All right, who's your choice, as of today?

[Phillycat]

Just wanted an updated look at how DU is skewing. If your primary were held today, for which Democratic candidate would you vote? I'm only including the top 3, and no "other" category, because I know a lot of you want Kucinich, but it's not going to happen, so let's narrow our focus.

[JDPriestly]

1. I'm working for Edwards.

He is the best candidate.

[Phillycat]

3. Me too.

[bicentennial_baby]

Kucinich

:patriot:

[GreenPartyVoter]

21. Ditto :^)

[Popol Vuh]

69. Likewise...

.

[FreeState]

79. Me too

although I more than likely will be voting for someone else - I have a sign and all in my yard for Kucinich - however, it looks like one unnamed candidate may take it so I will vote for someone else in order to vote for what I view as the most viable option.

[kath]

105. And me too! Kooch seems to be the one most closely resembling a REAL Democrat,

for those of us who remember when the Dems stood up for working people and the poor, not corporations.

[in_cog_ni_to]

2. Edwards. n/t

[blondeatlast]

4. Ex-Biden, now Edwards, but it pains me to see the field so narrowed so early.

I liked both Biden and Dodd.

[cynatnite]

5. It's still Hillary for me, but the way I see it...this is anybody's race...

Any of the top three could walk away with the nom.

[SammyWinstonJack]

6. Edwards all the way.

[mike_c]

7. Kucinich....

eom

[Ytzak]

8. Edwards in the primary,

I haven't changed my mind.

[Clarkansas]

9. Edwards. I'd be happy with Obama as well. No HRC please. eom

[Phillycat]

14. I agree, except I wouldn't exactly be "happy" with Obama, but I'd be

less "nose-holding" than I will be to vote for Hillary. :)

[sakabatou]

10. Other

[TahitiNut]

11. Fuck "it's not going to happen" and the horse it rode in on.

In Michigan, the "choice" is between Clinton, Kucinich, and Uncommitted. Got that?

:grr:

[Phillycat]

13. Hey, don't shoot the messenger.

I'm sorry your candidate is not viable. He doesn't have the money to be elected president or even get the nomination. Should money be the way we pick our nominee or president? Well, duh, NO. But that's the way it is. :shrug:

[TahitiNut]

20. (1) I shoot the message, not the messenger. (2) The message is ethically bankrupt.

No matter how often or articulately it's explained, some folks just don't seem to get it. It's not a spectator sport. It's not a zero-sum game, no matter how blinded by such memes some are. Each person has one vote. It's each person's to do with as they see fit. As long as there's conscience and a choice, I'll be guided by it. Fuck "viable." Fuck "electable." Fuck the various euphemisms that do nothing but demean and dismiss the conscientious choices of others. Fuck the "Fuck Nader" crowd. Fuck the "your opinion doesn't count" crowd. It's called "democracy" and it's about standing up for what's right NO MATTER WHETHER IT'S ALONE!

For the sports bots: "It's not whether you 'win' or 'lose.' It's how you play the game." (Note - it's about playing, not watching.) Those who demean and dismiss this simple moral imperative are akin to Nazis - they were "realists" too.

We treat the "political process" like Vick's friends treat dog-fighting ... with even less class.

:grr:

[Phillycat]

22. I respect your passion.

And I agree with the concept of not accepting the status quo. Hey, that's why I'm an Edwards supporter! But Kucinich has never polled nationally in any percentages that are electable or even competitive. I would say a lot of Americans don't even know who he is! I'm not saying you can't have a dark horse candidate - Bill Clinton was a late bloomer himself. But with Super Tuesday in the beginning of February and the poll numbers as they are, it doesn't seem possible for him to get anywhere...

[AndyTiedye]

25. How is it that "Vote Your Conscience" Has Come to Mean Exactly the Opposite?

"vote your conscience" doesn't mean that when people say it. It means vote for whomever you like best and hang the consequences, even if it elects another Republican who will totally wreck the country and start WW III.

[TahitiNut]

31. No matter how often folks sing that tune, I won't dance.

I really don't know how to say it more plainly. I am responsible for my own vote, NOT that of others. Maybe it's something in the mental make-up of partisans that's blind to this simple ethical truth. Maybe it's something in that attitude that just cannot comprehend the notion that "the ends don't justify the means." There seems to be something in the water that such people drink that makes them deaf and blind to the notion that a political party has no entitlement to my vote. It's like the Bad Old Days in the Roman Catholic Church - indulgences and fear of excommunication and cries of 'Heretic!'

It's almost comic. When a person actually walks the walk and adheres to the ethical principles and social values that a party uses as mere marketing - and jettisons whenever inconvenient - he's atttacked as a heretic in League With The Devil. Such attacks are ethically bankrupt.

If, through the 'system' as it exists, people in both major parties keep lurching toward fascism, then that must be what's needed for people to learn. As I've said before, it'll undoubtedly get a lot worse before it gets better. And the people who make it worse by adherence to obeisance and constant dismissal and condescension to matters of ethics and conscience WILL ALWAYS try to shift the blame to others. It's in the Nature of The Beast - "making deals with the Devil" - that the failure of others to go along to get along are the "problem."

:puke:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

42. Such a quaint idea. That you own your vote. It's so...democratic.

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." --John Quincy Adams:thumbsup:

[Lilith Velkor]

32. To all the families destroyed by Welfare Deform, NAFTA and Drug War escalation

...whilst the Democratic Party sneered, "What are you gonna do, vote Republican?"

...what the fuck is the difference? Is taking a big, meaty dump on us so satisfying to the CONSCIENCE that it's worth LOSING VOTES?

[TahitiNut]

36. It's ironic - seemingly a case of partisan projection.

To gays - the candidates cozy up to the homophobes and flip the bird to the GLBT crowd and say "if you don't vote for us, you're voting for the GOP."
To minorities - the candidates cozy up to the racists and flip the bird to them saying "if you don't vote for us, you're voting for the GOP."
To labor - the candidates cozy up to the corporatists and cheap labor conservatives and flip the bird to them saying "if you don't vote for us, you're voting for the GOP."

On and on, ad infinitum. It's been a continuing slide to the right for over 25 years, abandoning the New Deal and the Four Freedoms.

The people giving cover and comfort to the GOP 'business/bigot base' are ... ta dah! ... the same ones who attack the left and (KNOWING it's an INSULT) claim the left is enabling the right?!?!

The "political calculus" of abandoning the working class (against whom the divisions of race, religion, gender, etc. are USED to "divide and conquer") and kissing the butts of bigots and the wealthy is based on the bankrupt notion that you can stampede people into voting for EVIL if you can point to a GREATER EVIL.

Fucking insane. :crazy: Welcome to the Banana Republic States of America!!

[AndyTiedye]

73. What the Fuck is the Difference?

The Supreme Court for starters. Compare Clinton's appointees with Bush**'s.
If we lose, they get another one, giving them a totally fascist majority on the Court.
Clinton's appointees are the only liberals left who don't have one foot in the grave.

Escalating the drug war sucked, but it sucked a lot worse when Asscroft started sending
the DEA in to shut down medical marijuana dispensaries and arrest sick people. He also
diverted the planes that were supposed to protect us from rogue aircraft to chase pot smugglers.
He did this in the summer of 2001 (around the same time he stopped flying commercial airliners).
If those planes had still been on their previous duty, perhaps 9/11 could have been prevented.

Then there is the small matter of the Iraq war. Bush** started it. The Democrats in Congress
went along because they were taken in by Bush**'s lies about Saddam's nonexistant nukes.

The PNAC crowd tried to sell Clinton on an Iraq invasion. He told them to take a hike.

Does none of this matter to you?

[Lilith Velkor]

81. Please yank my other one while you're at it

Sure, Clinton didn't invade Iraq -- that doesn't matter to the Iraqis who died under the bombings and sanctions. If you really believe the Dems were fooled by B*sh, I feel sorry for you for being reduced to apologetics for people dumber than he is. They're not, actually. They only miscalculated how bad he would fuck it up.

Sure, the drug war got worse later -- that doesn't matter to the one million incarcerated and who knows how many disenfranchised (many of whom were driven into the trade thanks to NAFTA and welfare reform, BTW) by the time the Supremes installed B*sh. Clinton's precious appointees couldn't stop that one, could they? They could have if there were not already a fascist majority on the Court, a fact so goddamn frightening that a lot of people prefer to believe the Nader's Fault myth.

Your whole post consists of "Clinton looks good next to B*sh." Big fucking deal, Richard Fucking Nixon looks good next to him! Can't we do better than not-as-bad-as-B*sh, or do we have to redefine "conscience" to mean "feeding the hand that bitchslaps you?"

[Pastiche423]

67. I Recommend your post!

:applause:

[TahitiNut]

68. (grin)

Some of the simpler things get me a bit "hot," I guess. I detest "reality TV" - and the self-proclaimed "realists" who abandon the very ethical principles they claim they stand for under the 'threat' of what other people might do. Gads!

[Pastiche423]

71. Pages upon pages

year after year, DUers scream for Universal Healthcare, the end to the wars and to hold this administration accountable for their crimes to our democracy, yet they ignore a man whose platform contains them all.

I've watched this game for too many years. I "get" that TPTB do not want a leader that is for the people. It's been played out decade after decade.

I do not and will not vote for TPTB's candidate.

We will never get a leader that is for We, the People as long as we keep playing by their rules.

[AndyTiedye]

80. How is Refusing to Throw Away One's Vote an Abandonment of Ethical Principles?

And by the way, even DK isn't perfect. He used to be opposed to abortion, and what WAS that bit with Ron Paul?
They all have issues. There is no perfect candidate.

To argue that you are more ethically pure than the rest of us because you refuse to look at the system as a whole is a bit offensive, frankly.

I think we are all aware this bus is hell-bent towards fascism. I would like to apply the brakes.
Stepping on the gas in hopes that the people rise up when we actually reach our destination seems a lot less desirable to me.

[Lilith Velkor]

83. So the principle of democracy is offensive?

That's an attitude conducive to fascism, and you seem to not even realize it. How very sad.

[TahitiNut]

101. You either refuse or are incapable of understanding the answer I already gave you.

The ethical precept I use as my guide is Kant's Categorical Imperative. The ethical viewpoint is (somewhat) detached from outcome ... not subject to the fallacious "bandwagon" arguments. In the country I once lived in, every vote counted and every vote for a candidate espousing the kind of liberal principles being espoused by Kucinich planted a seed. It's NOT about a single election and it's NOT (solely) about who 'wins' and who 'loses.' I don't regard it as a zero-sum game. (Do you even comprehend what that means?)

The SUPPRESSION of the liberal vote is paramount to the SUPRESSION of liberalism itself! It makes no difference which 'party banner' such an effort hides behind. It's a contradiction (i.e. hypocrisy) of the most basic values most pretend to espouse.

You employ the rhetoric of bullies and demagogues when you construct an apposition of "you" (me) and "the rest of us" (the mob). That you then employ the phrase "ethically pure" (with more than a hint of condescension) betrays the mentality of the mob - the same "might makes right" attitude that infuses the current regime. Disgusting.

:puke:

[elaineb]

103. Damn, TahitiNut, that was BEAUTIFUL!

I always love your posts, but this one was one of the best. The anger I feel toward the Kucinich negativists on this board is starting to boil over, and you just said everything I want to say in one concise, heartfelt, highly rational, yet wonderfully passionate post.

I love you, man!!! :hug:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. Kucinich

[Individualist]

15. DK all the way

Early voting starts next week, and I'm voting for Kucinich.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

16. Kucinich

Who will remain my choice in the primary election. I feel it is important to send a message about Iraq, health care, the environment, etc to the Democratic party that progressives need to be heard.

[Phillycat]

23. Whom will you support if DK drops out?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

30. I'll write in my own name

Primaries are when we vote with our hearts. Shouldn't be a time when we have to vote for people we don't like.

[Maine-ah]

17. Kucinich

[VelmaD]

18. it surprises no one more than me...

but right now I'm leaning hard toward Clinton. I'm still pretty ambivalent about the entire field right now...but the way the media behaved about Clinton this past week has me really pissed off.

[HughMoran]

57. I'm in that boat with you

I like both Obama & Clinton (& just contributed to both), but I am livid about the way the media (& frankly a lot of folks here) have treated Hillary.

[onehandle]

19. Still... Edwards Underground. nt

[Hoof Hearted]

24. Voting for Hill on Super Tuesday but support Obama as well. Either one can win, either one would

make a great President. Even Edwards would be a great choice, though I'm not supporting him now, you can bet I would in the GE.

[madokie]

26. what amazes me is there is a 70 some odd percent voting for John

but when you read the threads on here they are mostly about how bad obama is or how terrible the hil is, whats the deal with that anyway
Myself I just like my choice of candidate because he seems to be talking to me not at me about our real problems and what needs to be done. John Edwards seems to be someone who was able to reach the American dream and actually wants to help as many as he can to do the very same thing rather that trying to keep us down. but thats just me

[ChiciB1]

59. It's EDWARDS For Me... No MATTER WHAT!!! n/t

[Elspeth]

27. What. No Kucinich?

:(

[Phillycat]

29. I don't want to disparage your reading comprehension skills, but...

:shrug:

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Phillycat]

45. Yes, dear. I understood your oh-so-subtle subtext, heh.

My point was that I EXPLAINED why no Kucinich in the original post.

Also, personal attacks are not allowed on DU. Are you new?

[bobthedrummer]

28. Dennis Kucinich eom

[Lilith Velkor]

33. Mike Gravel, but I'd settle for Edwards.

[Phillycat]

38. Wow, I've never met a Gravel supporter.

What do you like about him? I'm not being snarky, I honestly don't know very much about him.

[Lilith Velkor]

63. I like his opposition to our belligerent foreign policy, and his support for direct democracy

I'm a little iffy on his Fair Tax proposal, but I'm still pissed off at Kucinich over the Ron Paul flap, so I'm in the Gravel camp now.

And I've actually had a beer with him. (But to be fair to Dennis, he did give me a hug once. I still lurv Dennis even though he stepped on ye olde crank.)

[Phillycat]

64. Thanks for the info!

:hi:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

44. My second choice to Kucinich. Easier to spell too..if necessary.

[robbedvoter]

53. Me too - but look - he's excluded from this poll too! By guys whining media

excludes their candidate...

[mnhtnbb]

34. Want to see Edwards come on--so I can vote for him in NC primary--not until May!

[Phillycat]

35. I know - in PA here - ours is April. I hope he's still in!

[Iggo]

37. Kucinich...(n/t)

...

[TheUniverse]

40. I voting for Kuchinich in the primaries regardless.

But out of those choices, I'd probably choose Barack.

[Paulie]

54. I'm going with Kucinich till after the Illinois Primary

After that, it will pretty much be sewn up. Sigh

[Phillycat]

55. Who will you support when/if he is eliminated?

[ChiciB1]

61. NOBODY!! n/t

[ChiciB1]

62. Wrong Post... It's Edwards All The Way For Me!! n/t

[Iggo]

66. When Kucinich is out...

...I'll vote for whoever is the nominee in the general election.

Kucinich is my guy for the primaries. Beyond that, my vote is for the Democrat over the repub. Clinton, Edwards, Obama...all the same to me. I'll vote for any of those three in the GE. If the nominee is someone else, I'll vote for that someone else.

I can say it another six ways, but it all shakes out the same.

[Paulie]

102. By then there won't be any choice

Sigh

[Norrin Radd]

41. Kucinich.

[MyNameGoesHere]

43. So many fans of that cartoon "Underdog" n/t

[Phillycat]

46. Heh. I know. It's too bad, really.

I'm sorry so many fellow Dems are not going to get the candidate they want. Hopefully once the primaries are over, we will all unite behind our candidate and KICK SOME REPUKE ASS!

[lpbk2713]

47. Edwards ...... and

... of course, Elizabeth.

:thumbsup: :hi: :thumbsup:

[bpeale]

48. EDWARDS! nothing has changed & nothing will change...EVER!

[peabody71]

49. STOLEN!

Who your Daddy,
does she wear panty hose?

[Phillycat]

51. I'm sorry?

?

[robbedvoter]

50. One of the guys missing from your poll...You whine about media, then do the same

[Phillycat]

52. I've never whined about media.

What the...?

[robbedvoter]

56. Sorry,, I took you for an Edwards supporter - easy assumption here, on EU. Still, 6 candidates

are in the run - would it be so hard to name them all?

[Phillycat]

60. I am an Edwards supporter, but haven't complained about the media

coverage.

No, it wouldn't have been hard to list them all, but statistically, it's extraordinarily unlikely that any of the others are going to get the nomination - my intention in the poll was to see how the 3 more viable candidates were polling in the (statistically meaningless, in the end) DU universe. That's all. :shrug:

[robbedvoter]

86. So I was right. The poll was designed to make Edwards seem viable. Nice try.

As of Iowa he has the same chances as my man Gravel and DK.

[Phillycat]

88. He came in second in Iowa...

I really didn't have an agenda, but boy you sure do want me to have evil intent, don't you? I don't know what you've got in your head of what an "Edwards supporter" looks like, but I'm not it.

[robbedvoter]

89. His one shot to stay in was winning that race. Hence, having only a victory speech

prepared. Failing that, he's only angling for VP again. I learned enough from 2004 to know this. The "second" is an euphemism for - very badly beaten by Obama. Eliminated from the race - effectively.

[Phillycat]

91. If he doesn't perform in SC I'll concede the point.

I do think he's still viable, and I don't think it's wishful thinking. That's why I posted my own poll - you're welcome to post one too. :)

[Kucinich4America]

58. Kucinich

And no, I didn't stutter.

[RedCappedBandit]

65. None of the above.

I'm voting Kucinich

[Pastiche423]

70. Kucinich

[balantz]

72. John Edwards, all the way!

[judaspriestess]

74. judging from the DU polls, John Edwards has much support here

why is he not higher in the polls across the country? I think DU represents a good demographic for Democrats. If we feel this way here, why not everywhere? Or am I mistaken as far as the demographic representation?

[robbedvoter]

87. "I think DU represents a good demographic for Democrats" - maybe this statement

needs a bit of re-thinking. Along with the one "we are left of mainstream" - because then gravel would get - if not support, at least some respect.

[Phillycat]

92. I don't know the answer to this question either.

It kind of baffles me, to be honest. Not that the DU demographic supports him - I don't think DU is indicative of anything but DU. I actually don't think it's an accurate cross-section. But anecdotally, most Dems I know are supporting Edwards. I don't actually know anyone (here in Philly, admittedly, more liberal than most places) who is supporting Hillary or Obama. Everyone I know likes Edwards. It's strange. :shrug:

[TankLV]

75. NOT obama - that's for sure...

[SeattleGirl]

76. Edwards. Has been for a long time.

I don't dislike either Clinton or Obama; I just prefer Edwards.

[defendandprotect]

77. And, I'd caution you all again to think about the TROJAN HORSE the VP rides in on --- !!!

[defendandprotect]

78. Wow! Hillary is the underdog at DU --- !!!

Just out of curiosity, what's the main reason?

DLC?
corporate $?
Position on some issue?

[Steely_Dan]

82. Sorry, I would vote for the most qualified...

Biden. Of course, I'm not going to get that chance.

-P

[Raine]

84. Edwards, Obama second...anyone but Hillary nt

[countryjake]

85. Kucinich...

and if Edwards doesn't start speaking of our working class in all of his speeches about how worried he is about the plight of the middle class, I may not even have any second.

My vote will go to the candidate who represents those who only have their labor to sell in this country...if it turns out that there is no candidate like that on my ballot, I'll keep it, for what it's worth.

[LWolf]

90. Kucinich. n/t

[La Lioness Priyanka]

93. i want hrc or edwards but in reality i support anyone but obama. nt

[Phillycat]

94. I'm trying hard not to let Obama's supporters here turn me off to him.

I don't love him, but I'm still at the point where I would willingly vote for him in the general. With HRC I will have to hold my nose. Of course I'll do it anyway. :)

[La Lioness Priyanka]

95. oh i will vote for him in the general election because he is far superior to huckabee or romney

but in the primaries i wont support him at all. nor donate money to his campaign.

the donnie mcclurkin thing left a bad taste in my mouth.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

96. I voted "Edwards", although in MI, it's spelled ...

"Uncommitted"

:hi:

[MadHound]

97. Kucinich in the primaries

If he isn't on the ballot on Super Tuesday, I'll write him in. In the generals it really depends on who the Dem nominee is. I could very well go Green.

In my opinion, our top tier candidates all pretty much suck, some worse than others.

[jonnyblitz]

98. Anybody but Obama. nt

[La Lioness Priyanka]

99. hey you!

:hi:

[mnhtnbb]

100. Damn! Didn't get to vote twice for Edwards.

[Common Sense Party]

104. Gravel.

Seriously, does it matter?

That is, does it matter what the minuscule, hyper-activist microcosm of DU wants?

It may be interesting to find out, but completely irrelevant to what happens in the primaries in Michigan. And South Carolina. And Florida. Etc...

[workinclasszero]

106. OBAMA!!! /nt