There is not now, and never will be, a perfect Democratic candidate for president.

[s-cubed]

Every one has flaws, which are being pointed out repeatedly. Frankly I'm tired of it. Digging up what someone said 15 years ago is not helpful. I want to know what their position is today.

I also want a candidate who can alter course when the evidence calls for it, who can admit error.

I am just happy that we have a number of very good candidates. No one is talking about a Democratic clown car.

I will support, work for, and vote for whomever is the nominee.

[JaneyVee]

1. And there is only one Democratic frontrunner...

[msongs]

2. ...today anyway nt

[Enrique]

3. at least not since Lee Mercer Jr.

[Bonobo]

4. Yeah, ummm, about that "what is their position today" thing...

You've probably heard that politician SOMETIMES say what is best for the current political mood. IOW, it is not really their true position so much as it is a reflection of political calculation.

So what you do to try to figure out what a person is REALLY like is look at what they have done throughout their lives, particularly their adult lives and more particularly the years they have been in public service.

[LWolf]

5. True.

I don't want a perfect candidate, but I want a candidate that will represent me, not the 1%. There's one in the race.

The others? I don't dislike them. The problem is with the system. It's so corrupt at this point that I don't think the Democratic power structure represents the 99% to the degree that they should.

And yes, pointing out the opposition's flaws is part of a political campaign. If you are uncomfortable reading about those flaws, then don't. It's a simple, clear-cut choice.

[Bagsgroove]

6. Yep

There is a candidate I support and believe in. I don't expect he'll win the nomination. But whoever the Democrats nominate (Ms. Clinton is my guess) would be far better than the GOP alternative (Mr. Bush, if I had to bet).

I supported Bill Bradley over Al Gore in the 2000 primaries. My guy lost. In the end I voted for Gore. Was Gore vs. George W. Bush "the lesser of two evils?" Yeah, maybe. But a whole lot of real-world evil would have been averted if Al Gore had become President.

Hillary Clinton is not my first choice. But I'll sure as hell vote for her against anybody in the current Republican field.

[ljm2002]

7. It's primary season...

...i.e., the period of time when candidates from the same party try to differentiate themselves from the other candidates. The party's rank and file also seek to find differences between candidates in order to select the one we like the best. Most of us understand that there is no perfect candidate; our responsibility is still to select the best one, in our collective estimation.

Your post implies there should be no discussion on the relative merits of candidates from within the Democratic party, and that we should just put our hands on our hearts and pledge to support whoever is the nominee. But then what is our role in determining who will be our standard bearer in the general election?

Sure it's great when anyone, including a candidate for office, is able to admit error and evolve on questions. But if another candidate has been right all along on a given question, and has taken that position when it was not politically expedient to do so, advocates for that candidate have every right to point that out. And if criticisms of a given candidate are untrue, unfair or irrelevant, advocates for that candidate have every right to point that out, too. It's all part of the normal give-and-take during primary season.

So I say, go ahead, criticize the Democratic candidates you don't like and build up the ones you do like. They're big boys and girls. If they can't take criticism from within their own party then they certainly won't be able to hold up to the withering onslaught that will be unleashed by the great right wing Wurlitzer machine when the general election rolls around.

[99Forever]

8. I'm more selective than that.

I will support only a candidate that meets MY criteria on major issues that affect me and mine. I owe no allegiance to anyone simply because of the letter they drag behind their name.

[Sheepshank]

9. I don't need ACA for my health care, but will vote in part for a candidate...

....that supports and grows the program.. It be hooves me little, but I realize there is sometimes a bigger picture that is as important.

[99Forever]

10. I actually do have to rely on my state exchange for my coverage.

And quite frankly, it's anything but affordable. That said, it's just one of many issues that guide my views and determines who I will and won't support.

[MoonRiver]

13. Same here. We have BC/BS through my husband's employer.

He told me today that our premiums will double next year, ugh. But, we can afford it and we both support ACA. It's a start toward single payer, we hope. But even if it isn't, ACA is a hell of a lot better than what this country had before.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

11. Not only that

but there will never be a perfect Democratic POTUS either. Even Sanders, were he to be elected, will have to make compromises and do some "horse-trading" with Republicans AND Democrats in Congress in order to get things done unless he is elected with super-duper ultra-progressive supermajority in Congress, which isn't likely, at least not in 2016.

[TheKentuckian]

12. All imperfect is not created equal, no shit no one is perfect. Who claimed any was?

Lack of perfection isn't an excuse to embrace the suck but rather a reason to continuously strive to come as close as possible as not to end up unacceptably shy.