Why?
Democratic Senators since JFK hasn't even won the election.
Even JFK barely won it - less than half of the votes.
I remember seeing Gary Hart and Walter Mondale running in the Democratic primary in 1984. Both were senators from Colorado and Minnesota respectively (Gary Hart was my senator, and I was only 8, but still somewhat followed politics) - both didn't even win.
Fast forward to 1988 - This is one exception, and it was Michael Dukakis vs George H.W. Bush - a governor from Massachusetts (aka Taxachusetts - to take Kerry's example from the right wing) vs a moron from wherever the asshole decides he's from (Houston, Texas). Doomed from the start, Dukakis was never a brilliant campaigner. As a 12 year old, he was a turnoff.
(Note, I want to thank GHWB for one ONLY good thing that he managed to sign into law - the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act - made a huge difference in my life)
Fast forward to Bill Clinton vs George HW Bush - Now, that man had charm. He governed Arkansas. True, Clinton had faults, but he was still charming the pants off everyone. When he was elected, I was pretty damn pleased. I knew something special happened. And that fact that we had 8 years of peace and prosperity helped. And the economy was booming. The gap between the rich and the middle class ACTUALLY was closer.
Fast foward to 1996 - my first actual Presidential election that I was legally allowed to vote for. Bob Dole vs Clinton. Dole, a crackpot 'Thug vs a successful president that has defied the Rethuglican Congress for the entire 8 years, and still managed to pass some critical bills and defied the threats. Survived the impeachment process. Survived whatever witchhunts the 'Thugs managed.
Fast forward to 2000 - Al Gore vs Chimp. This one I had definetely banking Gore to win, especially in Florida. It was a sudden shock to me that Chimp stole the election, and thought 'fraud' from the beginning since I followed every case from the Florida courts to the Supremes, and I knew the Florida courts were correct in determining that fact, and at one point, Al Gore was in, fact, leading in many different 'aspects' of counting determined by the NYT in 2002.
Fast forward to 2004 - John Kerry vs Chimp. I only half-heartedly supported Kerry because in my guts, I knew he would lose because of his record as a Senator from Massachusetts, and I knew that the right-wing media would go full-time blasting at him. I was a Howard Dean supporter through and through the primaries and was not happy when he dropped out after Iowa and the infamous 'Scream'. I'm quite pleased that the delegates has wisely selected him to the DNC Chairman. That man has guts, and has proved it in the 2006 elections.
Now we're coming to the 2008 elections, and the selections for Democratic presidential nominees are pretty slim pickings. Right now, even though there are tons of senators trying to kiss butt and win the primary, I am still sitting on the fence, leaning towards SLIGHTLY to John Edwards? Why? He has impressed me through the last 3 years, even after he left the Senate, he took the time to meet people, denounced the IWR vote he did as a Senator in 2002, and is anti-war, pro-troop redeployment out of Iraq. But like I said, SLIGHTLY leaning towards him, not 100% backing yet, more like 10%. My heart is still for Al Gore, who still continues to impress the hell out of me, and would love to see him back on the game, and I know I'm hearing rumors and innuendoes, but think about it - the right wing has absolutely NOTHING to attack him about - the Tennessee house that he's using green energy for that is overly expensive to pay for - debunked. WAY debunked. A lot of right-wing Al Gore 'facts' has already been debunked and will not be a factor. Stiff? No way. DLC? Forget it. Corporatist? A little, but I'll forgive him for the Wal-Mart thing - I know he was trying to promote
green energy.But the fact that Al hasn't announce that he's running has me still sitting on the fence.
But my case in point - Senators have voting records to defend, and the right-wing attack machines are just warming up (and pissing on their pants in excitement in anticipation of Hillary Clinton - what makes you think that Rupert Murdoch donated $$ and hosted parties for her?) for any Senators that have been nominated for the Democratic President. Too many stupid votes that they have to explain for, and that'll waste their time and money explaining away every single vote they made that pisses people off in general.
Hillary hasn't even announced that she regretted her IWR vote and would reverse her decision. No, she continues to be a cheerleader for Bush's war.
Obama? He said he would continue funding the war. Already crossed him off on my list -- too many right wing attack potential. Plus he's not experienced enough, although I will give him credit for being an excellent state senator in the state of Illinois where my sister lives, and my mom's native state. And he's
flip-flopping already!
Biden? Ha - forget it. MBNA/BoA owns him and I already hate credit cards.
Richardson? *snore* - although he's a governor of my neighboring state of New Mexico which I love to visit, he's just not charismatic enough. Although he's smart and have handled North Koreans with ease, I see more of him as a Secretary of State than a President. He'll be excellent in renewing all diplomatic ties with every countries that Chimp has managed to piss off.
Edwards - as I explained as above, he's my *slightly* man of choice.
Other candidates - I've either 1) never heard of him (or her), or 2) has no chance of winning (Sorry Kucinich - I like you, but you *know* yourself that you don't have any shot in hell of winning the nomination)
*pants*
I'm done typing. You may criticize at will, I may or may not answer.
Hawkeye-X
EDIT: Added another Obama reason.