Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is our best choice for nominee one of the announced candidates?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
calteacherguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 07:05 PM
Original message
Poll question: Is our best choice for nominee one of the announced candidates?
Edited on Fri Jun-08-07 07:13 PM by calteacherguy
Edit: Assuming we could chose anyone in the Democratic Party, is the one best equipped to lead our Party, America, and the world into the 21st Century among the current announced contenders?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. Of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calteacherguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Why do you say, "of course?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojambo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
3. Not in my humble opinion.
Gore and Feingold are both better than almost all of the announced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donnachaidh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. Gore and Feingold -- the DREAM team!
Those two would walk away with it. :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #12
28. For sure!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
4. Nope
Run, Al, run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
5. Probably Not nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
6. Nope. Kerry or Gore would be better, I think. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
7. I like the top three and Richardson. But Gore would be nice to have
in the race too. I'll never forget when he flew to NO during the Katrina crisis. He was Presidential. That being said..I still do not know who to favour. One of those 5.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pastiche423 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
8. Nope
Gore is not in yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
9. No , either Clark or Gore would be a vast improvement
They each have the stature, credentials, and experience needed to lead our nation at a time when issues of an international nature are becoming increasingly important PLUS they both have a progressive vision for America both at home and abroad. That is the winning combination in 2008. The Republicans are waiting to pounce on Hillary for being a Clinton, and on Edwards and Obama for being relative rookies at a time when we need seasoned leadership.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dread Pirate KR Read Donating Member (234 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #9
20. Gore deserves the Nobel Peace Prize, but
Wes Clark deserves the US Presidency.

I gave Gore his chance for POTUS in 2000, and it ended then. For now, I'll support him 100% towards his commitment to reduce the dangers global climate change.

If not,..I'll need to learn SCUBA to find me treasures that were once buried near secret coves; and that'll really wave my flag. ~=];/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #20
34. If Clark doesn't run I would support Gore over any of those announced
There is so such thing as a perfect candidate (not even Clark, lol). So Gore doesn't have to be perfect, just the best of the choices given us, and as it now stands I think Gore clearly would be if he ran and Clark didn't.

It's not like I have the power to propose a formal alliance, but I would suggest that all Clark supporters keep an open mind about Al Gore, and that all Gore supporters keep an open mind about Wes Clark. We all have a lot in common; we care about experienced and visionary leadership and are not confident that we can find it in the current field of Democratic candidates.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rosesaylavee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 08:27 PM
Response to Original message
10. Gore, Kerry, Feingold, Clark
I know that Kerry is sitting this one out. Am holding out for Al though and hope that he will enter the race after he rests up from his book signings, global concert series - maybe September? Perhaps he will wait until after he gets the Nobel Peace Prize. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
11. Where is the "HELL, no" option?
Edited on Fri Jun-08-07 08:30 PM by BlueIris
Which is what I would have picked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
13. "Best equipped' for the most serious problems - Gore, Kerry, Hart and Clark.
No doubt about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
14. Absolutely...and in fact...
This is the best field we have had in many cycles....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. The numbers are tiny but...
...so far those who have responded to this poll, by a wide margin, don't agree with you. I think the polling question was asked in a neurtal enough manner. Hopefully it will get more participation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #16
26. And it is in direct contravention of opinion polls...
Which consistently show Democrats are very satisfied with this selection of candidates...in the 55-65% range...very extraordinary!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #26
31. very extraordinary : like very pregnant? very unique?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calteacherguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #26
36. So, 45% being dissatified is good?
Edited on Sat Jun-09-07 01:33 PM by calteacherguy
In any case, I think we may be comparing apples and oranges here. My question is not, "are you satisfied," it's what I posted in the OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-10-07 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #36
41. Actually it is quite good...
Nearly unprecedented...and indicates there is little clamor for a so-called "savior" candidate like Gore to get in...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calteacherguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #41
44. Have data? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-10-07 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #36
43. Most great Presidents aren't well liked as candidates
FDR and Lincoln weren't exactly well liked until they were in office.

Once in a while a candidate like Bobby Kennedy will come along and generate a lot of enthusiasm. But that is the exception, not the rule.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calteacherguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #43
45. My question is not about who is well-liked. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ksclematis Donating Member (84 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 12:02 AM
Response to Reply #16
30. Right on, Tom....
I just voted "NO"....I'm for Clark, and I hope I can vote for him in Nov 08.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 02:17 AM
Response to Reply #14
46. I think both the 2004 and the 1988 roster of candidates were stronger than this field.
of course the arguments here would be abstruse, academic, and subjective. But I don't for a second think the Democrats are running their "A Team" this cycle. I look at the stage and feel like something is missing--a feeling I did not get when there was a Dean, a Kerry, and a Clark in the race.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #46
52. What is missing
Some big names who have been kept from running from regrettable reasons. that isn't good for the process. Some names who balked at stepping immediately into the second tier and be exiled from even being listened to seriously again.

But what is also missing is the shake up that Dean brought to a process that might have gone somnolently non-populist and an easier "victory" at least for Bush- which would have meant a powerful mandate cooked up with fake vote tallies. What is missing the actual debate getting to the hot core of the REAl crisis today in such a way the press has to at least notice it beyond the small stuff that turn people off. Something to prevent that same media from helping anoint a candidate before any vote is cast and squelching all enthusiasm in the process.

What the DNC or other leadership groups fear, risk, boldness, populism, hot confrontation as opposed to bean counting caution and calculation(which, if they in by any margin makes them arrogantly self-congratulatory) is as called for as impeachment and for many of the same reasons.

Can I mention Eisenhower, desired by both parties for having the right political stuff- a guaranteed win, an impregnable and "popular" image. Who was not our most shining speaker. All the charismatic, naturally talented and great leaders possess not an iota of that mile thick teflon and obligatory support. movie stars can fake it. Real leaders get pommeled by people not in awe of mere mortals. So if you submit to that game you blink, cringe, slink and follow polls instead of leading them. And the major news organizations will make sure this is how it is on behalf of corporate interests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dread Pirate KR Read Donating Member (234 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
15. no more betrayals, time for REAL Leadership...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sellitman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
17. Gore is the one.
No one else comes close.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmarie Donating Member (258 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
18. No,no and no!!
Clark or Gore are needed and necessary at this crucial point in our history. Of those two I hope it's Clark. I love what Al's doing now, and I think Clark could pull in more Independents and moderate Republics than anyone else. Plus, Clark's got the diplomatic and FP expertise we so need right now! I believe they are both respected internationally, so either one would win back a fair number of our former friends overseas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
19. Absolutely, yes.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
venable Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
21. there is a misleading perception of 'potential' from the undeclared
in that the very act of declaring puts one in the category (with some people, not with all) of having 'ambition'.

Ambition, in the sense that people don't like.

Undeclared, or never mentioned, are those in whom we can place infinite possibility - ie they are not encumbered by the reality of political theatre and the hubris and compromise and actual policy that this entails.

The Undeclared are our dreams.

The moment they declare, they have feet of clay.

We've seen this in the past, as recently as 04, when highly esteemed citizens, eagerly anticipated, entered the race, only to be seen in that cold, harsh light as mere aspirants, and lacking, when as 'potential' they were wonderful.

It is an unfortunate part of our system that, often enough, those who should be president will never be because the very thing that makes them fit for the job also makes them uninterested in the process of actually becoming president.

given that, I look for the person whose actual positions and proposals match my vision of the world, and in that regard we are doing very well this time around: Kucinich, Obama, Dodd, Richardson, and my own very strong choice, Edwards.

As for Gore - he will never be more appealing than he is now. My fear should he get in, is that within weeks or days, he would revert to the guy that said Elian Gonzalez should not be allowed to return to his father in Cuba, the guy about whom Nader tells this story:

Nader saw him eating a chocolate ice cream cone. Nader asked, "Is chocolate your favorite?" Gore got fidgety and stammered, " Well, I like vanilla and...pistacchio, and I like strawberry too, and I like a lot of flavors...."

I worry about that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #21
29. Broken system
Unfortunately venable, you are right.

General Clark said this recently:

"I was against the war in Iraq early on. I wrote the op-eds against it, I testified in front of…against it. I was cited in the Senate, and then when I ran it was like as though somebody said ‘ah, he’s running for office, you see – all of this was a smokescreen, he’s just out for his own ambition, forget about what he says, it’s how he uses it to advance.’"


Can this broken system be repaired?





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
election_2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:39 PM
Response to Original message
22. Nope
Richardson is the only one in the current field who I'm really excited about...and even he, I think, would probably make a better V.P. to Wes Clark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:43 PM
Response to Original message
23. Obama
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
24. No, We need CLARK!
He's the best!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snowbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #24
49. Yes! What Auntie Bush said !!
~~~




~~~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
25. Still hoping for Clark.
:-)

or Gore

:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rydz777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-08-07 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
27. Gore won before - and would win again in a landslide. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 05:15 AM
Response to Original message
32. I'd like to see Ted Kennedy in the White House over any of the candidates currently running
Edited on Sat Jun-09-07 05:17 AM by Hippo_Tron
But he could never get elected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
33. Clark!
Gore would be fine too.

I find it difficult to commit to one of the rest knowing that there might be at least a small chance one of these will run. I also see no particular need to commit right now. WHY? Plenty of time.

The hard part for Clark would be getting the nomination. He is by far the best candidate for the general election, but many Dems are afraid of military candidates and don't see past that. THey don't know that he is also among the most progressive of the alternatives. He was, after all, endorsed by both Michael Moore and George McGovern....not exactly conservatives! However this is part of the two-edged sword for Clark. His military background makes him perceived as moderate...this will help him in the general election, but ironically this same trait makes it difficult for some Dems to see that he is really a progressive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StudentsMustUniteNow Donating Member (859 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
35. Byron Dorgan and Bernie Sanders
Maybe Jim Webb
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
37. These results surprised me a little bit
I expected No to come out ahead, but not by this margin. Even though the numbers voting here are fairly small, with this type of super majority voting "No", they still are significant I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSlayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-10-07 12:31 AM
Response to Original message
38. I fear we are going to turn what should be a sure win into a close loss.
By nominating the wrong person.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-10-07 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #38
39. And as usual, we'll only realize it after the election......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSlayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 03:06 AM
Response to Reply #39
47. It looks as though many here won't.
But as for the general population I quite agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calteacherguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-10-07 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
40. Kick for the Sunday crowd...anyone still want to vote? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-10-07 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
42. Down to 16% saying our best candidate is already running.
Wow. I know that a small sample of posters at DU is not exactly representative of the Democratic Party, but still. Like I wrote somewhere (maybe here, lol) DU members are kind of Beta tester activists who tend to have our finger on the pulse of at least one limb of our Party before the wider public realizes it. We still are a minority certainly, but then again this poll so far is an absolute blow out.

I suspect most of those who are saying No want Gore in the race, many others want Clark, and others would like Kerry back as an option also. All three of these men are seasoned leaders who also have good progressive credentials. Even Russ Feingold, another good man with excellent progressive credentials who many yearn for, has a lot more experience in Congress under his belt than our current Presidential front runners. On a combined pragmatic and ideological basis I would much rather vote for Gore, Clark or Feingold than our current front runners, and I also think that John Kerry would make a better President than those now running, though I think the general public is not quite ready for an encore performance by big John yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calteacherguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 02:30 AM
Response to Original message
48. Kick. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Awsi Dooger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 04:58 AM
Response to Original message
50. No, Mark Warner would have won in a landslide
He was the only candidate who could have changed the political map and carried many states we never dream about. I'm hardly the only one who thinks so. Jerome Armstrong of MyDD posted similar a few days ago. Of course, he left MyDD to work on the Warner campaign before Warner decided not to run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #50
51. According to Warner, he chose not to run because he felt that the 2008 election
would be about National Security.....and that this was his achilles heels.

I believe that he, Mark Warner is correct in his assessement, and that your prediction that Mark Warner "would have won in a landslide" had he run.....is incorrect.

Warner was smart enough to take his achilles heel into consideration when determining whether he could win if he ran, and unfortunately, you don't.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
More Than A Feeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
53. Nope, Feingold would have been the best!
You are totally missing out on your best chance Russ!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 31st 2024, 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC