posted
Maybe it's just me, but I haven't seen any candidates for the next presidential election that stir my soul or make me think "Wow, they're the leader who can make this country great!"
Let's look at the field:
Howard Dean: About as maverick of a candidate as we're going to get. I hear about how he will shake things up in the Democratic party and then I listen to his positions and think there's more smoke than fire. But in this crowd of milktoasts, he is the loudest. Still, not very inspiring, nothing about leading us to any better day ahead.
John Kerry: War hero, congressional stalwart. Has the personality and looks of a young Abe Vigoda. Nothing there. Boring. Valedictorian of the Al Gore Personality School.
Dick Gephardt: This makes Gep's what, 14th try for the White House? What didn't he learn the last 13 times? Basically, America just isn't too warm to him and we're not likely to like him more any time soon.
John Edwards: Self-made man, one term senator, fairly handsome and young fellow. Heck, he's from NC and that wins him a point from me, but honestly, he's a watered-down Clinton when it comes to speaking. And there's a lot more water than Clinton. If he showed some fire, he might be a tad interesting.
Al Sharpton: C'mon, gimme a break. He's funny at least as he tries to work the newfound integrity angle. On stage he still looks like we caught him naked and he's trying to cover up the nudity with a chewing gum wrapper.
Joe Lieberman: If George Washington and Barbara Bush had a love child, he'd look a lot like Leiberman. He's a smart man and apparently a true moderate, but he's so uncharismatic that they chose him as the Dem VP candidate last time around so he wouldn't steal the spotlight from Al Gore. They had to search far and wide for just such a man...
Carol Moseley Braun: This is a smart lady of grace and dignity. She's got more diplomatic skill and experience than anyone in the race, on either side. While well-thought out and progressive, she doesn't have any fire, any spark. And sadly, I don't think she's electable at this time. In 20 years, she would have made one heck of a president.
Dennis Kuchinic (sp?): Started off sounding smart, but no one, including him, can get past the thought that sooner or later Dean is gonna stuff him into a locker. An avowed Vegan, no matter how smart he is, he'll never shed the thought that he's a little out of touch with this reality. He was, after all, the guy who used a pie chart during the NPR debate... (think about it, he sure didn't).
Wesley Clark: Well, this morning Madonna gave him her endorsement. Ummm, errr, okay. A retired general who doesn't speak much about the military, a former head of NATO who doesn't speak much about Europe and coalitions. Does he ever speak? How did he ever inspire his troops? Has anyone in the military vouched for his abilities?
On the other side of the coin:
George W. Bush: Didn't care much for him in the last election, but it looked like he wasn't going to try and rock the boat. He probably wouldn't have much if it hadn't been for 9/11. And that's where he failed as an inspirational leader. At America's worst single moment with the world's attention and sympathy directed wholly at us, he was easily upstaged by New York lame-duck Mayor Rudy Giulliani. Rudy led us, inspired us, consoled us and suffered right alongside. When Bush finally spoke, the moment had passed and his plain words sounded canned and lifeless. Where was the "Day that will live in infamy" of FDR? Or where was "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country?" Or possibly even "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall." History gave this Pres. Bush his moment of destiny and he phoned it in. It hasn't gotten much better since then and I'm not inspired to think it will get better.
These folks don't inspire us. They don't really lead us. They are all up for their big test and each speach they make, every debate waged, every question asked brings the emotion evoked at most job interviews for a Pizza Hut manager.
Don't we deserve better than this? Don't we NEED better than this? Is this the best our generation could do?
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Seriously though, do you ahve someone(s) specific in mind when you say that? If you HAD to write someone in, who would it be?
Posts: 2532 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the Iowa radio debate, some questioner began with "I'm not too crazy about any of these candidates..." I couldn't help but think, "Of course not. The crazy folk vote for Dubya."
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Where was the "Day that will live in infamy" of FDR? Or where was "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country?" Or possibly even "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall." History gave this Pres. Bush his moment of destiny and he phoned it in. It hasn't gotten much better since then and I'm not inspired to think it will get better.
I think he had a very such moment, whe he stood upon the rubble of the world trade center, andthe man shouted "I can't hear you" and he replied, "But I can hear you, and soon, those that did this will hear you!" and the whole crowd started chanting "USA! USA! USA!" Hell, I'v never been so enspired before, or after.
And it warms this little boys heart to hear the Dems being called "Milktoasts"
Posts: 1900 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Frankly, has their been much to be inspired by in any president since Reagan? No. And I was too young to remember him, so this is all I have.
Posts: 1900 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
On the one hand you've got Dubya. He's easily the worst president in my lifetime. When people claimed the world would end in 2000 when he got elected, I must admit that I scoffed at them - as far as I was concerned both Bush and Gore were equally poor candidates. But Bush has proven me wrong with his acts - he really is far worse than I could have imagined.
So, that's that for the Republicans. (And here's to hoping they can get a good candidate in 2008 - maybe a Colin Powell or someone like that.)
As for the Democrats:
I can't help but like Sharpton, even though he's a bit wild. He could never win, though, so it's a moot point whether he'd make a good leader.
Kucinich is on the right track, but is too crazy to get elected - and he looks too much like a shrew, you know?
Kerry, Gephart, Edwards are all far to dull and boring. They make cheesy attacks on Dean, and waffle all the time. I can't tell what they believe in and what they don't - only that they don't like Bush.
Braun could be a decent president, but lacks the charisma and vision needed in this race.
Lieberman is pro-Iraq War - that eliminates him as far as I'm concerned. If you can't attack Bush on his biggest weakness, I don't see how you'll win.
Clark seems like a strong candidate, but didn't stick to his message enough. Thus he got muddled up with the rest and probably won't win now. But he does look like a good, strong president, just by watching him - and that's important. I wish he'd reconsider on the VP position - Dean/Clark would be very effective.
Dean is my favorite at the moment, although he's got his share of faults too. It's hard to tell if he's liberal or moderate on issues other than the Iraq War, and I have to say he lacks the traditional politician's debating ability. But at the same time, he's largely stuck to his positions, he sounds well-thought-out, and he's got the guts needed to run this race (the guts the Dems lacked in 02). Of the electable candidates, he's the only one that seems willing to stand up to Bush to try to convince the public, rather than cater to the public's whims - and that's absolutely necessary in this election.
I'd like to see a really great candidate for once, but rarely does that come along. I think we should just be happy the democrats are at least managing better candidates than Al Gore - or (gasp!) even worse, Hilary Clinton!
posted
And the fact that he stood on a platform when shaking Baileys hand, so he wouldn't seem such a gnome, just makes him look stupid, and the smile scares me, If I had to pick a Dem, I would go for Lieberman, he is the only one I have yet to actually have any schred of respect for, he sticks to his guns, and hes about as honorable as politicians get. And Shaprton tour managed for James Brown, so that gives him some points, but frankly, hes a nincompoop. I would like to see Powell in the oval office, but frankly, if he ran, he'd be killed, sad as it is, its true, their are too many bigots out there, and hsi wife won't let him run. Cheney's too sick, sadly, I really like him, but maybe Condaleeza Rice in a few years, the first woman, and the first black, and a republican, I'm all for it, maybe in 08, I would like to see her run.
[ January 08, 2004, 04:07 PM: Message edited by: Rhaegar The Fool ]
Posts: 1900 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like Kucinich, really, although I don't agree with his politics -- mainly because, UNLIKE Dean, he HAS stuck to his positions, which he's articulated fairly clearly and ethically. Dean's too clearly poll-tested; I don't get the impression that the man has a genuine opinion.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seriously? I'm under the impression that Dean has been very steady in his main positions. He seems as genuine as Kucinich is.
quote:I would like to see Powell in the oval office, but frankly, if he ran, he'd be killed, sad as it is, its true, their are too many bigots out there, and hsi wife won't let him run. Cheney's too sick, sadly, I really like him, but maybe Condaleeza Rice in a few years, the first woman, and the first black, and a republican, I'm all for it, maybe in 08, I would like to see her run.
Question - why would Powell get killed but not Rice?
I'm really disappointed his wife won't let him run because Powell really is a very very good candidate.
posted
No more reaosn that Powell would, except their have already been death threats, and he has a lot of enemies, and frankly, I forgot to say it was a chance for Rice as well.
Posts: 1900 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think if he makes it, I would vote Lieberman, and be reasonably happy with my choice (not ideal, but someone I respect). Barring that I'll probably vote for a 12th party canidate because the political game is really begining to tick me off.
posted
It's really too bad that Braun has no chance whatsoever of winning. I've been researching her for a school project, and so far I haven't found a single opinion I disagree with.
Among the other candidates, however, I haven't found anyone remotely inspiring. I have a sinking feeling that it's going to be Bush again in 2004.
posted
From the Democratic side I see the choices as: A) Wackos out in left field: Kucinich, Dean B) Poll cats: Clark, Kerry, Gephart, Edwards C) Reasonable but unelectable: Lieberman D) Everyone else that doesn't have a prayer
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I still don't see why people see Dean as "out in left field" liberal.
Kucinich, yes. But Dean doesn't agree with almost anything Kucinich does. Not how we should handle Iraq, not healthcare, not gays, not guns; I guess taxes. Just saying he's a crazy leftist doesn't make it so.
Dean, while certainly left on these issues, is a more moderate left (which, in todays political discourse doesn't seem to exist).
posted
To be honest Dean is hard to pin down. He talks up a storm as if he were a far-left liberal (Democratic wing of the Democratic party etc), but his record doesn't look all that extreme liberal.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think people just assume he's extremist because he talks the loudest of the major candidates and is one of the few that actually takes solid positions. Also, in the beginning, he was the one that stood the strongest against Bush's positions, which made him both the average Democrat's favorite and someone who appears more starkly opposite to Bush.
posted
Dean's really not an extremist, he just looks that way in the dim 20 watt bulb that is our current political system.
Forty years ago, heck 20 years ago, he would have looked like a somewhat bland moderate. But in this day of "safe" candidates, he looks more radical than he really is.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well I'm an ardant liberal, and out of the Democratic candidates my vote would go to Clark (if I had one) but honestly despite my political position I sort of hope Bush gets in again. This is because if he gets in again, Hillary Clinton can run in the next election as the Democratic Candidate. She'll win against almost anyone the Republicans can put up. If however a democrat won, it would be 8 years instead of 4 before she could run, and by then I think that she'll have been out of the lime light too long to be a shoe in for president.
Hillary for '08!
-Fooglmog Guy with no clue.
Posts: 37 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem with all the candidates is that they want to be President. Really, we should pick Presidents like we raise armies: draft them. You don't want to be the leader of the US? Too bad, you've been chosen to serve your country.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heh, I consider the possibility of Hilary running in 2008 if Bush wins to be a big reason to hope the Democrats win this year. Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
I just heard Edwards speak and I have to say I was pretty impressed. I think Lieberman would be the best president (I've been glued to CNN all evening, so I just heard him speak too) but would never win. Clark sounded a little too desperate when he talked tonight. /ramble
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, yeah, I'm with Tres. If I could guarantee that by voting Democrat this election Hillary would never be president, that might just settle my vote.
If I could vote in the democratic primary, which I can't, I'd probably vote for Lieberman. As it is, I have to wait to see who emerges from the primary, then vote for someone else entirely.
Can I just vote for Jed Bartlet? I'm actually curious how many write in votes he'll end up with.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Out of all the Democratic candidates, I prefer Lieberman as well. I'm actually toying with the idea of registering Democrat since I haven't chosen a party yet. However, it's likely that the Oregon primaries won't matter anyway, so I'll probably just stay non-affiliated with any party.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to say, I was impressed when listening to Edwards during the Iowa campaign. A second place finish out of nowhere was also impressive.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Plus he's an annoying quasi-Republican whiner who's big into censorship AND religious conservatism, which pretty much makes him a non-candidate from my point of view.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, he didn’t get any supporters at the caucus. That would have been even more embarrassing than being the only supporter of a candidate present. If there was anyone there to be embarrassed. Which there wasn’t. Nevermind. Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure it applies to either, but if you've got some links that back it up, I'd be interested to read them.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Links that back what up? That Lieberman's a religious conservative who favors censorship? Or that he's a quasi-Republican? Because, y'know, I equate being a pro-censorship religious conservative with being Republican, most of the time. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
*sigh* Type the following into Google: "Lieberman religious conservative censorship." Pick your favorite source from the list.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh! Atheists believe he was a religious conservative. Well, I guess from that perspective it could be seen that way. But then again, Atheists tend to be religious conservatives in their own right -- unswerving in their conviction, hidebound to a belief system.
I guess it is all a matter of perspective. Cute way to bring home the message. Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
*nod* So, to rephrase your statement, "it appears that atheists are especially upset about Lieberman being a conservative. "
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank God for the country that Dean's enelectable after his nice little scream. How do you vote for someone who goes into hysteria after he loses a primary and then screams like that?
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Though I'll admit he definitely sounded crazy, I don't think it was meant to be so much as a scream as it turned out to be, considering how raspy he sounded.
Posts: 4292 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to say, as others have, that I'm fairly impressed with Edwards so far. Okay, so maybe he's made a mess of money as a lawyer. But he's also, from what I understand, the first person in his family to have gone to college. And he seems to actually understand that there are real people out here in the world. Which is huge point in his favor, at least from my point of view.
I'm just afraid that people are going to dismiss him because so much has been made of his looks. That would be a shame, I think, because he really does seem to have some depth to him.
Posts: 2454 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
