It's crunch time, place your bets, Dean or Kerry?

Am I being too naive in thinking that Clark will make Dean his vice president should he get the nomination despite all the advantages having a straight talking northrener with lots of well organized support, 40 million dollars, experience with domestic policy, experience balancing budgets that appeals to young voters and the kind of voters that don't want a general in office would bring? I would prefer 8 yrs of Clark followed by 8 years of Dean over 4 years of Bush followed by Hillary Clinton's nomination and another Republican victory.

Who do you think would make the best president?

Who do you think has the best chance to beat bush?

Who do you think will the primaries?

Who do you think/hope will be the running mate?

And the all important why?

My answers:

1. Dean would be the best president IMO. He (as stated by angie) "is genuinely bright, tough, fair-minded, and intent upon making changes that truly improve life for "regular" Americans is starting to have a tough time competing with the polished politicians. He speaks in normal cadence, he doesn't work the cameras, he shares honest thoughts (some of which aren't always "right") rather than spouting rehearsed, ambiguous, empty sound bites. "

I like his candor, I like the way the guy thinks, and I hate how the media picks on him so much for speaking his mind and telling the truth. There isn't a single statement he has ever made that I disagree with.

The caucuses ARE dominated by special interests.

Gore did NOT have the persona to appeal to voters.

The democrats DO need to appeal to the guys driving around with confederate flags in their pick up trucks.

There WERE some positive aspects to what happened in Pakistan a few years ago.

And capturing Saddam has NOT made america any safer.

If the media didn't spoon feed opinions into peoples head so much and just presented his statements without all their biased opinions, I think most americans would agree with his statements and would respect him for his candor.

And above all, I think they would connect with him and see him for what he is, a brilliantly insightful and knowledgable individual. Infact, I think that the best thing Dean can do right now if he wins the nominations is to continue speaking his mind. Voters will connect to it when they hear it from him instead of having it spoonfed to them from biased sources.

I also think that Dean is suprisingly moderate and WILL balance the budget without letting americans lose jobs and without stifling corporations. I think he will revoke the tax cuts, cut unneccesary expenditures, cut the defense budget, do whatever it takes to do so without hurting the economy. I think that he is a politician despite his denials and think that all the candidates except for Kucinich are as well. All of them including Dean say what they don't believe in order to win the primaries and will say what they truly believe, a more moderate stance, in order to win the election.

As much as the liberals here will disagree, radical ideas like tariffs across the board that Kucinich proposes WILL stifle businesses and the american economy as a result. We need a common sense liberal, a liberal that acknowledges that business does play a valueble role in america, in the white house

I don't believe any of the candidates except for Kucinich opposed the war as strongly as they claimed to. I think all of them believed the whole weapons of mass destruction arguement and wanted Saddam taken out and Iraq liberated though they all probably wished we would do it with more support.

2. Clark has the best chance to beat Bush simply because of his resume. A general, a southrener, a gun owner, he's got what middle americans are looking for. But unfortunately, I get the sense whenever he speaks that he doesn't have a clue how government or politics works. He often just rants on about his stories in the army and when he does talk about the issues only glooses over them in superficial terms with little real insight into them. The more I hear him speak, the less I see him as knowledgable or insightful enough to be a good president (though still infinately better off than Bush). Sitting out of the debates so that the other candidates can talk about the real issues as well as drag both Dean and themselves into mud was the best political move he ever made. (Edit: I feel like I just put my foot in my mouth with that prediction)

3. I don't know who will win. I want Dean to be president. But I want Clark to take on Bush. Dean forced to take such strong liberal stands so openly that I don't think he'll be able to tell americans what he real thinks and believes and thus attract the moderates (the common sense americans) if he gets the nomination. And the media is doing such a good job overanalyzing every thing he says that he won't be able to speak his mind and thus connect with the voters as an incredibly bright guy who speaks his mind.

4. I want Clark to get the nomination and Dean to be Clark's running mate. That way, Dean can bring in the out of the beltway voters, northners and all his young supporters to the booths and Clark can win. Dean can play an active role in the domestic issues that I think Clark will often have to sit on the sidelines for. And 8 years later, Dean will probably win the presidency if he proves to be as intelligent and capable as he strikes me to be. I really don't want Hillary to have a go at it anytime soon. But thanks to the idiotic fight that Clark so stupidly started with Dean on the airwaves, I don't see that playing out.

(Edit: Simply change every reference to Clark to Kerry)