Have you *ever* paid this much attention to a primary race before?

[WilliamPitt]

Wait, before you zap me for trying to claim thare are a lot of 'rookies' in this place these days, understand that I am voting 'No,' as in I have never been this tied up in a primary race before. I watched '00 like a hawk, faded some in '96 because Bill had it in the bag after Dole fell off the stage, watched hard in '92 and '88, etc.

This, though, is a whole new level. You?

[Hoosier Democrat]

1. I started being a Primary Junkie in college

Back then, I was an early and enthusiastic Dukakis supporter. We followed every primary like reading tea leaves.

I even followed the Repug primaries in 1996 and 2000.

[isbister]

2. other - 1980 n/t

[mopinko]

3. never donated before

and never wasted so much time arguing.
always paid farily close attention, tho.

[eyesroll]

4. I've been involved, but never this deeply

(Of course, I'm nobody's press secretary :), but...)

I live in Wisconsin, which is going to be a mess for the next two weeks. I believe I'm attending an Edwards rally tomorrow. (I'm trying to attend one from each candidate, if I haven't already seen them, for history's sake.)

Will--Are you coming to WI before our primary?

Edit: Per Sheila's request below -- I was old enough to make Reagan posters in 1984; old enough to pick my own candidate in 1998; old enough to care in 1992; but not old enough to vote until 1993.

[WilliamPitt]

6. I don't think so

Discovering that being in a stationary place with a computer means getting a lot lot lot more done.

[eyesroll]

7. awww...too bad...

But let us know if you change your mind!
</hijack>

[SheilaT]

5. You probably ought to request

age ranges, or how many election cycles we've been old enough to vote in.

For me, it's since 1972.

[Rowdyboy]

8. You kids are so young! 1976 Democratic race-Now there was a real campaign

Jimmy Carter
Morris Udall
Scoop Jackson
Frank Church
Hubert Humphrey
George Wallace
Jerry Brown
Birch Bayh
Sargeant Shriver
Milton Shapp
and
Fred Harris (my guy)

Started in January, people were still voting in early June. Jerry Brown and Frank Church both got in during the late SPRING for God's sake.

Not to brag or anything....

[texasmom]

45. I do remember following this primary season!

I was in 7th grade and was pulling for Carter, so it was fun!

[IndianaGreen]

9. In a way it reminds me of 1968

After Bobby Kennedy was assassinated, the Democratic machinery decided to back warmonger Hubert Humphrey rather than the only remaining peace candidate, Gene McCarthy.

The Left sat the election out, unwilling to prostitute itself to a candidate that had been a cheerleader for America's colonial war in Southeast Asia.

Deja vu!

[Rowdyboy]

10. Which brought us Richard Nixon

Renquist, Warren Burger, Trent Lott and other assorted trash.

We're still paying because the left refused to "prostitute" themselves by voting for a great man like Hubert Humphrey.

[redqueen]

11. Thanks for pointing this out.

This subject deserves its own thread... esp. around November!

[IndianaGreen]

13. Humphrey: "Vietnam is this country's greatest adventure!"

I was on active duty when I heard that pig make that remark on Armed Forces Radio, I cursed his name, and I continue to curse his name for his complicity in the criminal war in Vietnam.

There is only one Vietnam era character more pathetic than Humphrey, the architect of the war: Robert Strange McNamara.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

17. And as witnessed by the response some still don't get it

[Ficus]

34. HHH

was a good man, IMO. But that isn't the point. I agree. Let the left sit out...whatever. If the rest of us need a Watergate to remove Bush we will, even without the help of the disgruntled left.

[Iverson]

37. maybe it's the other way around

Considering that the anti-war people were right at the time and vindicated by history, maybe the centrists shouldn't have pushed a guy who was willing to parrot Pres. Johnson's line on VietNam.

Why is it always supposed to be the lefties who change, even on life and death issues?

[lovedems]

12. I am 36 and honestly, this is the first time I have paid this much

attention to a primary. I started to pay attention to politics in the 90's but never to this degree (which sometimes borders on obsession!). I really started to pay attention in the 2000 primaries and politics has been a "hobby" of mine ever since.

It is kind of cool, having 4 young kids. My oldest knows how much politics interests me and is showing a youthful interest himself. For the Young Authors Contest he is considering writing a story "If I were President For A Day". He is thinking about all of the ways he would help people. I will raise 4 democrats yet!

[welshTerrier2]

14. 1968 - Gene McCarthy

although i must admit, we didn't have anywhere close to the amount of news coverage of the campaign that we're getting this year ...

the dems are getting tremendous exposure from the "horserace" aspects of the primaries ... too bad it will soon be over ...

btw, does it seem like our candidates are not getting much attention this week? is there another debate scheduled? things have gotten a little too quiet ... i'm afraid if we declare a winner in the next week or two, this may be what it's like until the convention ...

[Zomby Woof]

15. I have to agree

It must spring from supporting a candidate on the level I support this one for the first time, and the hunger for getting Bush out and turning around a drifting United States.

And yes, I am a veteran political junkie too, so I am thinking this is the biggest for many of us.

[cmf]

16. I'm pretty young, so I haven't had much chance to get involved.

I'm only 27, so this is only my 3rd presidential election that I can vote in. My first one was Clinton's second term, so there was no opposition. For the 2000 Democratic primary, I was semi-involved. I watched the 2000 Republican primary very closely, because I already knew that Bush and Co. was very bad, and didn't want him to win the nomination. This time I'm very excited and it's been one of my top interests since about August.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

18. I did in 92 because at the time

I had been living in SD and the mayor who was probably the most progressive mayor San Diego had ever seen had gone to work for Jerry Brown's campaign.

[Terwilliger]

19. pry?....merry?

What is this? Some form of ritualized dance?

[MODemocrat]

20. I've always voted, but haven't been as involved

There has been such a good lineup of candidates this time, that it made us keep our eyes open; that coupled with the idea of actually having another person in the presidency besides George Bush.
This is the first time in my long life that I've ever made a contribution to any campaign.

[bhunt70]

21. no, always very political, but not to this extent.

[Donkeyboy75]

22. I'm only 28,

and although I've followed primaries before (I was a 2000 junkie), this is an obsession with me. Must be because I hate the Deserter in Chief more than I ever thought possible for a public figure.

[Eurobabe]

23. my first experience

when this is all over, i hope *someone* has the foresight to interview a whole LOT of people and write a book.

my bet is there are many disillusioned folk at this point.

[Avalux]

24. All New For Me

but I'm older now, have kids - want them to have a good future.

[blindpig]

25. never before

although in 92 I worked for the dems(pollwatcher & phone) because Hunter S Thompson said to.
This is the first time I've had a choice other than "the lesser of 2 evils" other than 72, which I deeply regret. Go DK!

[MaineDem]

26. I've been a political wonk since the 60s

I remember staying up late with my father listening to returns on the radio when I was very young.

I had the chance to go to Chicago in '68, never dreaming it would turn out to be so momentous. I was still in high school and didn't have the money or the parental approval for the trip.

This primary, although the most important in my lifetime, is just another in the long list for which I have been almost totally comitted.

[rucky]

27. Even when I canvassed for Jerry Brown in '92

I wasn't this involved.

[THUNDER HANDS]

28. no, not even close

This is the FIRST primary I've every watched, period.

And I have to say I'm enjoying the hell out of this. What fun. :)

[NoPasaran]

29. Only 1972 came close

When I was part of the very small group of McGovernites at my high school in El Paso. And being too young to vote I could only participate viscerally through a teacher who described the precinct caucus and county convention to us.

I have never been so involved as now though. I don't think the stakes have been this high before.

[hippiegranny]

30. benn voting since '76

i have never been so worried about all things political in my whole life, much less primaries, as i have the past 4 years.

[no name no slogan]

31. 1988 was big for me, so was 1990 (Wellstone's 1st Senate race)

I organized a couple of precincts for Dukakis for the caucuses. I even went to the state party convention as a Dukakis delegate.

1990 was very huge for me, as I got to actively organize for Paul Wellstone. I'd been friendly with Paul since 1988, when he helped us elect a local professor to the state legislature, and was thrilled when I found out he was running for Senate. I went to the state convention that year, too, supporting Wellstone. I busted my hump during that election, which we won by a nose.

I got out of college in '91 (during the previous "Bush Recession"), and was working two jobs to pay rent during most of '92 and '93, although I followed the primaries off and on. After Clinton won, I held out hope, but he disappointed me so much in 1993 that I dropped out of party politics.

Other than a local legislative race in 1998, 2000 and 2002, I pretty much stayed out of Dem politics. Gore and Bradley excited me about as much as dry white toast, and I voted 3rd party.

This year, however, is much different. We actually have a candidate worth not only voting for, but WORKING for, too. I'm proud and happy to be out organizing and working for the next president of the US, DENNIS KUCINICH! FEAR ENDS, HOPE BEGINS. KUCINICH 2004!

[Catt04]

32. 1992

nt

[Auntie Bush]

33. This is the first time I've ever been so interested in politics and

I'm in my sixty's. First time I'm EVER contributed, considered myself a junkie, wrote letters, got signatures, Attended political parties/meetups, chatted on line about politics, spend 24/7 thinking about a political campaign, drove my family nuts with my one track mind and ever loved a candidate. Although I loved Bill Clinton and he woke up my political juices.

I guess it's because I fear for our country for the first time ever and I know Clark is the bright star in our future and the world will be in worse shape without him. He's EVERYTHING I could ever want in a president. He not only has my vote but he has my heart and soul. He's got me! I'm his!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

35. I always WATCHED

beginning in 1960, when Kennedy and Humphrey were battling it out for the nomination.

But this is the first time in my life that I have volunteered for a specific candidate or contributed more than $20.

[OutlawCorporatePolls]

36. pay even more attention.

come see my research site.

[MrSlayer]

38. This is the first time I really cared.

And it's also the first time I actually found a candidate I felt was worth giving money to.

[Piperay]

39. No because usually by the time I get to vote in CA

it's already decided and my vote doesn't count for much, this time maybe it will. :-)

[Casablanca]

40. Have Dem primaries had media coverage like this before?

Even when the Repub candidate is an incumbent? You'd think that the entire anti-Bush sentiment of the country were right there in the primary vote totals, instead of being the sentiment of the Democratic base that it usually is.

It's sad that support for candidates like Dean and Kucinich are defined by a fraction of the number of people that vote in a general election. And that the massive support for Dean by Republicans and true fiscal conservatives are going nearly unnoticed.

[Crunchy Frog]

41. I have never paid this much

attention before. I am not new to voting but this is absolutely the worst administration of my lifetime. I the past the stakes just didn't seem so high. I did pay alot of attention to the primaries in the first election I was eligible to vote in. I was extremely fixated on the Gary Hart campaign, but I'm far more fixated this time.

[BL_Zebub]

42. I haven't seen a race this contested since

I tried to run for God! And that was a long, long time ago.

[blondeatlast]

43. I've always gotten very involved after the nominee was chosen,

although I worked for Bill Bradley in '99.

This matters. Damn, how this MATTERS!

[texasmom]

44. I'm 41, and I've followed the primaries before,

but I have never been this interested, this sure of the candidate I've chosen, this determined for change in November. It's amazing, because as much as I hated Reagan and disliked Bush the elder, I never got that involved in the primaries. Maybe it was because I was in my twenties. Maybe now it's because I'm in my forties and have young children. I'm really scared for our country. I'm really scared for my children's future. There is so much at stake on so many fronts. We can't lose. I think that's why we all have so much passion for our candidates--because we just have to win in November.

[opihimoimoi]

46. Never have I seen this much bruhaha but then this one is SOOO important

ABB

[Kathleen04]

47. I'm 17, so this is the first time I've paid attention

I don't remember very much of 2000, I vaguely remember watching one of the Gore and Bush debates. Then I really remember watching election day and the ensuing madness for weeks thereafter..

[mlawson]

48. Yes, always, because it was never decided for us this early!

The DNC even let Gary Hart (1984) have longer than this...

:argh:

My interest is evaporating now; it is obvious to me what is going to happen. Here we go again.