2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

Love the links....Anyone had any experience with the Wellstone Foundation?

foxnews? Now there's a prime #1 source. Bleak to you, not too meaningful to a lot of the rest of us. In my home state the party's raised quite a bit - more than the repubs. Win some, lose some.

Maple - I know VNN is into the Wellstone group, and Tartarin says she is, too. Try looking into Move-On.org (I think). They're beginning to organize again.

How come nobody ever talks about this guy runnin'(again)?

For President I mean....

This made me smile...

The Wellstone Foundation is doing the right thing, but it's a long term effort, not looking for immediate results. Moveon is with you 24 hours a day, emailing you not just about general, national issues, but now also about need for immediate action in one's home state.

Max, to be honest, I found your posts to be silly and cruel.

He'll probably take that as a compliment, indicating objectives accomplished.

Tartarin: Why is it "cruel?"
Snood: Go take a bath in Australia...

Max,

I gotta wonder why anyone would gloat about one party having all the moolah to control elections. It does seem as though you haven't given much thought to what that really means. We have surpassed the the
Golden Age of Greed of the 1890s, Max, where money was the all and end all. I think it's about time for another progressive era to counter-balance this horrendous trend. A David and Goliath scenario maybe in the works.

The campaign finance law which was fought for and finally passed by congress is now basically on hold with it's several of it's provisions legality in question. It now remains for the USSC to rule. Based upon the political makeup of that court there is little question that they will rule against the provisions. Making I suppose the law null and void.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/03/politics/03DONA.html?th

Not having the requisite knowledge to take Ted Kennedy on for his policies, you post a picture of an elderly, fat guy having a swim. Pathetic.

I'm not a big fan of Hillary's, but I've noticed she's become a target for men who, uh, are not as well-equipped as she is.

So, who won the debate today?

Argh.
Did I miss it? I thought it was tomorrow after dark. Tell!

It's tonight at 9 (Eastern, I think) to be moderated by George Stephanopolous but will not be televised live.

Look for it on C-SPAN tomorrow.

dys-- Good stuff. Graham had a zinger-- "I represent the electable wing of the Democrat Party."

(prognosticatin') Sharpton will take from Kerry- Dean will take from Kerry. Braun will leave the race after her showing in SC (the second primary, I think it is) There are alot of very active, Democrat lawyers in Columbia and surrounding cities-- I wonder if their money can pull something out for Edwards... Anyhow, I see the older Dem establishment in SC going for Graham, Kerry or Lieberman, with Kerry losing some younger voters to Dean, pushing Edwards up.

1)Graham/Lieberman
2)Graham/Lieberman
3)Edwards
4)Kerry
5)Dean

I'm lovin' Dean. This is going to be great!

Prognostications of South Carolina? I'm going to look for a poll.

Oops. Forgot Dick.
Here is the poll, from Gallup.

Lieberman Leads Field of Nine
Bush not seen as invincible


by Lydia Saad
GALLUP NEWS SERVICE

PRINCETON, NJ -- A new CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll on the 2004 presidential election, based on a national survey conducted April 22-23, finds Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman holding a slight edge over the field of nine Democratic candidates that will meet in South Carolina this weekend in the season's first nationally televised debate. Massachusetts Senator John Kerry and Missouri Congressman Dick Gephardt follow close behind. In March, Lieberman had tied Kerry for second place, with Gephardt in the lead.

The same poll shows George W. Bush in a relatively strong position against the Democrats in the general election, but without the sense of invincibility that surrounded his father after the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Bush's Lead

George W. Bush holds a healthy advantage over an unnamed Democratic in the 2004 presidential election, after seeing that lead narrow to just 3 points earlier this year. Today 49% of national adults say they would vote for Bush, while 35% are inclined toward the Democratic Party's candidate.

Bush's 14-point lead today is similar to the 15-point lead he held in late March, but significantly better than his standing prior to the start of the Iraq war. In a March 14-15 poll, only 45% planned to vote for Bush versus 42% who were backing the Democrat. Bush is faring less well in the election than he did in the first several months after Sept. 11. At that time, he led an unnamed Democratic challenger by 25 points. But in the second half of 2002, his lead settled into the 15-point range, similar to where he stands today.

---------------
Still think, despite slow start, Graham will end up near the top, behind Lieberman. Gephardt, IMO, will wind up behind Edwards.

if Lieberman gets the nod i will again vote Green.

Dys:

I feel the same way! Ugh! But I am realistic and know that he doesn't have a chance...my feeling is that Kerry will get it, although I like Dean more.

I'm not a Lieberman fan either. Kerry really wants this one. I wonder if dems will go for a southerner ?

Sofia, I, too, think Graham will move more to the top of the list, but I think Kerry and Dean are to be reckoned with. Dean seems to be picking up a lot of younger voters, and around the country a lot of people are identifying with him. These small groups - sometimes 50 - 200 people, are working.

This time around, it looks like a lot of them have gotten the message that chemistry counts. And what could make it all work is that most of them seem to have the same issues, so it's a question of who do you like. I'm watching for george to go into overtime on the boyish charm and aw shucks routine.