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

I am not going to get into any debates on this thread, but I will offer my thoughts.
I would seriously consider voting for Clark with Dean as VP. I will not consider voting for Dean, with or without Clark as VP. If Dean gets it; I will have to decide between Bush and voting "Green", again. Centroles's predictions coincide with my opinion.

The Democratic Convention should be wild and wooly the way things are stacking up. I can hardly wait. My bet is on Clark but have no idea who he would pick as VP -- perhaps Edwards.

Acq, I'm gonna wait to the last minute to see who has the best chance against GWBush. It's not going to be Dean or Clark, because they continue to raise too many controversies since they chose to become a candidate. I had hoped from the very beginning that Dean would come out the best candidate, but he's now resorting to attacking the people in his own party like the others. Voters do not appreciate negative campaigns, but none in the demo club has learned from the past. They are losing to GWBush by fiat.

I cant help but ask what choice Dean has. Every other demo candidate is attacking him. Why arnt they to blame for reelecting Bush by trashing members of thier own party.

they are to blame. this is why i dislike kerry, lieberman and to some degree clark and gephardt. edwards did his best to keep his nose clean from all this mud slinging and that's why he's one of the few candidates i still respect.

in terms of character, i like edwards, dean (he used to speak his mind) and kucinich (because he still speaks his mind) the most. in terms of policy, i like dean, if you look at his past record and his ideas, you can tell that he has very realistic and relatively moderate agenda that will nevertheless benefit millions.

in terms of electibilty, clark takes the cake. so i would be happy with a dean nomination but would prefer a clark nomination with dean as his running mate.

Ackuiunks portrayal of Lieberman is right on spot. I lived in CT for 27 years, having recently moved to Denver and I was not impressed by Lieberman (although anyone would be better than
Gov Rowland--creep is too good for him).

Kucinich is my dream candidate, but Dean or Clark stand the best chance and I'm starting to lean toward Clark because of his background, his coming from the south and his foreign policy experience. I don't trust him simply because he is military, which might be knee jerk on my part.

In any other election, I would vote for the person whom I felt would be the best president for the country. This election is too vital to the health of our country and the continued existence of the Constitution, to have the luxury to do that. I will vote for whomever gets the nomination.

Ackuiunks portrayal of Lieberman is right on spot. I lived in CT for 27 years, having recently moved to Denver and I was not impressed by Lieberman (although anyone would be better than
Gov Rowland--creep is too good for him).

Kucinich is my dream candidate, but Dean or Clark stand the best chance and I'm starting to lean toward Clark because of his background, his coming from the south and his foreign policy experience. I don't trust him simply because he is military, which might be knee jerk on my part.

In any other election, I would vote for the person whom I felt would be the best president for the country. This election is too vital to the health of our country and the continued existence of the Constitution, to have the luxury to do that. I will vote for whomever gets the nomination.

When I said "Anyone but Bush", I meant Dean or Clark ;-)

If I could vote, I would have gone with Kerry.

why? he talks like a robot.

well that's really not fair. but i just stopped liking the man when he started attacking dean for no reaason.

come on, the caucases ARE dominated by special interests. everyone knows that. why pick on him for saying something truthful four years ago?

'

My reason is because when I was living in Mass I had a problem where my civil rights were seriously being violated and I spent months writing letter to dozens of politicians explaining my story and asking for help and the only one out of all of them who responded was him. I didn't get an email or letter responding to my letter, but instead his office called me right at home and listened to what I had to say when no one else gave a rats ass. He cared enough about my situation to give me the time of day and I like the hell out of that.

My vote against Bush will be inconsequential, I live in Texas. That's why the first time around I voted my conscience; I voted for Nader. Without the electoral college, I would have voted for Gore.

Clark hasn't participated in any mudslinging unless you consider that incident of him revealing that Dean asked him to be VP.

This quotes proves better than anyother why the electoral college sucks. Make every vote count, ban the electoral college. Or atleast modify it to make it on the national level instead of the state level. You get the number of delegates proportional to the percent of people nationally that voted for you. That way, all those people worried some crazy guy that's charismatic as hell will win and there won't be a back up of educated people (the electoral college) to boot him premptively can be calmed.

not directly no. but i believe his campaign went wild on the negative propaganda too...

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/16/politics/campaigns/16LEHA.html

this is the best example i can find but there are others.

Centroles, I agree about the electoral college. I don't know enough about politics and the constitution to come up with options, although yours sound workable.

Your statement about the electoral college is exactly why I would vote for anyone who gets the Democratic nomination. I might go for Nader in four years, but not this time.

i think many people underestimate dean's ability to connect with voters with his straight talk ability. that's very important. if mccain got the nomination over bush, i'm certain the last election wouldn't have been such a slim victory for the GOP.

if he gets the nomination, his message is going to turn a LOT more positive.

He'll talking about how he is a fiscal conservative. His record in Vermont taking it from it's largest defecit to his largest surplus.
His ability to cut wasteful unneeded govt. spending.
The policies he implemented in Vermont to get 98% of the population insurance coverage. And how he intends to take a similar route to get us universal coverage without balloning the budget.
His stellar record on education in Vermont and how he plans to implement it at the national level.

This is the message that appeals to moderates and conservatives even. He can even talk about how the NRA has almost consistently endorsed him for governor to ensure that he connects with conservatives as well.

I think going into the general election, he'll downplay the whole antibush theme. He may even commend him on policies like his immigration policy and not talk about Iraq as much. When he does talk about foreign policy, he'll talk about how he backed bosnia, the first gulf war, and would've have backed the iraqi invasion if the president more effort at diplomacy.

Of course they'll be mention of all the bad things bush did, all the cuts to education, social security, the environment, healthcare he made etc. His payoffs to special interests. But I think he'll be more direct and less emotional when talking about those issues as well. Basically all the stuff brought up here... http://www.politicsforum.(org)/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5367

He's a great speaker. And he can come of a straight talker. The more people hear him speak, the more they tend to connect to him. Edwards has a similar ability.

I wish I could say the same for Clark. His credentials maybe stellar, but his ability isn't.

I picked Cucinich early, but almost nobody else did, so I went with Dean.

Looks like Kerry is in the lead. Cool :-D

I have always understood that the electoral colleges' purpose ,in kind of a laymans nutshell, was to make sure all peoples voices were heard and counted or otherwise politicians would never campaign in small rural areas.

With so many homes everywhere now having access to some much news, internet, just plain information at their fingertips, I would think this would no longer be an issue and just about anyone who wants to be informed can be.

So why the electoral college? Screw it, I say.