2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

Laffin'!

So, it seems some here choose to scroll past
anyone thinking tort lawyers are scummy
anyone with negative view of Clinton
anyone who doesn't agree with them...?

Is this a debate board or a kindergarten clique?
So a member takes dim view of Edwards? You say what you please about Republicans... What about equal rights to freedom of speech?

Aren't you here to exchange views?

Sofia,

Right ON!

The "scroll" thing is a childish and insipid ploy.

If it were an earnest attempt to avoid undesireable and contentious debate it would be done without the unecessary provocations (calling the people names, and making a song about it).

It just comes across as an immature way of avoiding debate that they do not have an answer to.

Grow up people!

The following people have made it abundantly clear that by scrolling, they are unwilling to deal with thoughts and opinions that may vary from their own:
mamajuana
Setanta
tartarin
dys
jjorge....

Why else would someone scroll?????

"Don't bother me with the facts, my mind is made up, and by the way, my opinion is more valuable than yours"


THAT IS WHAT SCROLLING IS ALL ABOUT PEOPLE.

Sofia and Craven are right:


GROW UP and start acting as if you were the adults you all purport to be!!!!

max,

Just for the record, if I were to make a list it would not be like that. I only bring this up because I think a few on your list are there by association and since you said you agreed with me I want to make it clear that I disagree with your list.

A simple example is that some on your list decry name calling a few posts before others in your list stoop to it.

Edit: I realized I disagree with your entire list. Every single one of those people are capable.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
White House 2004: Democrats
All data are from nationwide surveys of Americans 18 & older. See also:
Political figures

Time/CNN Poll conducted by Harris Interactive. May 21-22, 2003. N=368 registered Democrats and independents who lean Democratic nationwide.

"Thinking ahead to the 2004 presidential election, if you were asked to vote for a Democratic presidential nominee for president today, which of the following Democrats would you vote for? . . ."

....................................5/21-22/03 2/19-20/03 1/15-16/03

John Kerry ...........................14.......... 8.............. 11
Joseph Lieberman .................13.......... 16............. 21
Dick Gephardt ......................13........... 13............. 10
Al Sharpton ...........................8 .............7.............. 2
John Edwards ........................7.............. 7............... 12
Bob Graham ..........................5.............. 3............... 3
Howard Dean .........................4............. 3................ 3
Carol Moseley Braun ...............3............. 4................ n/a
Dennis Kucinich .......................2............ 2................. n/a
Other .....................................1............. 7................ 11
Not sure ................................30........... 30................ 27

This is interesting. Kerry has taken a tiny lead. Lieberman has fallen drastically. Edwards has fallen. I thought Graham and Dean would have gained more...

Any surprises?

I certainly need to read up on this Not Sure fellow. He could actually be trouble for Bush if we're not careful!

I wish I knew if this was business as usual--30% undecided at this point.
For some reason, it seems to me there is a greater flux in the last two elections-- people aren't committing to a candidate like they used to.

Sharpton over Edwards and Graham is a big story.

Perhaps you should observe a few debates and a few kindergartens to better distinguish between them.

Name-calling is not debate and it adds nothing to a meaningful discussion.

If I get called by a pollster I'm declaring for the Rev. Al.

(Hey, it's rare to be able to jack with a real poll....warping the online ones has gotten to be as much fun as putting peanut butter on the dog's nose...)

Shifting gears into humorous overdrive for a moment, I think the most unlikely scenario for a Dem ballot would be "Lieberman-Sharpton 2004".

What would be yours?

Lieberman-Gore

LOL, Scrat...

How about Kennedy-Kennedy (take your pick of any--living, dead, near-dead...)

"He KennedyKennedyKennedyKennedySahwing, Battah"

How about a cross-party entry: Shriver-Kennedy/Schwarzeneger

I like the shriver/schwarzeneger idea...a full 200 points of IQ would be brought to the office.

Geeze, you really think Maria scores over a hundred?

Thanks, Craven.

You're right, I fixed it.

Graham/Kucinich gets my vote.

Speaking of the Good Congressman from OHIO,
he is quite a prize....
http://www.kucinich.net/index.htm

I agree. Thing is, it's not like all the name calling is from one side and some who "scroll to avoid" indulge in exactly that:

I just stumbled across this, but let me know if someone else has already shared it:



The article goes on in some detail and seems to make a pretty convincing case that it is unlikely that some of these people made these donations from their own funds and of their own account.

Craven -- This time I don't agree with your reprimand -- at all. It's important (hey, above all for conservatives) to make a distinction between genuine and heartfelt conservatives and the "paper-thin" radicalism which has become its off-shoot. It would be just as fair to say that within the Dems (and I've seen this, albeit infreqently, in A2K) there are neo-con-Dems -- just as power hungry and just as paper-thin intellectually. We're talking here about jab and run smart-asses -- they are a class (not a political party) unto themselves!

Waaaaahhhhh! You BETTER argue with me, or - or, you're just being a big BABY!!!!!!!!

And you're not as MATURE as me! So There!!!!!!!