2008 Democrat Contenders

[Conan71]

Who do you like so far?

I watched a couple of hours of the winter DNC on Saturday.  I assure you it pained me to have to watch that smug bast*rd Howard Dean for that long, but I wanted to hear what to expect out of the candidates for '08.

Joe Biden has never had an original thought in his lifetime.  He loves to claim other's words and work as his own and obviously didn't get a clue after the '88 campaign that America is not interested in him.  He's also been caught over-stating his educational credentials.  Biden is in love with himself and it showed in his speech.  He's a stale six term senator.

I was real impressed with Bill Richardson, he's got a dynamic personality, and seems like a guy you'd love to have lunch with.  In addition, he's got experience in the U.S. diplomatic corps, four time Nobel peace prize nominee, secretary of energy (though his tenure is considered by some to be a black eye), served in Congress, and by all accounts has cracked down on crime and created quite a few new jobs in New Mexico as Governor.  He understands the success of traditionally conservative economics by creating tax cuts in New Mexico to help bring about creation of jobs and prosperity.  Who knows, we might even finally wind up with a workable energy policy.

Something else which would not hurt him is his Hispanic heritage.

Richardson could garner a fair amount of GOP swing votes.  Depending on who the final candidate is for the GOP, I would have to seriously consider Richardson if he were to win the Democratic nomination.

Mike Gravel- Where did they dig this guy up?  He was a senator from Alaska from '69 through '81.  He's got a stodgy appearance and demeanor that's better suited for the GOP. []

I didn't stick around for Vilsack, I went to the gun show and excercized my second amendment rights. []

My opinion on the other front-runners:

Hillary Clinton- She does have the insight of being an integral part of a pretty successful White House administration, and will have eight years of Senate experience under her tush.  Experience like that is hard to beat.  However, she's one of the most polarizing political figures of our time and lacks any sort of charisma.  She even has Bill Clinton's most loyal supporters fleeing to Obama's camp.

Other part is, she will do what is politically expedient, before she will do what is right.

Barack Obama- tons of charisma, African American, Muslim roots- all window-dressing issues which would draw image-driven rather than issue-driven voters.

Other than that, what experience does he have as a leader?  A state Senator and by '08 he will have served one term in the Senate.  Hardly what I would call the best leadership credentials in the pack.  I think he will be someone else's running mate.

John Edwards- Clinton-esque charisma without the Clinton sleaze.  Incredibly likeable guy, but what leadership qualities does he have?  Six years in the Senate.  Great Horatio Alger story, but is he still really in touch with the down-trodden?

Al Gore- Does he really have the guts to run in the same race as Hillary?  With the Clinton's propensity to dig up sludge on their opponents, I'd think Gore would be too easy a target.  Has about the same relevant experience as Hillary.

Secondly, he's a huge hypocrite.  He can thank tobacco largely for his old family money which has provided a cushy life-style, yet went after the industry with a vengeance.  Other than talking about protecting the environment, by all accounts he doesn't walk the walk in his personal life.  As well, there are much more charismatic contenders in the race.

[iplaw]

The Dem primaries should be quite the spectacle this year...I guess whoever doesn't get cannibalized by their own party will get the nomination, but at this point, I think Hillary and Obama are the only viable options.

Gore has cashed in politically with the global warming issue.  Single platform candidates are a sure losers, and I think he's got such tunnel vision at this point he wouldn't be able to recognize his kyoto from a hole in the ground.

[waterboy]

I am leaning towards Edwards. I watched him speak here during the last election and am convinced he has not lost track of who and what America is about. A view from both ends is important at this time. I don't care for Southern accents, except on women, but I can overlook that. He is looking rather tired as of late. He admitted to having made a mistake in the Iraq vote and did so without trashing the prez which looked good. He was the first I saw comment, and make sense, on how to deal with Iran.

Your analysis of the rest of the pack seems true enough to me though the criticisms apply to almost all politicians. Richardson is a border state guy and would need to make really tough decisions but at least informed ones.

[iplaw]

I think Edwards is a poor choice. To quote Simon Cowell, "he's utterly forgettable."  I do agree southern accents on women are a good thing, but not so much on men...it drives me nuts when Silky Pony says his dad worked at a "MEEEEL."  It's just as obnoxious as NOOCULAR Weapons..

[iplaw]

Speaking of the '08 race, Chris Matthews got spanked by Imus this morning for dropping the F bomb on air when they were talking about the '08 race.

[aoxamaxoa]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Joe Biden has never had an original thought in his lifetime.  He loves to claim other's words and work as his own and obviously didn't get a clue after the '88 campaign that America is not interested in him.  He's also been caught over-stating his educational credentials.  Biden is in love with himself and it showed in his speech.  He's a stale six term senator.

TRUE!
[/quote]
I was real impressed with Bill Richardson, he's got a dynamic personality, and seems like a guy you'd love to have lunch with.  In addition, he's got experience in the U.S. diplomatic corps, four time Nobel peace prize nominee, secretary of energy (though his tenure is considered by some to be a black eye), served in Congress, and by all accounts has cracked down on crime and created quite a few new jobs in New Mexico as Governor.  He understands the success of traditionally conservative economics by creating tax cuts in New Mexico to help bring about creation of jobs and prosperity.  Who knows, we might even finally wind up with a workable energy policy.[/quote]

Very True

Hillary Clinton- 55% hate her....no chance


[/quote]
Barack Obama- tons of charisma, African American, Muslim roots- all window-dressing issues which would draw image-driven rather than issue-driven voters.

Other than that, what experience does he have as a leader?  A state Senator and by '08 he will have served one term in the Senate.  Hardly what I would call the best leadership credentials in the pack.  I think he will be someone else's running mate.[/quote]

TRUE except Lincoln had the same credentials and Americans may be willing to give it a try after the current idiot moron in charge got by in 2000....


[/quote]
John Edwards- Clinton-esque charisma without the Clinton sleaze.  Incredibly likeable guy, but what leadership qualities does he have?  Six years in the Senate.  Great Horatio Alger story, but is he still really in touch with the down-trodden? [/quote]

ok
[/quote]
Al Gore-
Secondly, he's a huge hypocrite.  He can thank tobacco largely for his old family money which has provided a cushy life-style, yet went after the industry with a vengeance.  Other than talking about protecting the environment, by all accounts he doesn't walk the walk in his personal life.  As well, there are much more charismatic contenders in the race.
[/quote]

That's a lie. Gore went after tabacco after his loving sister died from lung cancer. The family sold the farm. They had an awakening. They admitted they had been wrong. That takes courage. Something the people who stole the election from him in 2000 have none of. He's a vet. He would have had a completely different outcome had he been elected.

You seem to be wary of a good man. Read the book and rent the video. Gore would be the best person for the job.....

[Conan71]

Hillary really doesn't stand a chance to win the nomination.  She's so egocentric though, she's having a hard time believing it.

I like the idealism and apparent passion of John Edwards.  I was truly taken in by it in '04.  Idealism and suitability for the job are two different things though.  If he had been a governor, and actually been an administrator and leader, or had extensive foreign policy experience, or had a key White House post in the past, I'd give him credit for relevant experience which might help him in the duties of President.  I just don't see any relevant experience.  His charisma and back-story of his youth is his best asset.  And who knows, the mill his dad worked in might have been owned by his grandfather.  Politicians do tend to over-state things.

Give him one or two terms as a veep or another high-ranking admin position and I'd reconsider my view.  I just don't think a lengthy career as a tort lawyer and six years in the Senate are enough experience.

With McCain, Brownback, Biden, Clinton, and Obama all in the running at this point, that means five percent of our U.S. Senate is distracted with a campaign for President at one of the most politically crucial times in U.S. history.  Does anyone else think a Senator or Representative should have to step down when they announce a candidacy for another post during their term?  

We basically are paying them full-time pay for a job that is not getting their full focus.  In other government job sectors, if you had a part-time job that kept you out of important meetings and meeting all the expectations of your job, you'd be fired, right?

[waterboy]

I wouldn't let the lack of experience within the executive branch, house or governorship be a limiting factor. Lots of good leaders have not sullied themselves with that background. Administrative skills are learned in many different ways and are applicable at all levels.

You show more insight than many politicians who have served multiple terms. And I've seen some pretty astute observations all over the internet that seemed to elude current leaders.  We really need to get away from the personalities of these folks and listen to what they say. For instance, Edwards remarked on MTP the other day that Iran's leader isn't nearly so popular among his own people as Americans might think. Attacking Iran may be just the move he needs to galvanize his country and increase his power.

Senators/reps should take a leave of absence to run for office but how do you decide upon their successors who will have been non-elected but just as powerful?

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

I think Edwards is a poor choice. To quote Simon Cowell, "he's utterly forgettable."  I do agree southern accents on women are a good thing, but not so much on men...it drives me nuts when Silky Pony says his dad worked at a "MEEEEL."  It's just as obnoxious as NOOCULAR Weapons..

Silky Pony, that's good. [] Quoting Simon Cowell doesn't mean much though. Would rather have an effective administrator in the executive office that was a bit forgettable but and outstanding achiever. Eisenhower wasn't like a charm bracelet ya know. But who will ever forget his achievements?

[Conan71]

My apologies, I had to peek under the curtain and see what Aox is spewing now.

Suggested reading on Al Gore:

http://www.realchange.org/gore.htm#pollution

Real Change takes pokes at all candidates, not just the libs.

http://tafkac.org/ulz/gore2.html

FICTION: The same sister died of lung cancer years later (1984) and Gore vowed to never accept tobacco money as campaign contributions.

FACT: Just four years later (1988), while campaigning for office, Gore spoke to the tobacco industry in Greenville, North Carolina and said he was one of them because "I've planted it, raised it, cut it, and dried it." He raised over $100,000 in "reported" contributions. His Sister died in 1984. He did not stop accepting campaign funding from Tobacco Company's until 1996.

IMO, Al Gore is a pathological liar who never lets facts get in the way of his political ambitions.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

I wouldn't let the lack of experience within the executive branch, house or governorship be a limiting factor. Lots of good leaders have not sullied themselves with that background. Administrative skills are learned in many different ways and are applicable at all levels.

That's just my own personal paradigm.  There's a lot to be said for the philosophy of having an "outsider" in the White House, but according to my paradigm, it's just more window dressing.

Edwards isn't the off-spring of a political dynasty and he's not old money either which were two things which drew me to him in '04.  

I was really puzzled that Democrats squandered that opportunity in '04 in favor of Kerry.  Do you suppose it was his Senate seniority which appealed to the voters in the primaries?  Kerry was boring, old power, money, and politics.  If the ticket had been the other way around, I think Edwards could have picked up enough swing voters in the general election.

[rwarn17588]

<iplaw wrote:

Speaking of the '08 race, Chris Matthews got spanked by Imus this morning for dropping the F bomb on air when they were talking about the '08 race.

<end clip>

Really? Do they have video? [:X]

[}:)]

[rwarn17588]

Back to topic ...

I don't honestly know who's going to win. I think I can safely mark off the ones who won't win, like Biden, Vilsack, Kucinich.

My wife, who's much more of a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat than I am, thinks Hillary is unelectable. Thus, the race is probably between Obama and Edwards. Richardson is the proverbial dark horse, and may make a stronger challenge than anticipated.

Maybe Wesley Clark, too, if he ever makes up his damned mind on whether he's entering the race. It's probably already too late for him.

Don't count on Gore. He's having more of an impact on environmental issues, doing what he's doing now, than he ever would as a politician.

It's going to be an interesting campaign season. I read one report that says this is going to be the most wide-open presidential race since the late 1920s.

I think both sides have strong candidates -- ones that are at least more competent that the current occupant of the Oval Office.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

I wouldn't let the lack of experience within the executive branch, house or governorship be a limiting factor. Lots of good leaders have not sullied themselves with that background. Administrative skills are learned in many different ways and are applicable at all levels.

That's just my own personal paradigm.  There's a lot to be said for the philosophy of having an "outsider" in the White House, but according to my paradigm, it's just more window dressing.

Edwards isn't the off-spring of a political dynasty and he's not old money either which were two things which drew me to him in '04.  

I was really puzzled that Democrats squandered that opportunity in '04 in favor of Kerry.  Do you suppose it was his Senate seniority which appealed to the voters in the primaries?  Kerry was boring, old power, money, and politics.  If the ticket had been the other way around, I think Edwards could have picked up enough swing voters in the general election.

I think it was his youth, his reality oriented vision of two America's and his immediate family. When you listen to him in person he has charisma. Whether or not he is genuine doesn't seem to be an issue. One can look at his path, his wife & kids, his education and career and identify with them as something they could achieve.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

Back to topic ...

I don't honestly know who's going to win. I think I can safely mark off the ones who won't win, like Biden, Vilsack, Kucinich.

My wife, who's much more of a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat than I am, thinks Hillary is unelectable. Thus, the race is probably between Obama and Edwards. Richardson is the proverbial dark horse, and may make a stronger challenge than anticipated.

Maybe Wesley Clark, too, if he ever makes up his damned mind on whether he's entering the race. It's probably already too late for him.

Don't count on Gore. He's having more of an impact on environmental issues, doing what he's doing now, than he ever would as a politician.

It's going to be an interesting campaign season. I read one report that says this is going to be the most wide-open presidential race since the late 1920s.

I think both sides have strong candidates -- ones that are at least more competent that the current occupant of the Oval Office.

I think the other shoe is going to drop on Obama.  Clinton sees him as her biggest threat right now, which means her operatives are working overtime trying to come up with as much dirt on him as they can.  Something will fall out that will either turn off a lot of voters to him or will blow up in Hillary's face.

I hope Richardson does make a strong run in the primaries and enough issue-driven voters will turn out in favor.  I truly believe that he could put aside partisanship to do what is best for all of America, not just half.