Are you satisifed with the Dem 08 candidate field?

[Stinky The Clown]

****PLEASE DO NOT NAME YOUR FAVORITE****

Are you satisfied with the current field of Democartic candidates or do you wish the choice were more broad?

****PLEASE DO NOT NAME YOUR FAVORITE****

To keep the sampling going, please kick this by replying with anything ... like even a "."

Thanks!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Kick.

[Bjornsdotter]

2. Kick

[KT2000]

3. "." Kick!

[Janice325]

4. Done!

kick

[thoughtcrime1984]

5. Less than 1/3 think we have acceptable candidates

Is President Fred Thompson on the horizon? Ugh.

[illinoisprogressive]

38. Obama is running and I support him so, yes I am satisfied.

[annabanana]

6. kick. . . . . .n/t

[Diamonique]

7. Kick n/t

[Dr Fate]

8. No- I need more viable choices. n/t

n/t

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

9. I Wonder Who The Un-Named Favorites Not Running Are...

Or Is.

[TwilightGardener]

10. Republicans. (We's got trolls, I tells ya! TROLLS!) Or maybe Big Al.

[Fozzledick]

46. Maybe someone who won three presidential elections in a row?

Nah, someone like that would never be inaugurated.

[ElizabethDC]

11. kick

:kick:

[tech3149]

12. My primary choice for 2004 is still there

and at least two others would be great second choices. I can't sing the praises of the entire field, but they all would get my support above any Repub candidates.

[abburdlen]

13. kick

[saltpoint]

14. Happy with the current crop; many fine presidents among them.

Happy with prospect of more candidacies; there's wide agreement among Democrats on several issues of key concern.

Happy to be one voter for the winning party in 2008, and happy to vote against any and all incumbent Republicans who have long ago outlived their usefulness to a representative democracy.

And if you're Pete Domenici or Mitch McConnell, you better watch your butt.

[leftofthedial]

15. We need more real Democrats

and fewer DLC shills for the oligarchy

[leftofthedial]

16. We need more real Democrats

and fewer DLC shills for the oligarchy

[Clarkansas]

17. Not yet, can you tell who I am waiting for?

[IndianaGreen]

18. Not a bad field, but we could use a candidate with strong environmental record

and whose background would make him perfect to face the challenges our country and the world faces in the 21st century.

See! I didn't name anyone! :-)

[GreenArrow]

19. No. Kind of a yech blah field,

inspiring only in comparison to their potential Republican opponents. It's about what I expect though. Then again, none of the candidates I'd prefer could win anyway.

[skipos]

20. I wish we had more non-senators from flippable red states. nt

[illinoisprogressive]

41. Alot of the Senators are from Blue states, actually.

Dodd is Conn which is blue, Clinton is from blue NY and Obama is from blue Illinois. Can not remember if Deleware is blue or purple.

[sandnsea]

21. Kerry, Gore, Feingold, Clark

That's a field of candidates. And Dean if he hadn't committed not to run.

[NCarolinawoman]

23. Wow! Yes! They would drive the debates away from the pablum!

[MrSlayer]

22. Not at all.

I am not satisfied, I'm dismayed.

[Adelante]

24. k

[bklyncowgirl]

25. I would be thrilled if Gore got in but I could live with the current field.

I like Richardson, Obama and Edwards bring enough good things to the table that I could support them happily and enthusiastically. If Clinton is the nominee, I could support her but with considerably less enthusiasm.

[LWolf]

26. Other:

While I have a favorite, I'm not satisfied with the field.

I'd like a different sort of field, one where I could happily vote for any of them in the general if my favorite doesn't get the nomination.

[Stinky The Clown]

27. Self kick

[Cameron27]

28. kick

[Apollo11]

29. Gore-Obama would be my dream ticket!

Let's all find ways to show our support for Al Gore! :patriot:

Visit Al's site www.algore.com and read his blog http://blog.algore.com

Get ready for Live Earth on 7/7/07: www.liveearth.org

Sign the petitions at www.algore.org and www.draftgore.com

:kick:

[Apollo11]

31. But from the current field - I like Edwards the most

I think Edwards has matured and improved since 2004.

I am willing to accept his sincere apology for co-sponsoring the Iraq War Resolution in 2002.

I think Edwards is ready for the job in a way that Obama is not (at least - not yet).

I don't like all of the "bipartisan" "working with Republicans" cr@p from both Obama and Hillary.

[Auggie]

30. Kick (I have two favorites not running)

[IA_Seth]

32. Rec'd...

It's a pretty big deal that we have so many people left wanting by our current field of candidates.

[Hart2008]

33. Why do we tolerate this system?

As of this posting only slightly more than a quarter (26%) are satisfied with the current field. The vast majority (73%) is dissatisfied. Half of respondents have a favorite candidate who has not yet declared an interest.

Unfortunately, voting for unpledged delegates is impossible in many states. We need to end this practice of “buying” the candidates who are selling themselves to us and make the system work by nominating the best people, not those who raise the most money. In the end a campaign should be more about the candidates record and ideas, and less about personality.

This field needs more candidates, not less.

http://www.garyhartnews.com
http://www.rungaryhart.com/
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3193854

:kick: HART 2008! :kick:

[Cameron27]

34. We tolerate it because it's shoved down our throats.

[Hart2008]

36. WAKE UP! WE DON'T NEED TO VOTE FOR THESE CANDIDATES!! N/T

[Cameron27]

37. I heart you Hart,

but I don't want to lose 2008. I don't see a way out until the whole system gets re-fitted.

[Hart2008]

43. I want a landslide in 2008!

But we won’t get it with the current field. I don’t see this crowd flipping bunches of red states to blue. We won’t get that landslide, with big majorities in each house, unless we nominate a candidate who is not compromised on the war. Otherwise, the issue of the war gets neutralized. IMHO, all of these Senators are compromised on the war, and the war isn’t going to go away anytime soon. Before we nominate a candidate, we need to put our own house in order first. Voting for the IWR should be disqualification for our nomination this election. The good of the party must be placed before personal ambitions or personalities.

It is still early yet, and I expect another candidate to emerge after the summer, or into the fall when people start to pay attention.

http://www.garyhartnews.com
http://www.rungaryhart.com/
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3193854

:kick: HART 2008! :kick:

[Cameron27]

45. I'm waiting for someone too :-)

If mine doesn't run, I'll take a good look at Gary Hart. We'll see what happens, but for now I'm leaning towards Obama.

[LSK]

35. is this another "I wish Al Gore would run" poll???

:shrug:

[illinoisprogressive]

39. I was kind of wondering the same thing myself

[SaveElmer]

40. Probably the best field we have had in many cycles...

Only two of the candidates would I term absolutely unelectable...the rest comprise the best, most experienced, most competent, most compelling field we have offered in many decades

And the exciting thing is, there is an extremely good chance we are going to nominate either a woman, an African American, or a Hispanic to the top of the ticket...

[illinoisprogressive]

42. I agree. It's the best field I've seen since I've been voting which is a long time.

[mak3cats]

44. Kick...

[Hart2008]

47. kick