Who would you vote for, Gore, Clinton, Kerry, Other? (and why)

[cain_7777]

For Presidency, who would you vote for in 2008 and why? Just curious as to all the differing opinions to reply.

[SteppingRazor]

1. I'd vote to move this from LBN to GD

after that, I'd vote for whoever had a D next to their name

[cain_7777]

6. Jeeez, sorry.

Whoa, there snippy. Meant to post in General discussion.

[SteppingRazor]

8. Ahem. Sorry. LBN's the only forum around here...

that gets such stringent treatment. Didn't mean to get pissy about it.

Anyway, to get to your point, I'm really open about the '08 candidate. I'd like to see what positions the various nominees put forth after announcing their candidacies, and go from there. A lot can change in a couple years, after all. :hi:

[Spangle]

7. Same here.

Not a news item. And not a BREAKING news item either.

[babylonsister]

2. '06, '06, '06, '06, '06. nt

[Tiggeroshii]

3. hmm.. this isn't lbn.

n/t

[Vidar]

4. Not LBN

[applegrove]

5. Any and all - if I could vote. Any and all.

[DemGa]

9. Hope it's Gore

[Crunchy Frog]

10. Clark. n/t

[iilana X]

11. Kerry.

He's done a lot of things that never get much press. He's at the forefront of just about every issue. Hillary plays it safe and kisses up to the republicans. Gore is conservative one day and liberal the next. He wasn't all that great a VP and then turned tail and ran after 2000. We need somebody who knows how to push back hard and somebody who is more than a single issue candidate. I like Kerry. Barbara Boxer would be my second choice. I'm watching Jesse Jackson Jr. for the future.

[cain_7777]

20. We'd be much better off if we had a paper trail for Kerry 04

He'd be prez, we'd be out of Iraq with a proper budget, much less of a deficit, maybe Kyoto would now be signed, social healthcare, and this list could go on forever. Kerry needs to run again. I just hope he learned a little from the last election and comes back with a new approach. Seriously, when you run against such a dumbass and lose you can blame diebold only so much.

[iilana X]

28. He talked today on the Stephanie Miller show about having a paper trail.

Kerry also talked about needing a paper trail before:

"I call on Congress to keep its promise and fully fund the Help America Vote Act, fund the activities of the Election Assistance Commission, and help states invest in better voting machines with paper trails."

Bush might be a dumbass but that is an asset not a liability in many areas of the country, sad to say. Remember how many people said John Kerry was "elitist" because he uses proper English and can say the word nuclear instead of nookular. And remember all the dumbasses who went to the polls believing firmly that WMD were found in Iraq.

[blm]

41. I am still of the belief that it will be Kerry who works to expose the

machine fraud, and works to secure the machines BEFORE the next election. He knows too much now that he didn't know before - one is that you can't trust the Dem party infrastructure to secure the machines before the vote.

[blm]

12. Kerry - he's the only advocate for open government and he'd open the books

that NEED to be opened so this country can actually HAVE a real democracy protected by INFORMED CITIZENS.

[cain_7777]

16. Exactly!

If an administration has nothing to hide then open govt is the way to go for real democracy.

[Jai4WKC08]

21. "the only advocate for open government"?! n/t

[blm]

24. Well, Kerry HAS advocated for over 20 years for open government.

He took the Reagan and Bush administrations to court a few times to get the books opened. So far, there hasn't been anyone else to MAKE that a defining part of their resume. If you have any info that you can share to correct that perception, then I'm all ears, but I try to stay on top of who has been out there advocating to open the books.

Certainly Clark takes an open approach and gives detailed answers to questions out of respect for the public, but, advocating for open government that opens records to the people that need to be seen is a bit different. If this is something he will work for, then all the better, in my book.

[Tom Rinaldo]

27. He's not the only advocate for open government,

Clark is also and even did that during his 2004 Presidential campaign, with all of his own records. Piles and piles of personal records and documents were made available to the media in a special reading room that Clark set up for them. Clark did so specifically as a demonstration of his commitment to open government.

Having said that, I don't doubt at all that Kerry is a strong advocate of it also, and good for him for that.

[blm]

35. I have said that Clark is candid - and that is a great sign - an advocate

is someone who has spoken up for the issue and worked to OPEN books that have been closed to the public by official government acts. That would qualify the difference in how they are seen.

So far, that hasn't been anyone else who challenged power to that degree except Kerry. At this point, none of us KNOW how far Clark would go because he hasn't stated it as a mission ..... I repeat, at this point. I, for one, would love to see it as part of a mission for ALL Democratic office seekers.

[Khaotic]

13. Gore

I would vote for Gore because he's fighting as a citizen. He has an unbelievable resume and I think he's really found himself.

Whether he runs or not, I think he's going to continue to fight.

I no longer consider him a part of the DLC and I think he's become a true progressive.

Here's a winning ticket for '08: Gore/Obama

The fight would really be on, but the Democrats would probably have the best people up for election since Sen. Robert Kennedy was running for president.

[MrBenchley]

14. How about all of the above....

[Ken Burch]

44. Well, you're only allowed to vote for one of them at a time.

Otherwise, they'd end up in a five way tie for second and Jeb would get in with 22%.

[welshTerrier2]

15. voting criteria

i'm not interested in picking candidates or in answering polls about them either ... but, since you added the "(and why)" to your subject line, i thought i would at least address that part of your question ... we would be well served focussing more on platform and less on candidates ...

starting with the premise that we are in a very real war for the survival of our fundamental liberties, and viewing bush and those who pull his strings as an evil, un-American cabal, we need to look for leadership that is willing to "out the enemy and the evil they represent" ...

i see very little of that happening with most prominent Democrats ... to be sure, a few in the Dem Progressive Caucus in the House would meet this test ...

the specific issues are really very few but very important ...

1. we should not just focus on corruption - the problem goes much deeper than that ... corruption is a distraction, albeit an important issue ... the real crisis is the poisoning of our democracy by greedy, powerful interests ... restoring the best interests of the American people and just plain and simple fundamental democracy to our government should be job one for Democrats seeking my support ...

2. Iraq - too many Democrats are still playing politics with this issue ... "we have to stay and push for more diplomacy" ... are you f**king kidding me??? when will they realize that bush is NEVER going to broker a peace deal?????? those who refuse to support immediate withdrawal are truly fools ... could their ideas be viable with a reasonable President in the WH? of course they could - what they're doing is investing America's blood and treasure in a hopelessly corrupt regime ... stop supporting bush's war and start supporting OUT NOW if you want my support ...

3. Democrats need a real plan on jobs ... it's time to recognize the legitimate fears of those who have suffered from "globalization" ... if you can't offer labor some specifics, you ain't going nowhere ...

4. We cannot tap dance around human liberation issues ... women, gays, minorities and anybody else must be free to live their lives as equals ... period ... this includes full support for freedom to choose and gay marriage ... there can be no compromising fundamental human liberties ... the tactics and timing can be discussed but the ultimate objective must be clearly stated NOW ...

5. And finally, global warming and a sane energy policy ... it's too late to propose "halfway measures" ... we are heading for an environmental calamity arguing about 22 miles per gallon versus 23 miles per gallon ... it's time to get a serious energy plan that includes a very bold and aggressive push for mass transit and alternative, renewable fuels ...

6. OK, and finally, finally ... there has to be a real can-do balanced budget proposal ... deficit spending is not a left versus right issue; it's just insane ... assuming we are not going to gouge critically needed social spending programs, Democrats need to take an aggressive axe to the wasteful components of the defense budget ... to play little political games so that the Party can appear "tough" on national defense and national security is not acceptable when it comes to wasteful spending ... we should have all the defense we need; not all the defense the military-industrial complex wants ... the two are not the same ... candidates who don't understand that, or worse yet, candidates who do understand that and won't speak out against it, will not have my support ...

[cain_7777]

39. great post, thank you

very informative and I agree with you on many aspects. I just wanted to get an early start and some debate. Our party needs a strong platform that all of our democrats in congress can rally around. Today 5/19 the dems have come out with an energy proposal. I have not yet had time to read it fully yet, but it looks like a good start. Your right in the fact that we cannot afford to half ass policy on global warming because it is already to late and we need drastic measures to counter the problem at this point. thanks again for you post.

[laugle]

42. As usual you post is

intelligent, logical and articulate! I am so sick of all the time spent defending a particular candidate.

I try to avoid it....but being human sometimes it's hard.

I have a limited time on DU and try to spend it wisely....

Thanks for the post!

[StellaBlue]

17. GORE

Will happily vote for any of the above, but I think Gore's time has come. Hillary will lead to a nightmare. And I think most people couldn't stomach another Kerry run (most people being most Americans, not most DUers).

[LSK]

18. Gore

Hes the best man to guide us through the Peak Oil crisis we are about to encounter.

I have no problem voting for Kerry, he understands what it means to be a citizen and is a great Patriot and an intelletual who can handle the complex problems we face.

I would support Clark and Feingold also.

I will only vote for Hillary in a general election.

[Uncle Joe]

19. President Gore because he is a visionary,

and he really cares about the American People and saving life as we know it from the dangers of global warming. Also he empowered all of us when he championed the internet and he did not stop there going on to create the first interactive two way democratic television network. On top of all that and much more, he has already been elected.

[mtnsnake]

22. Sharpton. After 8 years of Bush, I'm ready for some laughs!

[Dervill Crow]

23. Gore, because he was elected in 2000 and would have been awesome.

I cannot imagine why anyone would want to be president and clean up the mess that our country is in now, but if anyone can do it, he can.

[skyblue]

25. This is Not a Definitive List of Candidates, But Anybody but a...

Corporate Welfare WEEPIGLICAN!

I FAVOR a Candidate that is electable!

I Will Compromise in order to get that Electable Candidate who knows what polls are ....

I may not get every little friggin' thing I want, but at least I can get someone Elected who will get me some of the stuff I want. I'd rather get some of what I want than all the friggin' attacks the WEEPIGLICANS have made on American Women and Medical Research and the Right to Die and more of a Lack of Capeablity to have a Supreme Court Justice who will be selected for a LIFE TERM who thinks it is the PRESIDENTS Right to inspect my Medical Records and Garbage .....

:kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick:

[caligirl]

26. Gore- The power of his thinking, his passion is palpable, he loves this

country and you just know it when you listen to his words. His quiet efforts after Katrina, no press conferences were so appropriate knowing the horrible suffering of those with lessor means.

[blm]

36. JK did that the day after Katrina struck and no one found out about it

until Trent Lott thanked him on the Senate floor. Then when he made another trip with supplies representing the people of Boston a couple weeks later he was vilified as only doing it for attention.

It's such a shame that Democrats doing what needs to be done (as Gore and Kerry did) are treated so poorly in the media when they are really just being themselves.

[Totally Committed]

29. Wes Clark

it's the trust thing.

TC

[TayTay]

30. Other!

I'm holding out for the promised coming of the Democratic Messiah. This perfect being will lead us out of the electoral wilderness and usher in a Golden Age of wonderous liberalism that will last nearly forever.

Other than that, all we have a mere flawed humans. Ech. Who wants them?

[TheFarseer]

31. Gore

I think he would have the boldest agenda for America.

[Lindacooks]

32. I'll vote for the Democratic candidate, whoever that is.

We have GOT to get rid of the right wing dictatorship in this country.

[moobu2]

33. Any one of them would make a great president

I'm a life long die hard Democrat though, who will support however the nominee. I’m a member of the Dem base, always have been and proud of it.

[LWolf]

34. I'll vote for

anyone who stands and works for progressive issues with integrity, and has the record to prove it. Actually standing in opposition to the current regime from the beginning of the 2000 selection, whether or not it was personally expedient, is a requirement.

[Cosmocat]

37. Clark is the total package ...

As others noted, I will go with pretty much whoever ... ALL of our guys/gals are better than any repuke ... And, I know there are some real hard core Gore and Kerry people here ...

But, Wes Clark is the total package ... I got turned on to him from being here, and I just grow more and more sure that he is BOTH the best candidate AND gives us the best hope of having a D (read adult) get elected ...

The fact is, both Kerry and Gore have been marginalized by the republican propoganda machine, including the MSM ... They have been belittled and cartoonized enough to skunk them with far too many of the average (read unattentive and uncommitted) voters ... They both are great men, have integrity and all, but they backed down in the clinches when it counted during their elections, held back and allowed themselves to be steamrolled ... AGAIN, I am not knocking them, but for too many americans, they have been unmasculated ...

Clark ... He has the ability/tendency to effectively sidestep issues without looking like he wimped out ... He also has southern in him, and is one of the VERY few Ds who would have a chance to win southern states ... Pretty much any other candidate would have to win on the 22 state plan (or whatever it is) and that just leaves to much room for error ... Clark makes it a national election ...

Also ... He will have the best international/security creds of any other candidate ... And, 2008 is going to be a HUGE campain relative to security/international issues ...

[Diane R]

38. Gore. Then Kerry. Not Clinton n/t

[cain_7777]

40. I don't like Clinton either

She is pandering to Bush's base and kissing his ass now. "Charming?" whatever happend to "worst president ever." If she stuck with attacking Bush she's be a lot better off.

[Ken Burch]

43. Why didnt't you think Feingold deserved a mention of his own?

What did Russ do to deserve being consigned to "other"?

[karynnj]

45. Kerry

His combination of foreign policy expertize, and the issues such as SS, Healthcare, pensions etc that he fully understands at a detailed level. Every time I have read a major speech by Kerry on anything, I have come away understanding the issues better. On many things he has identified issues long before any other Senators were speaking of them. Here are 4 examples:

1) In New War, Kerry addressed the problem of international crime and non-state terrorism. He explained that just as businesses have become global so has crime and he then focused on how to deal with it. (His 3 foreign policy speeches this year have been amazing)

2) His speech on NAFTA (1993) was one of the earliest things I've read on that spoke of the increasing income gap between top and bottom and the decline of the middle class, the inevitability of global markets and how we needed to work to get the good jobs here. (I heard Friedman saying no one in DC had ever spoke of these issues when he was pushing his "earth is flat" book. Kerry had a dozen years earlier - maybe if the NYT had covered the Democrat nominee.

3) His concerns in his Clean Elections floor speech in 1997 anticipated much of the discussion about corporate control of teh Democratic process.

4) His combination of alternative energy/good jobs in research and production/cleaner envioronment/eliminate dependence on ME in 2004

The breath of these issues and his competence on all of them is amazing.