I've wavered back & forth so much on Edwards

[blue america]

that I don't know what to think. In a sense, the same way I've wavered on Dean and Kerry. To me, those three candidates are ones I can be excited about. If I wanted to get into name-calling matches, I could go on the yahoo! boards and argue with bushies, but I come to DU because for the most part, it's like-minded people that are interest in progress. I don't resort to any petty name calling of ANY of the candidates, even the ones that I'm not partiuclarly fond of. There's a reason we HAVE a primary process, and we don't confirm a nominee based off form emails and speeched to teachers' unions in Des Moines that we see on C-span.

Yes. The Iraq war issue is huge. But remember, Dean didn't have to vote for it. Will that be the issue that defines who I vote for? In all likelihood, by the time my primary rolls around, we'll have our guy so I don't know if it even matters.

I'm rambling on and on here with no cohesive message, I apologize. Basically, the point is, how many of you have absolutely without a doubt decided on your candidate, and if that candidate does not win, are you still voting for a Dem? And do you like your candidate because of what he/Braun believes in and stands for? Or simply because you're not too fond of the rest of the field.

Here's what I wrote for DU after the South Carolina debate, and my feelings on most all of the candidates has changed one way or another: http://democraticunderground.com/articles/03/05/06_debate.html

[Terwilliger]

1. Kerry told you to get over it

why arent you listening??

[TheBigGuy]

2. Im undecided too.

I like alot of the candidates and will probably end up flipping a coin, or making my decision in the voting booth.

But as I've stated here many times before I'll vote for whoever the Democratic Party nominated. I'm not an independent or a swing voter whos going to have to choose between Bush and the Dem... I'm a Democrat.

[blue america]

3. Thats generally how I feel

but I do want to be inspired and excited by a guy. But who am I kidding. The Dems will have to nominate Trent Lott to make me consider not voting for them.

[MercutioATC]

4. Anybody but Bush

I like Dean, but I'll vote against Bush even if Lieberman is the nominee. My advice is to go with whomever speaks to your views. Forget about who's "electable". Go with who you like.

[blue america]

5. I know what your saying but

Kucinich will definately be out of the race by the time of the NJ Primaries.

It IS anybody Bush as far as I'm concerned.

[newsguyatl]

7. i say

go with the one who excites you, who ignites you, the one who gives you hope that we can take our country back... whoever does that for you, after listening to them speak and hearing them on the issues, that's your man (or woman)...

that's what i did...

[quinnox]

6. Yea, I vote for any Dem

Just as a side note, I believe your sig is much too large and may draw complaints. See the offical sig rules for info.

[blue america]

8. Thanks for the headsup

I uploaded it this morning and didnt realize that at full size it was that big (it was more condensed on my page).

[quinnox]

12. Thank you

for adjusting it.

[tjdee]

9. I'm totally sold on my candidate.

But that's me. I'm a quick study--I don't like being in an indecisive position. If I can't make a decision, I get the information I need to make the decision, and make it.

Edwards, in my estimation, has the best shot of beating Bush. And that's my number one priority. I can split hairs with him after he's the President. And that's how I feel about all of them. I can piddly poo with them after one of them beats Bush. George W. Bush is completely unacceptable to me.

I have also grown to LIKE Edwards very much. That doesn't mean I agree with everything that comes out of his mouth.

There are so many months before the primaries, there's plenty of time for a candidate to win you over, that's their job. If none of them excite you, what can you do. A lot of people felt that way about Gore, for example (not me! I adore Alby!). Hey, maybe you'd be a Clark fella!

[Bombtrack]

10. The war issue is huge, but not in the way that you make it out to be

People here assume that just because you're an informed dem that you have to be against the war. No, that is not the case. I believe that agreeing or disagreeing with the war is alot like belief in God. I think that both the atheists and the fundamentalists have there heads in the wrong places.

Being agnostic about it is the most honest attitude if you've really informed your self about both sides. 99 percent of the anti-war movement is rooted not at truely listening and thinking about both sides. There are good things that have and might still come out of it, that I will go over if you want, and there are many many bad things, one of them of course being oil/war profiteering, which the anti-war people believe was the primary and only reason, and many independant/agnostic and some pro-war people believe was one smaller reason.

What I am not agnostic about is the fact that Edwards has not been wishy-washy on the issue(unlike Kerry) and that he will gain many more votes and support than he loses because of it

[elsiesummers]

11. I read your post debate summary

And I basically think you are dead on - except - to be honest - I have written off Kucinich, Sharpton, Braun, and Graham - I don't think any can make the cut - I don't think any would be good in the General Election either - so why vote for them in the primary - that's what it is about - selecting the best General Election candidate.

I thought your write up of Kucinich was a little harsh. He does not phsically look the part of Pres - and this is important.

I think Kerry did poorly in the debate - I only gave him credit based on past performances. On the debate alone - your opinion was too generous, IMO. But I still like Kerry.

I'm pro-Edwards. Originally I was for Kerry, flirted briefly with the idea of Dean - but he doesn't reach me and turns me off as much as on.

Edwards is the one. He has a great message, especialy for this iffy economy, and he has the right history and background to deliver the message of equal opportunity and fairness. Most of all his message is of hope and a bright future - will play well against Bush terror/fear/scare tactics. And he goes after Bush fiercely. He's my favorite - by far.

I'll vote for any Dem - though it would be hard to pull a lever for Lieberman.

[blue america]

14. Thanks

and I agree about Sharpton, Braun, Graham and Kucinich, and thats why I summarized them in order of electability, but in reality, its a dead heat among those 4 for Zero Shot. Since May 5, Dean has obviously moved up.

I think I'm in a very similiar boat with you. Before the campaigning started, I was in the Kerry camp, mainly because of familiarity and his high profile, since I've never been big on Gephardt or Lieberman.

Dean's picked up some nice momentum of late and I'd be perfectly fine with him as the nominee.

But Edwards, you know, every time I see him speak to people, there's something about him that Wows me. He'd candid and honest and he seems genuine. And yes, he has no problems going after Bush. And you can't discount the impact of a southerner on the ballot. I whine a lot about the Northeast not getting any presidential representation, yet here I am strongly considering Edwards over Dean and Kerry.

[sandnsea]

13. Float the issues

That's what this time is for to me. Every person should be finding a candidate who reflects their views. Then push that person and those views as hard as you can so hopefully they will become election issues. When the final candidate wins, he should be the one that best reflects the most important issues of the party as a whole. And if they aren't your issues, then I guess you are just going to have to get over it. Or have Bush for 4 more years.

And I like them all except Lieberman.