2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

I have always thought a 'minority' on the ticket would energize a voting bloc. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't hear any negative results of Lieberman on the Gore ticket.

But, that was a different time--pre-911. (And, I was unaware of how serious our problem with the ME was at that time.)

This is why I think Lieberman's race?/religion may be quite a different factor now, for the reasons AU stated :

Regarding the ME it certainly would not enhance our position in dealing with the Moslem nations and indeed may make it more difficult. If that was at all possible?
-------------------------------------
Not fear of terrorists, but difficulties in being seen by Muslims/Arabs as objective in the Peace Process.

I also bet none of the Dem candidates will mention it due to PC. It would be a minefield to bring up in the political arena.

With Lieberman possibly the front runner, this makes for very interesting machinations.

For anyone who thinks this is anywhere near anti-Semitic, I am a serious supporter of Jews in general and a Lieberman admirer. Hoping to avoid incorrect assumptions. Very interested in the issue.

How is he any different from Cheney and Rumsfeld? Both of those guys are quite partial to one side in the ME.

Dys makes a prediction (not my choice, just a prediction) the final Dem ticket will be Kerry/Graham

maxsdadeo makes a prediction:
If dys's prediction is correct, the person elected as President in 2004 will be a past member of the infamous skull and bones fraternity.

Max
If the economy continues to flounder, Iraq and Afghanistan are still a hotbed. Bush may not be the shoo in he appears to be today. Kerry and Graham may be just the duo to do him in

~pssst! Hey, AU! ~

Kerry was/is also a member....

Sofia - I don't think your comments are even remotely anti-semitic, but I do disagree with them. Would you likewise not want a woman president since those same cultures might not approve?

I can think of no issue where I would look outside our borders for an opinion on whether or not I should vote to elect this or that candidate.

Scrat
You might not consider ethnicity,religion,sex or race when voting. However, there are millions who do. We are not the colorblind, homogeneous, tolerant society we would like to believe we have become.

<loud pops are heard as bubbles are burst everywhere>

!!!

Scrat said--
Sofia - I don't think your comments are even remotely anti-semitic, but I do disagree with them. Would you likewise not want a woman president since those same cultures might not approve?

------------
Please remember-- I am prognosticating, not saying who I want.

All I have been trying to say is I think Jewish heritage in the present global climate will be seriously argued as detrimental in the Presidential race. I think Lieberman's religious heritage wouldn't have had much of a negative impact in the 2000 race, but post 911 may change that.

Still waiting to see which of the Dem candidates will bring it up.

Like dys, I'm just predicting. I don't understand why people continue to respond as if this is my preference...

I vote for who I please, as usual not giving a damn what anyone else thinks. Most certainly not OBL or any other such lunatic SOB.

I see dys' Kerry/Graham. I counter with Lieberman/Clinton.

Good evening. I haven't posted in this topic before but I have certainly been following it. I stepped back when it got somewhat more confrontational then I was comfortable with.
Be that as it may, the topic seems to be who WILL be the Dem nominees (vs individual posters' opinions of who SHOULD be).
Dyslexia goes for Kerry/Graham; Sofia suggests Lieberman/Clinton.
I heard NPR's Bob Edwards chatting with Sen Graham a day or so ago. I was somewhat disappointed. He did note, correctly I think, that the South could be critical. He was arguing for a Graham/plus someone else ticket, of course.
I'm going to stop there. I do have some other thoughts and questions for y'all. Thanks. -rjb-

Mmmm. Realjohnboy has a really big point.
There's always some Southern strategy in the ticket...

But, those of you living outside the South should be aware.

Florida is not considered a Southern state. :wink:

au - I wrote nothing about being a colorblind society. I wrote that I would give no consideration to the irrational reactions of those outside our borders in selecting our leaders.

sofia - And all I am stating is that while I understand your point of view, I do not share it.

realjohnboy - I am torn about Lieberman. His statements make him the best Dem in the field in my opinion, but his record suggests no reason to think he means what he says. In a different field, I could honestly vote for a Democrat for president who legitimately intended and believed as Lieberman suggests he does.

Sophia

I think Lieberman's religious heritage wouldn't have had much of a negative impact in the 2000 race, but post 911 may change that.

Sofia a nice thought but IMO far from the truth. As I stated previously we are far from being a colorblind religion neutral society.

Both political parties live in a more or less constant tension between their more extreme sub-elements and their more centrist parts. Generally successful presidential candidates from both parties take pains to present themselves as representatives of the centrist elements of their respective parties. This was certainly a key element in Clinton's win in 1992 (along with Ross Perot's candidacy). Bush, with his "compassionate conservatism" bit attempted the same strategy as well. Moreover many have argued that Gore's evident shift to embrace of the left wing elements of the Democrat party contributed to his defeat.

It appears to me that the many more or less single interest groups that populate the left wing of the Democrat party will be less willing this year to tolerate the centrist adjustments their candidates may be inclined to make to win the general election. Direct threats to their hot button issues, and a feeling that they were marginalized during the Clinton years, appear to have aroused an unusual level of focus among unions, the educational establishment, the save Roe vs Wade groups, et. al. This could hurt Lieberman in the primaries, despite the fact that he (in my opinion) is the most electable of the lot. How will this play out among the 3 or 4 serious candidates in the group?

George...,
After following this interaction for 92 pages, I did not get the feeling that Lieberman was the most electable. Would you restate the reasons behind your assertion or redirect me to where I can read the details of your opinion?

Mapleleaf,

It's just my opinion. I believe the other serious contenders, Gebhart, Kerry, Dean, Edwards each bring very strong negatives that will likely excite more opposition among those who vote in the general election than their loyal Democrat backers will bring.

However, I would not expect to find evidence of this in a dialogue among loyal Democrats.

I think Lieberman is a loser, always have -- just a gut feeling. It has nothing to do with whether or not he's Jewish but very much to do with his lack of stature. Also there's a report that Edwards is considering dropping out. Dean is getting kudos and surprised glances for raising some fairly serious money on the internet -- there's interest in general in his well-coordinated use of the 'net. He now has a video website and a subsidiary blog (apart from his deanforamerica. site).

Oops! No loyal Democract here, perhaps the others are such.