DU this Gephardt Poll, they are ganging up on us!

[usregimechange]

Would John Kerry's selection of St. Louis Democrat Richard Gephardt cause you to switch your vote?

http://joplinglobe.com/

See how they are uniting around the Kerry ticket is all bad answer?

[redqueen]

1. Switch your vote?

What's the assumption here, that we're all automatically bush voters?

:wtf:

[BJ]

3. Joplin Mo's the buckle on the Bible Belt

Even if a Democrat can bring well-paying jobs to the area, end poverty and get them health care system second to none in the world, they'll vote against their own best self interests.

[usregimechange]

4. The poll pisses me off. And your right about Joplin so...

feel sorry for me. But all we need in these counties is 40% for kerry and he wins MO.

[k in IA]

2. Talk about a push poll! No appropriate answer but the last one because

I'll vote for Kerry no matter who is the VP, even though I hope it isn't Gep.

[evil_orange_cat]

5. Gephardt on the ticket would make a Kerry vote more painful than it is...

:(

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. Care to explain that?

[evil_orange_cat]

10. in no uncertain terms "Kerry is not my first choice"

I'm certainly not "pro-Kerry"... I'm "anti-Bush". ;)

IMO, Kerry belongs to part of the Democratic Party that is more of a problem than a solution. He's also a very flawed candidate. We'd be much better off with Edwards (charisma), Clark (better experience to boast), or even Dean (much better at motivating).

Having said that, I'd much rather help Kerry with constructive criticism than rail against him. Gephardt is absolutely what is wrong with the Democratic Party. He's stiff, uncharismatic, and holds views contrary to my own. Lieberman and Gephardt were the two candidates that would have made me vote for Nader. Kerry was a close second, however, I'm firmly ABB. It's just that voting for Kerry, while moderately painful, isn't nearly as bad as having to vote for a Kerry/Gephardt ticket. Plus, I want to see a VP that can be groomed to be a presidential candidate after 8 years of Kerry. Gephardt's old, and he certainly won't get any better with age.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

11. You certainly showed vast knowledge of Gephardt...

Probably haven't ever even heard him speak, because he's probably the best of the bunch you mentioned, especially better than Clark and Edwards.

And he's absolutely everything that's wrong with the Democratic Party because, and I quote, "holds views contrary to my own"? Are you fucking kidding me? Since when do YOU determine what the Democratic Party is? Perhaps you should just get over the fact that there isn't going to be a viable candidate that is an exact duplicate of your views. Neither Kerry nor Gephardt fit that role for me either, but they are both fantastic men who've done a hell of a lot more for our country and our party than Ralph Nader could even conceive.

I do agree the VP should be someone we can groom for President in 8 years, but we have to get that person into the VP role first. You can't select someone based on that, even though it would be really nice.

I'm willing to bet you hold one or two things against Gephardt that he's done on behalf of the party because you don't quite understand that in his position, he HAS to compromise some points in order to keep things going. You can't just be the hammer in politics, which is why people like DeLay and Kucinich will not likely ever be anything more than Representatives. That does not diminish their roles to their respective parties, but you're only kidding yourself if you think someone like that is going to get elected by anything more than a few hundred thousand people in a very particular location. That's the way the game is played, sorry.

[Warren DeMontague]

12. Politics is about more than nuts and bolts, as well...

Politics, especially at the national level, is also about inspiration and, yes, vision. Now, Bushco. obviously has absolutely no handle on either, so they fall back on fear and lies.

I've said this before, I'm going to vote for the Dem. ticket even if Kerry picks, say, Carrot Top for his veep. But that doesn't change the fact that I believe- strongly- that a Kerry/Gephardt ticket would be like 12 feet of sleeping pill in a six-piece suit. That sound you would hear during the debates would be the sound of millions of ADD-addled Americans turning the channel over to reruns of "Iron Chef".

So, yes, Gephardt- good man. But he's demonstrated his absolute inability to fire up voters repeatedly in his numerous presidential attempts. So, please, not on the ticket.

edit:speeeeeling

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

17. No one mentioned is any better

At all. Let's face it, short of Dean, we don't have other truly engaging speakers. And Dean's not going to be VP. Edwards has never impressed me with either his tone, delivery, or message, and Clark is still unpolished. I have not had the opportunity to see Vilsack in action. I have, however, seen Gephardt many times, and I don't think he's anywhere near as bad as people make him out to be. He speaks with a lot of passion, he's extremely intelligent (many of his speeches are from memory, or he speaks off-the-cuff), and he's had many fantastic visions for our country. I think, flat out, Gep hasn't been given a chance by many.

[Warren DeMontague]

19. Well, we can agree...

To disagree. I've watched Gephardt since his very first run in the primaries, which was back in 1988, I think, unless I'm mistaken. Smart guy. But if I'm right about '88, that means he's had 16 years to impress a political junkie such as myself. And I still find him boring as a farm subsidy bill and slightly, gratingly abrasive to boot. Just one man's opinion, here, but, again, his performance in said primaries has never been anything terribly exciting, either.

Personally, I liked Dean. I agree he's not going to get the slot. Clark, I agree, also did not live up to his buzz and came across badly in the primaries.. Not quite ready for prime time.

I Like Edwards. I think he amply proved that he can generate excitement with his performance earlier this year. I think he's got a kind of southern populism that we desperately need on this ticket, and his ability to re-frame issues of "values" in economic terms, and clearly articulate the fact that, yes, we are now living in "two Americas"- could be crucial in this election and in the debates-- because I think the GOP's secret vulnerability is that they've somehow convinced millions of lower income Americans in the heartland that they're looking out for them, which is a hollow joke-- Add to that Edwards', yes, natural charisma.. all of those things, I think, make him the no-brainer obvious choice. JMO, again.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

20. I've yet to witness such charisma in Edwards

I don't find him to be exceptionally well spoken, and I don't find his message to be exceptionally compelling. I saw him in several interviews where he came off as kind of bumbling. He isn't ready for primetime. Add to that this is going to be a gloves-off battle, which Edwards doesn't seem willing to engage in, and well, he just doesn't make himself the right man for this fight, though he may be in 2008. You are correct about the '88 primaries and while I can't speak to those, I really have to wonder what it is about Gephardt you find so unappealing. In these primaries, he spoke with more passion than anyone outside of Dean. The media fucked over Gephardt with the same, tired "didn't work in '88" mantra, so people never gave him a second look. He had bold ideas that are VERY much within the liberal framework, and he's a midwesterner that can have some general appeal nationwide, especially to labor, who needs a swift kick in the ass to get energized. Perhaps we have to disagree, but I just don't feel like you're giving Gep a fair shake.

[Warren DeMontague]

21. I think Edwards' energy

is the perfect contrast for Dick "Fuck Yourself" Cheney in the debates. But I will promise you one thing, unreservedly-- If Dick Gephardt is put on the ticket, I will certainly not only give the man another chance and a fair shake, but I will wholeheartedly go to bat for him, because it means I'm gonna end up voting for him. Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, it would be physically impossible for anyone to be less inspiring in the dem. VP slot than Lieberman was, in 2000. So the bar is low as it is.

[Cannikin]

6. Done..not many votes so far..shouldnt be hard to change it.

[Wickerman]

8. Bullshit like this makes me happy that Clinton is a distraction right now

Keep Kerry low on the radar screen so that Rove and Co and all the little operatives around the country can't use this kind of biased shit to drag him down. Meanwhile - Kerry is raising big dollars as Bush* implodes.

[Walt Starr]

9. Two days ago, I would've voted yes

but since I'm now a "wild eyed" Kerry supporter, I could give a fuck who he chooses for Veep.

[amazona]

13. page not loading for me

Switch it how? I'm already voting for Kerry. I'm sure Gep will do a good job if he is selected as VP. So not clear on what is being asked?

[Warren DeMontague]

14. That Poll Smells Like Ass

Sort of like "When Did You Stop Beating Your Wife?"

[HFishbine]

15. Laughable

"No, no amount of window-dressing would make Kerry look good."

How about, "Kerry doesn't need to be weighed down by a spineless warmonger"? There is no option for those who would like to vote for Kerry, but not Gephardt.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. Voted yes. From Kerry to Green.

Kerry is bad enough, but adding the Rose Garden Cheerleader is beyond my nose holding capabilities.

[asthmaticeog]

18. Screw Gephardt.

How many times has he sought the party nomination? And how many times has he been thoroughly, electorally rebuked? EVERY SINGLE TIME. If we didn't want him for our presidential nominee all those times, where the fuck are people getting the idea he'd make an attractive VP? It makes my head hurt... You don't pick a VP you wouldn't want for president, period.

[Warren DeMontague]

22. that's just wrong..

I mean the "Shining" picture, not your post.

Thanks alot, I'll be sleeping with the night light on tonight.