Rate the Dem candidates first as a "candidate" and then how you think they'd be as a "campaigner"

[mtnsnake]

I think each of them would make a competent president, but I think their scores would vary widely on how they'd perform as a campaigner. Rate Al Gore, too, if you want or anyone else.

Scoring: When you score them, imagine that each person has won the Democratic nod & is our nominee.

1) The "candidate" part of the score would be how strongly you feel that that person would make a good president.

2) The "campaigner" part of the score would be a guess on your part as to how they'd do on the campaign trail as our nominee...such as how they'd present themselves in areas like charisma, connectability, debate style, internal fortitude, personality, competitiveness, etc etc while on the campaign trail.

Rate them from 1 to 10, with 10 being the best, as to how you think each one would be as a candidate and then as a campaigner if they each were to get the nod.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

My ratings in alphabetical order by last name:

BIDEN: 7 as a candidate and 5 as a campaigner. (If he wasn't so prone to foot-in-mouth disease, I'd rate his "campaigner" score considerably higher.)

CLINTON: 8 as a candidate and 9 as a campaigner (I was totally impressed with how strongly she campaigned, especially in her first run for Senate)

DODD: 7 as a candidate and 5 as a campaigner (I'm just guessing here. I really am not that familiar with his style)

EDWARDS: 8 as a candidate and 7 as a campaigner

GORE: 9 as a candidate and 7 as a campaigner (I think I'm being generous on the "campaigner" part)

KUCINICH: 8 as a candidate and 5 as a campaigner

OBAMA: 9 as a candidate and 9 as a campaigner

RICHARDSON: 9 as a candidate and 8 as a campaigner (I'm somewhat guessing on the "campaigner" part of the score and going from gut feeling on that part.)

[Pyrzqxgl]

1. Sorry snake: this is just another way for you to let us know who you like

I wonder if you really care what we think. For instance I'd rate Edwards higher and I'm much less sure about Obama &
Clinton than you are.

[Forkboy]

2. Seems like he likes them all.

:shrug:

[mtnsnake]

5. That would be correct

I just think that sometimes there's a big difference between someone being a good candidate and a good campaigner and that this would be a way to differentiate. Plus, all too often, all we hear are the candidates that people DON'T like, so I thought it would be neat to see how people rate each one in their various ways.

[mtnsnake]

4. If I knew you were a mind reader I wouldn't have bothered posting my thoughts

Why didn't you tell me you already knew what was in my head? Then I could've let you post my thoughts while I did something else in my spare time like hike or fish, although it's still too cold for fishing up here. brrr

I wonder if you really care what we think

Why would I be doing this if I didn't?

For instance I'd rate Edwards higher and I'm much less sure about Obama & Clinton than you are.

Now was that so hard? :)

[jaybeat]

3. I'm game...

I haven't weighed in on the candidates much, so here goes nothing:

BIDEN: 3 as a candidate and "who cares" as a campaigner. (I lost all respect for Biden after how he handled Anita Hill. He hasn't done anything since to increase my opinion of him.)

CLINTON: 4 as a candidate and 9 as a campaigner (Way too DLC, pro-Israel, pro-Iraq War Resolution for my taste. On the campaign trail, it is hard to argue that she's one of the most effective campaigners the Dems have.)

DODD: 6 as a candidate and "huh?" as a campaigner (Chris has been a pretty good Senator, from what I can remember, for a long time. As a campaigner, well, let's just say I didn't remember he was running until now...)

EDWARDS: 9 as a candidate and 8 as a campaigner (He was the only candidate in '04 to mention the war against the middle class. Any other policy deficiencies he may have are nits by comparison, as far as I'm concerned. A pretty darn good campaigner, but I worry about the "rich trial lawyer" label being hung around his neck.)

GORE: 15 as a candidate and 9.5 as a campaigner (Honest, smart, authoritative, more moral credibility than God. I love Al so much, I don't even care that he fought for NAFTA or that he let the DLC goon-squad take him out of his own race in 2000. As far as Al being a lame campaigner, go ahead and give him a 7 for 2000--actually, give Carville and the rest of those traitors a -1000 and Al a 4 for not firing the lot of them. But now, it is a whole new ball game. Al is himself, and not afraid to let it show. And that's more than good, it's great. His sense of humor, gravitas, willingness to be human, but with a commanding intellect and moral authority (not just on climate change, but Iraq, Bush crimes, etc.) put him in a whole 'nother league. Run, Al RUN!!!)

KUCINICH: 8 as a candidate and 4 as a campaigner (It is great to be a progressive, and to stick to principles, but not at the expense of any chance of putting those into practice. He needs to alienate fewer fellow Dems in the process of his quest for ideological purity. Compromise IS way overdone, and not enough pols stand for *anything*, but our system won't work without it. And you can get elected without it, either.)

OBAMA: 7 as a candidate and 9 as a campaigner--can I give him a 12 as a fundraiser? (Too untested, hasn't been in front of enough issues for long enough to put him ahead of others, from my point of view. After 2 or 3 more terms in the Senate, lets take another look. Too many votes that make him look too DLC-ish for me. And too much pandering to church-goers. As a campaigner, people say he can move you like no one they've seen in forever--that's cool. Still, style over substance doesn't really sit well with me, but he IS my #2 after Edwards if Al doesn't run.)

RICHARDSON: 3 as a candidate and "who knows?" as a campaigner (Tax cuts? Sorry, dude, you're in the wrong party. Beyond that, his state is crying out for leadership on so many issues--poverty, destruction of native cultures, immigration, environment, etc., and though I haven't researched him a great deal, he hasn't made me notice him in those areas.)

[mtnsnake]

6. Way to go. Interesting ratings, btw

although where did the 15 come from for Gore? Something tells me he's your man.

I don't have any idea either on how Dodd would be as a campaigner. I think the only that surprises me a little is the one on Richardson, but I'm sure some of mine are surprising, too. I think a lot of people would agree with how you rated Clinton, Edwards, Gore, & Kucinich, especially the first three. I'd be interested to see how more people rated Obama. I agree with you that he'd be a heck of a campaigner.

[Czolgosz]

12. I completely agree with Jaybeat

[jaybeat]

15. Thanks! That never happens to me! (nt)

[w4rma]

7. Clinton: 5/6, Edwards:9/7, Gore: 9/7, Obama: 6/8

CLINTON: 5 as a candidate and 6 as a campaigner (she has to campaign as a chameleon, because her policies tend to be corporatist)

EDWARDS: 9 as a candidate and 7 as a campaigner (he now has the best policies of any candidate and he would be a powerhouse in the Presidency because he is trusted and liked by the most Americans. He's has been the leader on issue statements since the campaign began. Unfortunately, his anti-corporatist policies prevent him from being a good campaigner since big media minimalizes him even though he is in the top three and has one of, if not the best, chance to become the Democratic nominee, once all variables are taken into account.)

GORE: 9 as a candidate and 7 as a campaigner (Gore has been consistently able to predict how events would turn out and this has made him able to create some of the best policies for America. Gore is trying a non-traditional campaign out and is still feeling out the waters on making a run for the presidency. My dream team would be Gore/Edwards.)

OBAMA: 6 as a candidate and 8 as a campaigner (His campaign manager said the he is running a "personality" campaign as opposed to an issues campaign. That means that if he is elected, his positions **will** disappoint **many** people because he will not have explained them during the campaign and those people will have created their own ideas of what they thought he would do. It's a set up for a 1-term presidency, at most and/or loss of seats in Congress. I give him major credit as a fundraiser. I'm probably giving him too much credit as a campaigner since his poll numbers had been going down before the recent fundraising announcements, after which I haven't seen any polls yet.)

KUCINICH: don't care. no chance to win.

DODD: don't care. no chance to win.

RICHARDSON: don't care. no chance to win.

BIDEN: don't care. no chance to win.

[mtnsnake]

9. "his anti-corporatist policies prevent him from being a good campaigner"

That's something I didn't consider until you brought it up just now. Definitely food for thought. Anyway, if I had never seen Edwards run in 2004, I probably would've given him higher than a 7 in the campaigner category, but I was a little disappointed with him as a campaigner last time. However, he's a gifted speaker, charismatic as all hell, and I think there would be a good chance he'd surprise me at how well he campaigns as presidential nominee if he gets the nod.

[Forkboy]

8. Alright.

Biden - 5/3
Clinton - 5/9
Dodd - 6/6
Edwards - 7/7
Gore - 9/?
Kucinich - 9/5
Obama - 6/7
Richardson - 6/7

And these are as subjective as anything can possibly be :)

[mtnsnake]

10. At first I scored Kucinich exactly as you have him, but then I changed my mind

just before I hit the "post" button and gave him an 8/5.

And these are as subjective as anything can possibly be

Same for me. In 2 months, I might reconsider on all of them. ;)

[JNelson6563]

11. You sell Gore short

Gore has faced the dreaded "death" all pols fear. He no longer fears it, or anything for that matter, so he would be a fearless campaigner at this point.

Julie

[mtnsnake]

13. I never thought of it like that

I'm not convinced he'd be the fearless campaigner you say he would, although he could be, but even so, being a fearless campaigner doesn't necessary equate to being an effective campaigner. Then again, it could, so I really don't know....just guessing. I still think my score of 7 is being generous for him on the "campaigner" end of it, but I could be wrong. I love the guy but I do worry about his campaign abilities.

on edit: Just out of curiosity, Julie, how yould wou score Gore? No problem, though, if you're no comfortable saying.

[JNelson6563]

16. Judging by the ass-kicking speeches he's given since 2000

I'd give President Gore a 10 on both counts. :toast: :patriot:

Julie

[jaybeat]

14. I agree

He has something almost no politician has...nothing to lose. Because he already lost it. And he has a job now that is so good for him, he might not even *want* to be president. I honestly think he could take it or leave it. That's gives him a huge moral advantage; he can campaign, if he runs, from the heart.

He "died" a politician's death, and has re-made himself. That's why I suspect his campaign would be off the charts. "Comfortable in his own skin" is an understatement, and strikes at the heart of what many didn't like about him in 2000. (Though, as we know now, more than enough voters "liked" him for him to become President. That also has got to help on the campaign trail--confidence that isn't only hubris. And a deep sense of "there's more work to be done, and I know I can do it."

Run, Al, RUN!!!

[dajoki]

17. Dean was a fearless campaigner n/t

[mtnsnake]

18. I would rate Dean no lower than a 9/8, maybe as high as a 9/9

Damn I wish he were president.