democratic hopefuls 2004

[tasty]

I was gonna respond to cookie in the other topic but I think that this deserves its own place. Obviously there is currently a pileup of Democratic candidates. Here is all of them for those of you not following politics:

Joe Lieberman (senator)
Bob Kerrey (Senator)
Dick Gephardt (congressman)
John Edwards (lawyer)
Howard Dean (former governor of Vermont)
Al Sharpton (reverend, rights activist)
Dennis Kucinich (congressman)
Carol Mosely-Braun (congresswoman)

And to complicate things even more, Gary Hart, Joseph Biden, and Bob Graham have all stated they are considering a bid (I think Graham may have decided against it by now though).

If you are a Democrat, which of these candidates would you support for a presidential run? Which of these candidates do you think has the best chance of winning?

I support Howard Dean. Although he is not a favorite of the Democratic establishment, he is the most forward thinking of the candidates [not most radical, just most forward thinking]. Things I like about him include his support of a universal healthcare system, his support of publicly funded elections, and his support for the rights of homosexuals. He has already gained support with Iowa Democrats [at least my state is important for one reason first primaries what!!!], and I know he has been to Iowa City and Des Moines several times [I saw him speak last week].

[PsYcO aSsAsSiN]

John Edwards is actually a Senator from North Carolina who also happens to be a prick.

Although I am not a Democrat, the race will boil down to Edwards, Lieberman, and Kerrey - with Edwards likely getting the nod sice the other two are too liberal for the public's liking.

[jn.loudnotes]

The only candidate I know much about right now is Edwards, as he's from Raleigh, as am I.

However, why did you list him as a "lawyer" while listing Lieberman and Kerrey as Senators?  Edwards is a senator as well.  Also, I presume you meant "representative" by congress(wo)man, as senators are also congresspeople.

Anyway, I'm not thrilled about the coming election.  None of the democrats impress me, the third parties fail to galvanize me, and I'd sooner renounce my citizenship than vote for Bush.  Fortunately, I'm underage anyway, so the 2004 election will be beyond my control.  And when our beloved dictator retains power, it will affect my initial job market prospects, my potential draft status, and my individual privacies and freedoms.

Great job, opposition. . .

[tasty]

My bad on Edwards. I didn't mean to belittle his position in the senate, I just see him referenced in news articles as a lawyer all the time. Didn't even know he was in the senate. Sin, I don't think you can say Lieberman is too liberal for the public's liking, since he is pro-war, pro-Israel, and pro-censorship. He's probably the most centrist of the candidates out there.

[The Ghost of Bondo]

I won't be voting because I'll be in Canada by then.

But I don't really know enough about the different ones to choose.  Whichever one will beat bush is my choice.  Although I don't like Lieberman because of his pro-censorship stance when it comes to video games.

[abe]

bondo, you can vote by absentee ballot, thats what ive been doing. you just have to request it somhow (i think at the DMV).

as for the democrats: what a pathetic bunch of losers they are serving up on the buffet for 2004. saddest part is that its mostly leftovers from the last presidential election. lets see what we have:

liebermann- if i wanted a rabbi in the white house, id vote for mine. he just makes himself look like an ass everytime he starts with the morality crap.....makes him sound kinda, well, republican, imo. especially all the stuff with censure of the music industry in which he was very prominent. he might as well be a republican....

edwards- well, at least hes got the look. too bad hes a dimwit with almost no government experience.

gephart- mhhhhh, i dont think so. hes never had a real shot before, but with all these deadbeats around him, he might actually stand a slim chance.

bob kerrey (?)- i thought he was a republican and retired from senate.

john kerry (?)- is that who youre thinking of, tasty? he does have quite a bit of FP experience and hes from my state (mass). currently hes the only one id consider supporting.

howard dean- dont know much about him, but he sounds too much like a bleeding heart liberal to me. i guess theres nothing wrong with that in of itself, but i don't think we need a sissy in the white house. im talking out of my ass here though since i know little about him, except that hes big on social spending and against the war.

Al Sharpton- ROFL, yea right.....who in their right mind would vote for him? hes enough of a joke without running for president.

the last two i have absolutely no clue about. when the primaries were happening last time i was a big fan of Bill Bradley, so im really hoping somone of his caliber will step in and save the democrats' bid.

[tasty]

facts i have wrong: It's John and not Bob Kerry.

other stuff: leftovers of last campaign? when gore and bradley were the only major candidates? some of these guys have ran before but not in 2000 (besides Lieberman obviously).

Edwards is not a "dimwit". From articles I read he is supposed to be the most intellectual of the candidates.

saying things like a sissy in the white house and using terminology like "bleeding heart liberal" makes you sound silly. perhaps the candidates should have a bench press contest so they can  prove how manly they are.

[The Ghost of Bondo]

Well, I suppose technically I could vote in 2004...but that would take registering and thinking I could make one difference in this republican state.  I figure I'm moving to Canada to escape the US political mess, why go out of my way to be involved in it.  by 2008 I'll be a Canadian and not a US citizen so by then it will be a moot point.  As for non-Presidential/local elections, not only do republicans win most everything in Colorado that is state-wide, I live in an extremely republican city, and a republican district in that city so no positions that I'd be able to vote for will go anything but for the republicans.

[abe]

bah,

i guess i need to clarify what i meant by "sissy": he seems a bit to dovish on foreign policy. my opinion is that if we have a guy like that formulating our foreign policy, our interests will not be adequately protected and will get trampled on. there, thats what i meant by "sissy in the white house", which i think most people have an easier time interpreting than what i said above. i know, your against bush's iraq policy.....blah, blah, blah

maybe dimwit is a little strong for edwards.....he's not as knowledgable on certain very important topics (i.e foreign policy) as I would want my president to be. then again, neither is bush, but i never voted for him (and never will, no matter how shitty the democratic ticket).

i don't like the term bleeding heart liberal that much either, but it had the connotation i was looking for in this situation. i myself qualify as one (by most ppls standards) so don't take offense......and if you do, well, sod off.

finally, when i was talking about leftovers, i was referring to Liebermann, kerry and gephardt mostly.....theyre are not exactly fresh material. edwards is a noob (does saying that make me sound silly too?) and sharpton is a clown (this isnt his first bid either). i guess well have to wait for the primaries to see how these guys stand up against one another and, more importantly, against bush. anyways, i was just throughing out my thoughts on these candidates in a very raw and crude manner, so i don't really give a shit if you think i sound silly.......

[The Ghost of Bondo]

Found another name for the list in my newspaper.

Carol Moseley-Braun...former senator from Illinois
She was the first black female senator
She says she is a "peace dove and budget hawk"

She would be helped and hurt with her gender and race in the election.  I think to some degree having a female president could hurt foreign relations with some countries as not everyone in the world has as much gender equality as we do.

[EUR_Zaitsev]

Bondo that would be great accept we all know that there are too many racists and too many sexists and you put them together and well she simply wouldnt have a chance. Thats what counts out Al Sharpton as well. Though Al and Modeley Braun would be good for the world the Democratic party must put up a white male if they want a chance of ousting the encombent. We have to be able to sacrifice greatness and get a less knowledgable candidate rather then basically surrender the country to Bush for another four years.

[tasty]

I'm not actually a very big Al Sharpton detractor. I think he's generally a good guy. The problem with both him and Moseley-Braun is that they have been involved in past scandals. Combine that with Southern racism and you have a bad combination for winning the election. Also I thought you guys might be interested in seeing some poll numbers on who democratic voters are favoring, so here is a link to polls of both Iowa and New Hampshire voters: Democratic Polling Data

I would also like to pre-apologize to everyone for the apparent popularity of Gephardt in Iowa. Really, I don't know what they fuck they are thinking. It appears the universal favorite right now is Kerrey.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

liebermann- if i wanted a rabbi in the white house, id vote for mine.

By far the funniest thing I've heard Abe say yet.  LMAO.

Al Sharpton- ROFL

They day he is sworn in as President of the United States of America is the day that I not only move back to Canada, but I'll even move in with Bondo.  That just about covers my feelings on that topic.  

[The Ghost of Bondo]

They day he is sworn in as President of the United States of America is the day that I not only move back to Canada, but I'll even move in with Bondo.  That just about covers my feelings on that topic.  

Only if you'll pay me good money to babysit and indoctrinate your child with liberal viewpoints.
The good news is BC is one of the less liberal provinces...it gets more liberal in the East.

[KoS PY.nq.ict]

We really have had shit for candidates. I wouldn't be surprised if Bush was re-elected considering the crap that the democratic party has to offer (but i hope it doesn't happen). What would be nice is if Giuliani ran as a candidate. He seems like a decent guy with the right views.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Since there is a movie about Giuliani coming out soon, showing him in a very heroic light I've read, I wouldn't count him out of running yet, it's still early.

I imagine it really depends on his health.

As for bringing the wife (by then) and kid, I'd probably chose to abort both of them, saving them the anguish of watching America really go down in flames.  

[tasty]

What is with all the lionization of Giuliani after September 11. I'm sorry, but he was a douche bag before and the fact that he happened to be the mayor of New York when it happened doesn't change a thing. I personally don't think his leadership after 9/11 was any different from what any other mayor worth their salt would have done. Michael Bloomberg appears to be doing a much better job overall as mayor of NYC (besides the whole massive funding removal from the public schools there).

Also, what's wrong with Al Sharpton? I know the Dems think he's a disaster and I know there is a lot of popular sentiment against him, but I'd like to know why people dislike him so.

[abe]

Bondo that would be great accept we all know that there are too many racists and too many sexists and you put them together and well she simply wouldnt have a chance. Thats what counts out Al Sharpton as well.

No zaitsev, what counts all sharpton out is the fact that nobody takes him seriously. and for good reason, imo: he just hops on the bandwagon of any ridiculous cause or protest that he thinks will get him publicity, no matter how outlandishly dumb it really is. kind of like you, zaitzev, imo.
and tasty, it's not that I dispise Al Sharpton, but i think hes just a publicity-hungry profiteer. besides, if youre looking for a noob, al sharpton is your man: the only government experience he has is getting arrested.

oh, and py: last time i checked, guiliani was a republican. are you suggesting he take over the republican ticket from bush or that we have two republicans running for the white house? because i dont think itll fly either way.

and btw, i agree with you on benito guiliani, tasty. he was a fascist before 9/11 and i doubt thats changed any bit.

[jn.loudnotes]

Likewise, what's with all the edification of Bush after 9/11 as well?  Sure, he did finally make a speech without a verbal miscue, but I didn't really find his leadership very rousing.  And stolidly placing the US into a war while scaring the populace into a pseudo-patriotic fervor hardly seems like good leadership to me.  He acted very strongly after the attacks, but I continue to think that the stronger his actions = the worse for the country.

[3az]

hahaha
dont get all your hopes up too high...
most of the american majority (60% as of august - NBC) still approve of bush, more would if there weren't so many damn "democrat-or-death" people. you make me sick how you can take ANYthing a republican does, and twist it to make it look evil - whether or not in reality it was/n't good.  what especially made me sick was tasty's comment on guiliani, which only further proves my point. you guys are dumb.