Forbes magazine scoring of the candidates

[Stop Cornyn]

Just to disabuse those who mistakenly think Ron Paul's anti-war and anti-Patriot Act positions are an indication that he's not a radical reactionary:

[Progress And Change]

1. rec

[Deja Q]

2. So why is the Right more in love with Hillary than for Richardson?

[Progress And Change]

4. the right hates Clinton. they love you know who...

[Progress And Change]

5. the right hates Clinton. they love you know who...

[Stop Cornyn]

7. Because they could actually get someone in the White House with Hillary. Not so much with Richardson

(except maybe as Hillary's VP if she beats the down-trend to come back and win the nomination and then spurns Wes Clark).

[MadBadger]

3. The reason i dont agree with this

Bill Richardson is apparently more to the left of DK on Foreign Policy. Can see say...Bullshit?

[Progress And Change]

6. what are kucinich's positions on FP issues not involving Iraq and Iran?

What are his positions on Mexico, Russia, France, China, Japan, India, Africa, etc.?

[Stop Cornyn]

9. Richardson has called for a withdrawal so speedy that we'd have to abandon all our military

equipment in Iraq. Even Dennis is not proposing that.

[MethuenProgressive]

16. That's RW fiction. Source? Link?

www.2013IsTooLate.com

[Stop Cornyn]

19. Richardson: "The issue is light equipment. I would leave some of the light equipment behind."

With all your attacks on other Democrats, you don't even know your own preferred candidate's position on his signature issue!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[MethuenProgressive]

24. "abandon all our military equipment" = "leave some light equipment"?

Just another distortion from the RW Noise Machine.

StopCornyn: "we'd have to abandon all our miltary equipment behind!!!!"
Richardson: "The issue is light equipment. I would leave some of the light equipment behind."

Your candidate wants to wait until 2013.
How many more troops will die between 2009 and 2013 so your guy can save a few bucks on 'light equipment'?
www.2013IsTooLate.com

[Renew Deal]

8. So Hillary is to the right of Obama and Edwards on everything except the environment.

That what forbes is saying. I don't understand how Paul is to the left on Foreign policy. He's a non-interventionist according to his own admission. That puts him to the right.

[creeksneakers2]

26. She's not that far to the right of them

The graph shows Hillary is a consistent leftist. She doesn't score in the middle or to the right on anything. She's not at the extremes like Kucinich. She doesn't pretend to be.

To me, this graph shows how far off the mark those who call Hillary a corporatist really are.

[Tejanocrat]

10. So Edwards is the most liberal or tied for the most liberal on 4 of 5 categories ... Cool!

[Warpy]

11. Ron Paul is as far to the lunatic right as you can get on social issues

So I have a sneaking suspicion that this chart means absolutely nothing in that regard.

[jillan]

12. You forgot Biden - who scored a 4.6 - more liberal than Hillary/Obama

[gateley]

14. Wonder how that happened -- I noticed it, too -- thanks, Pirhana! nt

[Stop Cornyn]

17. I didn't forget Biden or Dodd or Gravel. I focused on viable candidates with Kucinich and Paul added

for purposes of comparison.

I WISH Kucinich was viable, but even Obama and Edwards are underdogs, and Kucinich, Dodd, Biden, and Gravel cannot possibly win (I understand that you heart tells you otherwise, but even your head must be whispering to your heart about not getting your hopes up).

I think Richardson has about a 1% chance since he's in 4th place in a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ia/iowa_democratic_caucus-208.html"]Iowa, New Hampshire, and nationally, and I included him because I wanted to err on the side of being over-inclusive, but -- frankly -- Richardson ain't gonna make it either.

[seasat]

13. I'd take any publication owned by Steve Forbes with a grain of salt.

I read through their "methodology" for this survey and they basically culled statements from the past news about the candidates and subjectively rated them. Richardson's trade policy has moved greatly to the left since his time in the house so I'd rate him much further left on that issue (at least at 3 on their scale). He like the other candidates (except Kucinich who wants a full repeal) are now calling for renegotiating NAFTA and other agreements to include protections for labor and the environment. Richardson has always supported tying trade to human rights. He cosponsored a bill to tie China's MFN status to improvements in human rights while in the house.

[gateley]

15. Didn't they rate Biden? Thanks. nt

[Stop Cornyn]

18. Yes, but I only included viable candidates plus Kucinich (the most liberal) and Paul for context.

[gateley]

20. Gee, thanks. nt

[Stop Cornyn]

21. No, thank YOU for posting reply #14 before #15 so I could tell your question was disingenuous.

[gateley]

23. Busted and guilty. Just pisses me off that even on DU, people dismiss some

of our candidates.

[Stop Cornyn]

29. I wish Kucinich had a chance of winning, but I recognize that it is not likely to happen. I'm not

asking anyone to give up hope in their candidate, but with Hillary so high in the polls and with so much money, and Obama with so much momentum and also with a lot of money, and with Edwards who has as more support and more money than the other remaining candidates combined, I'm just skeptical that the others have even a remote chance.

Hell, I'd characterize Obama's chances and Edwards' chances as somewhat remote (right now, I'd say 50% likely that Hillary gets the nomination, 30% likely that Obama get the nomination, and 20% likely that Edwards gets the nomination and -- if pressed -- I might be willing to knock Hillary down to 49% and assign that 1% for Richardson and Biden to share).

Not to pick on Biden, but what is the best case scenario you can imagine for him in Iowa? I think it's unlikely, but Iowa is notoriously hard to predict, so maybe Biden has a slim chance of finishing third (perhaps Hillary's downward momentum and lack of 2nd choice support will sink her lower than 3rd or some such scenario will develop and maybe the polls are under-stating Biden's support). There are only 5 days between Iowa and New Hampshire. How big is the biggest bump Biden could get from a 3rd place finish in Iowa to propel him up going into New Hampshire? Certainly, nothing that would move Biden from 3% or 4% to place higher than 4th (or -- if you want be very creative in imagining a scenario -- 3rd).

Even if Biden finishes 3rd in Iowa and also New Hampshire (a scenario I would suggest is less than 5% likely), where does Biden catch up with those who are ahead of him? While Hillary and Obama are outspending Biden 10-to-1 and Edwards is outspending him 5-to-1, and Richardson and Dodd are outspending him 2-to-1, where does Biden get the funds to propel his campaign into Ultra-Tuesday?

I'm not a huge fan of Biden's, but I prefer him to Richardson and Hillary and Gravel, and yet my discounting his chances has nothing to do with my feelings about him. Don't mistake this for any attempt to dissuade you from supporting Biden. Bear this in mind: as slim as I think Biden's chances are, I think Kucinich's chances are even slimmer, and I'm 90% likely to vote for Kucinich knowing full well he's not going to win.

[gateley]

33. I understand your reasoning -- although it's my HOPE that if Biden were to

come in third in Iowa, he'd receive extensive press coverage and as a result, contributions. You make an excellent point of there only being five days between Iowa and NH -- and I honestly hadn't given that much thought -- so press coverage or not, the NH voters wouldn't have the time to really look into supporting a different candidate.

Regardless, I am personally so convinced that he's exactly who/what we need in the WH at this very crucial time, that I'm optimistic others will see what he has to offer us, too if they're given the chance to see him. As I said -- this is my HOPE.

I strongly support your Kucinich vote and hope you overcome the 10% uncertainty. You'll know in your heart you 'did the right thing'.

[cloudythescribbler]

22. Is my eyesight bad, or did they rate Clinton & Edwards ...

to the LEFT of Kucinich on energy and environment?

I think that this whole chart is COMPLETELY .... well let's just say mixed up.
When Forbes ranks the richest people or the biggest corporations, at least they are dealing with hard(ish) numbers.

[Capn Sunshine]

25. WHY is "the Environment" a left-right issue?

what a misleading meme

[polichick]

27. Because of BIG BUSINESS! nt

[monmouth]

28. The poll is faulty without Biden. He is viable, is ahead of Richardson in Iowa...

[Stop Cornyn]

30. It's not a "poll." It's an issue-oriented candidate score card. And, BTW, Richardson is ahead of

Biden in MOST Iowa polls.

[monmouth]

31. Whatevah...n/t

[bvar22]

32. Thanks for the chart, but

no one needs it to know that Hillary is the most conservative of all the Democratic Candidates, and promises the least amount of change in the way our government does business. If you like the performance of the Democratic Congress 2006, you'll LOVE a Hillary presidency.

THIS is all you need to know about our most conservative candidate:


Hillary is also the most divisive Democratic candidate with some Democrats pledging to leave the Party if she is nominated.

Why take the risk?

Hillary Nomination = MOST Electoral risk for the LEAST Democratic gain.



"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone