posted
There are about a metric buttload of vets running for various offices for the Dems. Should make for an interesting race.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sadly, the Dems appear to think that being a vet is something special. *wry laugh* They have learned ENTIRELY the wrong lesson from the present propagandist spin on military service.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd vote for Hillary over most Republicans, but she's too much of a Republican bogeyman to have any real chance of winning. Lieberman I'd only vote for as a last resort... he's way too censor-happy for me. I'd vote Obama in a heartbeat, but to be honest, he's probably too inexperienced yet. Give him a few more terms in the Senate and then come back to him.
Right now, my top choice would be Mark Warner, the ex-governor of Virginia. He's demonstrated that he can win elections, not only holding the governorship in a solid red state, but getting his chosen successor, Tim Kaine, elected as well, in one of the biggest electoral upsets of the past few years.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't like Wesley Clark just because he's a vet, although I do think that it adds to his qualifications. I like him because I think he would make a very good president, which ultimately is what's most important.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't understand the people who think Kerry didn't put forth a good platform. It was there if you wanted to see it. He got so much bad press (the man was about as much fun to listen to as a ceiling fan) that it's just automatic now to attack him.
Dean was probably the best candidate for the Dems. Had Kerry not overtaken him in Iowa, I think he could have won the election. He had the credentials, the vision, and the drive necessary to energize his base, as opposed to leaving them catatonic like Kerry did. Bush won on personality, not on his merits, just as Kerry lost on personality, and merits didn't really matter.
As for 08. The Dems need to run a good, fiscally responsible progressive governor. Senators should be taboo for the party right now, they are too controversial for the most part, and the Republicans will probably make short work of most of their voting records, using national security concerns to dice them up. The fact of the matter is, they need new energy. A progressive democratic senator, probably from the midwest, and not New England, could be a good VP, but they need a governor for the big P spot. Bill Richardson or Tim Kaine come to mind as the best possible choices. I would've said Gary Locke a couple years ago, but he retired from public life. Tim has cross party appeal and will bring in moderate Republicans, and Richardson has a long history of balancing the budget, bringing in foriegn investors into his state, and being environmentally friendly. He's everything the dems could want in a candidate, but he's no so liberal that he's out of the reach of moderate conservatives.
As for the Republicans, they'll have trouble with cross party appeal. McCain or someone silimar would steal away a LOT of moderate Democratic votes (depending on his challenger), but I think a lot of the conservative base would stay at home and not vote at all.
Condi Rice would do a VERY good job of energizing the DEMOCRATIC base against her. She's automatically associated with Bush and his Iraq policies, and quite frankly I think that does a lot more harm than good for their chances. She's the Hillary of their party, a polarizing figure that sets everyone on their party lines.
I've heard Jeb and Laura Bush's names bandied about as possible candidates. Laura doesn't stand a chance, she doesn't have the background. Jeb would scare a lot of people wary of continuing the Bush Dynasty in a Democracy. Further, he has a lot of black marks against him for things he did in Florida, not to mention the long memories of many from 2000's election. I don't think it could be assumed that he would carry Florida.
Their leadership is in shambles. Bill Frist and "The Hammer" I think are out of it. And the Abramoff scandal could hit anyone, with the majority of the hits falling on Republicans.
McCain and Powell still stand out to me as great candidates. It's either than or some youthful energy from the party's younger governors. All in all the though, the Democrats have a lot more options. They just need to come together this time with a coherent message.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Powell will be too associated with Bush for many people. I think McCain would be a pretty good president. I'm pretty liberal, and I could see myself voting for him. The GOP could use some younger faces, as some have suggested. Anyone unnassociated with scandal.
Then again, so much depends on the mood of the election year. I really think public memory for most things starts to diminish after 6 months or so and really drops off after a year. Excluding big things like war, blowjobs, and hunting mishaps.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
