flipping no red states).

In a wash, neither would win because we'll still be at war, in a new war or nation building and the mushy middle won't vote for a woman, period, or a man with no FP creds.

[longship]

2. No preference.

It's too damned early to be choosing anybody for 2008.

[LWolf]

3. I agree.

I just figured that, as long as there are people who are insistent about throwing names out there, we might as well have some worthy of more support than they get.

[MADem]

25. So, you are looking for a few SURPRISE DARK HORSES, then?

Ones that seemingly came out of left field, but have the guts and brains, as well as the sheer presence, to make a huge splash? Are you looking for buzz runners in a primary field, or winners?

OK, off the top of my head:

Bill Richardson
Dianne Feinstein
Mark Warner
Maxine Waters
John Conyers
Janet Napolitano
Robert Reich
Barney Frank
John Lewis

Any one of them could run well, and perhaps surprise, or serve as a VP on a ticket and carry their load.

[LWolf]

29. I'm looking for a winner outside

the current power brokers. John Conyers is on the list; Maxine Waters is a good addition. I'm not sure if the rest are quite far enough out in "left field" for me.

[MADem]

38. Barney Frank is probably THE SMARTEST GUY in Congress

He can debate anyone and WIN. He is SO SHARP, SO SMART, and he ALWAYS has his ducks in a row and his facts in order. Of course, he is gay and out and living his life, so he would have a massive burden to overcome with the fundies who think "those people" are the devil.

But I'd sleep easy if he were in charge. He consistently makes good decisions. Plus, he is thoughtful and caring. A helluva fellah!

Bill Richardson would be the first Hispanic president, or VP, if he ends up on the ticket. The way to know if he is running, or thinking about it, is to watch him. He tends towards the well-padded side; if he starts dieting, he's running...!

[LWolf]

40. Tell me where

Franks and Richardson stand on:

Iraq in particular, the "war on terror," and international relations in general
NCLB
Nafta/Cafta
Health Care
Privatization
Campaign/Election Reform

Those would be making or breaking points for my vote.

I've always appreciated that Franks was the first gay member of congress to be OUT.

My 8th graders, who come from a tiny, mostly white christian rural ranching community, have been openly discussing the first hispanic, or woman, president. They said they'd like to see one of their number become either, or both. I told them that I didn't believe we were going to have to wait that long. I don't know about an openly gay president; there are so many walls of fear and hate that would have to come down. If Barney Franks is the one to take that task on, though, and he is somewhere I can accept on the above issues, I'll be working for him.

[MADem]

41. See Barney's website, his issue statements are all online

http://www.house.gov/frank/issue.html

His Iraq issues are in the archives.

Richardson wants to exit Iraq: http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/22/1847207

As you know, he used to work for Clinton, so many of his policies will likely run in parallel with Bill. He's pushing for alternative energy development in his state of late. You can learn more about his state issues here: http://www.governor.state.nm.us/index2.php

[Clark2008]

46. Wes Clark

And I'll even say Mark Warner, even though his corporate/Bilderburg ties discust me.

But, they're both outside of the current power structure and both might have a chance to flip a red state or two needed to win.

[kevsand]

5. "that fits this group well"

Just so there's no confusion, what do you consider to be the common qualities this group possesses that earns your potential support?

[LWolf]

7. Good question.

I'll toss you just a couple:

All voted not to support the president's ambitions in Iraq.

All willing to stand up, speak up with more than empty rhetoric, and act when needed.

[Jack_Dawson]

6. You have Kucinich but not General Clark?!

This is why we keep losing elections. :spank:

[LWolf]

8. Yes, I have Kucinich.

I voted for him in this poll, and I campaigned and voted for him in the '04 primary. Clark does not fit the "... never, or rarely, proposed at DU" profile for "other," so I'm not going to discuss him in this thread.

[Selteri]

9. I'd like to see Kucinich as Veep.

Just because I could see Barbara Boxer with her recent increase of popularity take a step in and get the presidency.

[LWolf]

13. Kucinich/Boxer or Boxer/Kucinich

I'd be thrilled with either ticket.

[ixion]

12. would not vote for clark... he's no progressive

just my opinion, of course.

[Jack_Dawson]

18. Like I said...

That's why we keep losing elections. But hey that's cool. Happy Turkey Day! :beer:

[skipos]

28. Michael Moore thought otherwise.

Hmm... not a progressive?

Don't get me wrong, I am not a single issue voter nor a single candidate supporter. I like Clark but I do like others as well.

[AmericanDream]

51. Same here... he doesn't impress me a bit .... n/t

[Jaundice James]

11. Edwards! Or maybe Chuck Schumer...

except Chuck has the tendency to say some stupid shit sometimes. -JJ

[LWolf]

14. Well,

Edwards doesn't fit the "Other" profile: "... never, or rarely, proposed at DU."

I don't know much about Chuck Schumer, though. Feel free to inform me!

[CANDO]

17. John Murtha

Let's see how the swift boaters try to swift boat Jack Murtha.

[LWolf]

19. Tell me more about him.

I know he's a hawk turned dove; I appreciate his efforts to get our troops out of Iraq. I don't know much else about him, though.

[eridani]

37. The same way they attacked Kerry

Murtha would probably fight back more, though.

[welshTerrier2]

21. yikes ... i almost posted the same poll today myself ...

i decided it was better to continue ignoring the '08 obsession of some posters ...

but had i done it, i would have selected many of the same candidates you did ... btw, please add Congressman Jim McGovern to future polls ...

i never open these '08 polls but figured you had something more interesting to offer than the usual nonsense ... i wasn't disappointed ...

[LWolf]

22. Jim McGovern it is,

except that with the frequency I post polls, he may be retired before I do another.

Glad to catch your interest. ;-)

[MuseRider]

23. Well I don't suppose

it is any secret to you who I voted for!

If possible I am even more impressed with DK than I was the last election cycle. He just continues to bring it to them with truth and integrity. He has my continued support. There are others I like, and I like them a lot but Kucinich is my dream president. Let him say he is running and I am there.

I usually hate these threads but this one I just had to join. :hi:

[LWolf]

24. Lol

I usually avoid these threads, too. :hi:

I thought it might be nice to hear some discussion of some worthy people outside regular DU fandom. I'm sure you can figure out who I voted for. ;-)

[Kahuna]

26. Oh Yeah. Great list...

:wtf:

[LWolf]

27. Thanks!

I think it's a great list, too. :hi:

[ruggerson]

30. Warner or Schweitzer

either one works for me and either one would win.

[sarcasmo]

31. Clark/Boxer 08

[Jack_Dawson]

33. I could get with that...

:beer:

[BlueIris]

32. OK, here's a candidate I've never seen here before: Phil Bredesen.

Governor of Tennessee. Would some TN residents like to explain why he would be good as the Democratic nom? You might want to mention one economic factor that is unique to the state of TN right now.

[LWolf]

34. I'll be listening in.

I hope someone from TN responds.

[BlueIris]

35. Well, here's one thing I've noticed: although there isn't all that much

personal info on Bredesen on the web, I couldn't find any nasty scandals, either. Not like a candidate's personal life should be a factor, if you ask me, but a background without something highly controversial would be a plus. Yes, yes, I know our nom was unfairly picked on last time, (and please, especially as a JK fan, I don't want to start up that debate again) but even I must bitterly admit that a nom without some easy smear targets in his past would be nice. And, I'm thinking, based on the economic thing this governor has done for his state, which is unique and brave, from what little I've read, the neo-cons would be hard pressed to get anything dishonest on this guy. I'm not really qualified to talk about the economics, though. Someone from TN needs to hit this thread and give us the pros and cons of Bredesen's policies.

[BlueIris]

36. 'Kay, well, TN residents should still be our first resource, but:

Here's his wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Bredesen

And his website (one of the nicest I've ever seen, btw):

http://www.state.tn.us/governor/Welcome.do;jsessionid=cDesTnvIGt9f

[LWolf]

39. Interesting reads, both.

Thanks!

While reading well-crafted promotions for a particular candidate or program doesn't tell us what's underneath the advertisement, I saw some items that pique my interest, and a couple of concerns. I don't know how real those concerns are without getting to know him better.

The concerns include:

*several mentions of "public/private partnerships," which can be a nice way of saying "privatization."

*efforts to reduce those served by the state's public health care system, instead of find the funds to continue at present levels of service.

*"back to basics" curriculum for schools--while it may not be the case here, "back to basics" is common rhetoric for those who seek to take thinking out of school, and relegate it to rote memorization of fact and procedure.

On the other hand, there were several positives as well; enough to keep an eye on him!

[Clark2008]

47. I'm from Tennessee, but I can't see him being successful

on a national level as the head of the ticket.

He's a smart, smart man and a good governor, but doesn't have the charisma I think would be necessary.

[LWolf]

48. I haven't found the charisma factor to be reliable.

I've noticed some pretty big differences in what is perceived among democrats to be "charismatic."

Also, I don't think I'd choose a candidate based on charisma, anyway. Maybe that's the difference. For me, it has to be the issues. I'll get excited, enthusiastic, and motivated by positions backed by action on issues.

Issues have to come before personality in any choice I make. There has to be worthy substance behind any "charisma."

Tell me more about what makes your governor smart, and what makes him a good governor!

[Clark2008]

50. Bredesen probably won't run, so it really doesn't matter.

I'd rather keep him here, actually. :)

[guidod]

52. Finally!

It's very refreshing to hear about somebody that does NOT work in Washington D.C.. We don't need a Crongressman in the White House. It would be great to hear about other Governors. NOT the one from California though.

[LWolf]

55. I wouldn't wish my former governor on anyone.

Here's a sort of amusing, or not, little story:

Last night I watched the new "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" on DVD for the first time. While I was creeped out by the Michael Jackson-like Willy Wonka presented by Depp, what really got me was the narrator. He had a slight accent. I kept "hearing" Ahnold. <shudder>

Really, though: if you are, like most of us, busy with your life and day-to-day responsibilities, you don't hear about everyone else's governor and rep. I know what my own are up to, and I know about the handful that the msm and DU fanclubs report on regularly. I'm sure there are plenty out there that I'm missing, and I want to hear about them.

[guidod]

57. I would like to...

hear from them as well. We've had 17 Governors step up from their jobs and become Presidents... 16 Senators have done it as well. I'm not really sure if we need more of the same stagnent Senators that have helped getting us in to where we are today. (Everyday I can't help but hope that some Governor will jump out and show what he can do. Everytime I start to talk about politics it turns into the same-o same-o real quick, the same picture seems to keep appering and the only thing that is different is the spelling of their names. I'm tired of hearing Hillary, gore, Edwards, Dead, Clark and many other. There has to be an outstanding Governor out there and I, as well as you, would likd to be able to see more of them. I think it's time to start house clening in Washington, Democrats and republicans. Who ever reads this post, please let us all know a few thngs about your Governor. Thanks

[ClassWarrior]

42. Even tho this poll is the first and only one I've seen that includes MY...

....three top picks, I STILL REFUSE TO ENGAGE IN UNFOUNDED SPECULATION THAT HAS NO BEARING ON WHAT THE SITUATION WILL BE THREE YEARS FROM NOW AND ONLY SERVES TO DISTRACT PEOPLE FROM WHAT WILL BE THE FIGHT OF OUR LIVES IN 2006.

:rant:

NGU.

[LWolf]

43. OK

I don't disagree. Since the conversation exists anyway, I'd like to see a wider variety of possibilities make it into play, especially this early. Hence this poll. Narrowing the conversation, and the possibilities, down to a handful of people 3 years out seems foolish to me. And, frankly, if that narrow handful is the best we can do, I don't see any reason to be discussing it come primary time. For the usual frontrunners at DU, my vote would be "none of the above."

Here's a question for 2006:

What progressive democrats are running that need support?

[ClassWarrior]

44. Thank you. Bryan Kennedy needs our support to defeat Sensenbrenner...

...in 2006. You can learn more about him at www.bk2006.org.

NGU.

[LWolf]

49. Interesting reading.

And an interesting background. What's the feeling in Wisconsin? Are people ready to elect a newbie to the house?

[bvar22]

53. I could proudly campaign and vote for any

in your poll.
I supported DK all the way to the convention last year.

I stood up and cheered when he made his passionate attack against the Republicans on CSPAN during the phoney withdrawal vote the other night!

I seldom open any of the ridiculous 2008 threads.
I also avoid discussions with those who have already pledged allegiance to a particular 2008 candidate and spend their time spamming DU with garbage from campaign websites.

[LWolf]

54. All good points.

I'm partial to DK myself, having campaigned, voted for, and supported him all the way to the convention.

Still, at this point I don't want to hear from campaigners for anyone. I'd like to see a wide open discussion that includes any and all the party has to offer. I've already heard enough about the "regulars" to last me a lifetime. I want to know what good things all those other contenders are doing.

[Independent_Liberal]

56. Clark/Edwards

That's still my dream ticket.

[hayu_lol]

58. Wes Clark...undeniably qualified in all respects. nt

[LWolf]

61. They don't fit the "other" criteria for this poll.

Please don't hijack the thread.

[MoonRiver]

59. I'm boycotting DU polls that exclude Clark.

He's the front runner here, and it's ridiculous not to include him. What's everybody afraid of? :shrug:

[LWolf]

60. lol

Posting is an interesting way to boycott.

I'm well aware of General Clark, and am not "afraid" of him, or anyone else, for that matter.

The point of this poll, which is evident if you read down through it, is to hear about all the other great dems that are not "frontrunners" "here." We've already heard about all the so-called frontrunners, if there can be anything like "frontrunners" 3 years before the primaries begin.

It's narrowminded and foolish, in my experience and opinion, to narrow the field to the status quo. I want to see all those other possibilities given equal respect and attention in the conversation, the same way I want to see them given equal respect and attention by the media. Since there are always more than enough threads to browse promoting "front runners" picked well in advance of any real contest, I want to provide some space to hear about others.

[MoonRiver]

62. I meant boycotting voting in them.

Guess I should have clarified. Point well taken about the poll being about non-front runners. I still don't see how this helps us understand who could win in 2008. Whoever is the most popular among ALL viable candidates should be considered. The non-frontrunners who get the most votes won't clue us into how they'll do against the frontrunners. And, we don't even know whose running yet!

[LWolf]

63. It's looking at it from a different perspective.

When the '08 campaign gets here, I'll worry about winning it. A competent campaign can beat GWB, as long as all the votes are counted accurately. Which is an interesting side note: what possible candidate is willing to fight for a paper trail, and what candidate is willing to stick it out until all votes have been verified?

Meanwhile, I want to know what candidates are worthy of my vote. I don't choose candidates based on who somebody thinks will win; I think anyone can beat the corrupt powers that be with a smart campaign. I choose my candidates based on their positions on issues, and based on their record. I'm not happy with any of the current so-called front runners. That doesn't mean I don't "like" them, just that they aren't presidential contenders that I will support. I want to hear about people I'd be interested in campaigning for.

In every election there are many people who just flat out choose not to show up, because no choice is offered that meets their criteria. I'd like to reach out to those voters, and bring them into the fold, by choosing a candidate that can appeal to those voters. I relate to them. I've always voted, but only once in my life cast a vote in which I actually voted FOR a candidate, rather than voting against the other choices. I want to vote FOR someone in '08, not against the opposition. None of the "front-runners" represent that vote for me.