Which candidate do you hope does NOT get the nod?

[ModerateMiddle]

For whatever reason - unelectability, positions, temperment, whatever.

I'm going to include them all, but I know that my vote won't be for one of the fringe-y candidates who I am fairly certain will NOT get the nomination. My concern is that one of the top tier folks will get it - and we'll be stuck with Bush again because of it.

[JI7]

1. GEORGE W BUSH

.

[Bucky]

2. troubling question

Lieberman's chances of getting the nomination are about even with Gray Davis's. I'm seeing the race as three tiered right now.

The first tier are those with national presence already. Dean, Clark, and Kerry (but Kerry could drop to second tier if he takes 2nd in the New Hampshire primary).

The second tier are the two dark horses who could break through if the top three manage to cancel each other out. Edwards and Gephardt are serious candidates who are a little too dignified to appear desperate yet.

The third tier are the novelty candidates. They won't connect with the prize, but have their base secured enough to stay in the game till the cows come home. Sharpton, Kucinich, Lieberman, and Moseley Braun.

[Octafish]

13. I hope he gets arrested and frog-marched out of the White House...

... along with the Turd Rove. I volunteer to cuff 'em both and read what remains of their Miranda Rights. Once we're on the subject, might as well drag Sneer and Crisco and the rest of the cabal straight to their preliminary exams for Treason.

[JohnKleeb]

3. wow!

I am just gonna walk away with a grin on face. You know honest to god and call me silly or insane but I feel if people realized that DK is indeed "electable" he may be doing better, its not just people here but all around. "I like him but hes unelectable" sigh, meanwhile Ive seen Kerry supporters who really like DK and fight with Dean supporters who feel the same. Wow, just wow, you know. Go DK.

[DrFunkenstein]

4. Its A Credit To Edwards That No One Voted For Him

He's really kept his nose clean. I think he took one minor shot at Clark at the last debate, but he's really been head and shoulders above the fray.

His inexperience may work against him, but at this point I'd definitely say that he has nearly a year now of good clean campaigning.

[JohnKleeb]

5. I was gonna comment on Edwards myself

Its obvious him and DK :D are the most popular yet not first choice of many people here. I like Edwards myself too Doc.

[DrFunkenstein]

6. Everybody Loves Dennis

I know this will piss you off, but I've been pretending for months now that Kucinich doesn't even exist. Because it would seriously divide me, and I really want to get a progressive in the White House. Given the tremendous support Dennis has gotten over the months, I am at least secure in knowing that he isn't leaving the national scene anytime soon. Sooner or later, America will catch up to his standards.

[JohnKleeb]

11. I hope so, I am sick of waitin

I dont care really, Wake up America.

[surfermaw]

16. The meek shall inherit

Go John, remember? Jimmy Who, and most of all Bill Who?

[JohnKleeb]

17. thinking the same with a guy named Dennis

but Edwards is cool too.

[DemDogs]

57. so one someone had to erase Edwards' perfect score

Do you think there is really someone out there who's LEAST favorite candidate is Edwards?

[LuminousX]

7. Clear indication of the Anti-Dean sentiment here

nt

[JohnKleeb]

8. Yet you guys are winning in most of the polls that we have

:shrug: I dont get it honestly.

[ModerateMiddle]

9. perhaps more demonstrative of a split

because other polls demonstrate a clear pro-Dean bias.

[DrFunkenstein]

12. I'd Say The Non-Dean People Are Collectively Tired of His Ass

Just my hunch.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

20. They're tired of him being more popular than their candidate...

...otherwise they'd be saying nice things about him.

- C.D.

[ModerateMiddle]

21. I doubt that would engender this kind of vote

I think part of the Dean phenom is that the alternative is split amongst several other candidates. Asking the question this way gets to the heart of the animosity that Dean has incited amongst the supporters of other candidates.

He hasn't left very many folks unscathed.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

45. Yep. I regret that it is true, and it will no doubt catch up to him.

I would never have thought to ask this question but look at what it shows. Seems there are many open wounds but they were made by only a few parties.

[demigoddess]

41. amen

did you hear that economic speech he made at Georgetown Univ. on Thurs?? It was fabulous. All the points a democrat wants to hear from the candidate for the party and at the same time it was easy to understand and not all academic the way that Gore would talk so he wont turn off the independents who dont like to think about policy very much. Clear and understandable. I especially like the part about allowing unions to organize in american plants overseas. That is one thing the republicans are trying to discourage. When they send plants overseas to countries that DO have unions they try to use our laws to make the foreign government get rid of all unions and union organizer.

[DrFunkenstein]

42. Was That The One After He Called Congress Cockroaches?

PS - The problem is not with American plants overseas breaking American laws, its with transnational plants acting within existent WTO laws.

Kerry's proposal to change the Chapter 11 laws would make the US Constitution the benchmark for NAFTA, especially when protecting environmental laws.

(Nader-founded) Public Citizen:

"The amendment was a modest reform that guaranteed much-needed changes in the NAFTA Chapter 11 investment model in future trade agreements.

Under the model, foreign investors may file a claim in secret NAFTA tribunals to seek compensation when government public interest regulations in any way diminish the value of their investment.

In doing so, the amendment would have instructed U.S. trade negotiators to ensure that future investor provisions do not grant foreign investors rights beyond what the U.S. Constitution provides."

http://action.citizen.org/pc/issues/votes/?votenum=121&chamber=S&congress=1072

The Kerry Amendment to the Baucus-Grassley fast-track trade bill would have limited expansion of NAFTA-style corporate lawsuits to more countries.

Under NAFTA, foreign corporations gained broad powers to sue US taxpayers for financial damages if our environmental, health, or land protection laws interfere with their businesses.

The Kerry Amendment would have ensured that foreign investors have no greater rights than US citizens under the US Constitution.

http://www.sierraclub.org/votewatch/2002/kerry.asp

WASHINGTON - May 21 - Friends of the Earth expressed disappointment in the loss of an amendment to trade legislation that would have protected environmental standards from foreign investor lawsuits. The amendment, offered by Sen. John Kerry, sought to address concerns with investment rules like NAFTA's Chapter 11 that allow foreign corporations to bring suits against environmental laws and regulations.

"By voting against the Kerry amendment, the Senate has paved the way for more backdoor corporate assaults on laws that protect our air, water and land," said David Waskow, Friends of the Earth's trade policy coordinator. "The Senate should be protecting the health and safety of Americans, not watching the backs of wealthy polluters who make big campaign contributions."

http://www.commondreams.org/news2002/0521-13.htm

"The current Fast Track bill is an environmental nightmare," said Carroll Muffett, director of international programs for Defenders of Wildlife. "The Kerry Amendment would have fixed one of the biggest problems with it. Without Kerry, Fast Track is just a license for unchecked environmental destruction."

http://www.charitywire.com/charity51/03074.html

Unlike the amendment sponsored by Sen. John Kerry, the Baucus-Grassley Amendment does not set the U.S. Constitution as the benchmark for the scope of property rights available to foreign investors in the United States.

The Kerry Amendment would repair the investment model of NAFTA. Under the Kerry Amendment, a foreign investor would be required to demonstrate that the policy in question was enacted primarily with discriminatory intent against foreign investors or investments.

The Kerry Amendment is based on U.S. Supreme Court rulings on expropriation in that it would guarantee that future trade agreements improve upon the NAFTA model and restrict such investment protection actions to only those cases where government action causes a physical invasion of property or the denial of all economic or productive use of that property.

http://www.commondreams.org/news2002/0515-04.htm

Dear (Decision Maker),

I am writing to ask you to support the Kerry Amendment to FAST TRACK. The Baucus-Grassley Trade Bill is not good enough. I would appreciate your support for this amendment. Specifically, the amendment will:

1. Ensure that foreign investors don't get greater rights than US citizens or investors. We need to make sure that the US Constitution is the benchmark for investor treatment.

2. Clarify the definition of expropriation in future trade deals to conform with the US Constitution and recent US Supreme Court rulings.

3. Protect US laws on public health, safety and the environment from attack by investor-state lawsuits.

4. Ensures that minimum treatment under international law is defined in a way that follows the US Constitution. We don't want to follow that of some other country.

5. Require diplomatic check. Before a corporation could go into one of the secret trade tribunals to sue for taxpayer compensation (avoiding the domestic court system), they should have to check in with their own government.

This amendment will be voted upon soon. I urge you to vote for it and keep the problems that are already happening with NAFTA Chapter 11 from happening under future trade agreements.

Sincerely,
Your Name
Your Address

http://www.unionvoice.org/alert-description.tcl?alert_id=2005

[truthseeker1]

48. Even Dean people (well, one for sure) are growing tired of him

I can only speak for myself, but I am a former Dean supporter and currently undecided. I am leaning strongly towards voting my conscience which means Kucinich, but I also like Edwards.

[diamondsoul]

10. Gee, that couldn't be an earned thing-

on the part of the good Doctor, could it?:eyes:

[AP]

19. I think the lesson here is that, if Dean drives Democrats to the poles

(and I mean, the extremes -- either enthusiastically for, or enthusiastically against -- not to the polls), there is a very distinct probablitiy that he'll do the same for Republicans, except that it'll be to the poles and the polls.

[ModerateMiddle]

22. It will be interesting

to see how it all plays out over the next 3-4 months. I surely hope I don't have to watch in horror again, like I did for the weeks after November 2000.

[RogueTrooper]

28. i think you have to differentiate between

the inside baseball types and normal supporters AP.

[xJlM]

44. Lieberman's getting smoked

I think the obvious bias is against him here. Dean and Clark leave doubts in my mind, so they must do the same with others.

[truthseeker1]

49. Yes me too

I have doubts about Dean and Clark, although when I watch Clark speak (not necessarily during debates though) I start leaning towards him. Dean however turns me the other direction. Too stiff and nervous. Seems like he's trying to hide something or seems like he's too afraid he'll say the wrong thing.

You never wonder about where Kucinich stands. On paper he seems perfect - and when he speaks you never feel like he's worrying aobut sticking to a script. He really believes in every stance he takes so he can't go wrong in what he might say. However, during debates he looks like he wants to kill the other candidates.

I really warm up to Edwards. He was great on Hardball. Not sure if he has enough experience though.

[xJlM]

63. I missed Hardball

Chris Matthews raises my blood pressure. And that's putting it nicely.

I'd love to see a Kucinich/Edwards ticket (or vice-versa). That might motivate even more common folks to get out and vote. I think those are the sleeping giant who will ultimately be necessary to take back this country from the corporations.

[mandyky]

64. I don't think there IS an anti-Dean sentiment,

but I have memorized the names of Kerry and Clark supporters who can't stand Dean. The only polls I care about are primary and general election, where I think Dean will mop the floor with the DLC's chosen boys.

[quinnox]

14. So Dean is second only to Lieberman...

How interesting.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

15. I would have

voted for both of them. As for Clark, I 'just don't know'.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[StlMo]

51. It is interesting.

I hate Lieberman's centrism.
I simply don't trust Dean.

Great Poll!

:)

[PAMod]

60. Not very interesting, really

All of the Deanies voted Lieberman because he is barely a Democrat, and everyone else voted Dean because he is beating their pet candidate for the nomination.

The reason the others didn't get any "support" is that no one except for their respective supporters really cares about them.

[LuminousX]

23. Overall

I find this troubling and once again makes me question why in hell I should care. Since I seem to be one of the very few who willingly and happily will vote for any of our top tier candidates I really should just keep my mouth shut, not support anyone in the primaries and let the partisan hacks on this board decide who should head up the ticket.

It is frustrating to have hatred directed towards you for supporting one candidate over another. Dean obviously does have a polarizing effect, but would he have one if he still was essentially an unknown from Vermont? The further we go in this process I see less boosting of a candidate and more tearing down others. Yeah, yeah, Dean started it. Let's assume that is absolutely true. What compensation do the other campaigns want in return? What can we Dean supporters do to end this pettiness? What in the world do you want from us?

Do you want absolute contrition? Okay, Dean sucks. Dean raped Vermont. Dean is worse than Ashcroft. I will not vote for Dean because of the sheer volume of hatred and vitriol directed towards him thanks to many on this board. Happy? Good. Now tell me why I should vote for the candidate you support. Convince me that I shouldn't just sit out this primary and I should just flush the money I invested in Dean down the drain and send money to the person you support. Why should I stand in the rain passing out flyers for YOUR chosen candidate? Why should I get a sunburn listening to your candidate give a speech?

You've already convinced me not to vote for Dean. Now convince me that any of the other jokers running are worth my vote.

[whirlygigspin]

24. Hillary will come in and save the day!

Fear not oh haters of the Dean,
Hillary will save you!

SNAFU

...and they wonder why Democrats don't win,

--"Look! Dean is popular! Destroy him!--

Rove must be laughing his ass off.

[LuminousX]

25. I'd still need a reason to vote for her in the primary nt

.

[ModerateMiddle]

29. "--Look! Dean is popular! Destroy him!--"

That's hardly the problem, but if that is all you can see, then that's all you ever will see. There is a reason why so many people don't want to see Dean as the nominee.

Not wanting Lieberman to be the nominee is CW around here. To the point where no one ever questions anyone calling him pretty much any derogatory name.

That Dean is polling so high in THIS poll indicates a problem.

Whether you will see it or not is entirely up to you.

[LuminousX]

32. If he is polling this high, no problem, he won't get the nomination

Quite simple. Dean is not a threat if he has this much hatred against him.

But who should I support now?

[ModerateMiddle]

33. Depends on your core issues

If, as Dean says (unfortunately in public and in front of the candidates he considers to be "unelectable"), there are "5" candidates who can "beat Bush" and that's a big criteria for you, then you pick amongst them.

Clark
Dean
Edwards
Gephardt
Kerry
Lieberman

(I have 6 because while Lieberman polls higher than Edwards, I really don't think Lieberman has a chance at the nomination, whereas Edwards probably does.)

Are you ideologically driven?

The leftish candidates are Gephardt and Kerry. Gephardt I am placing somewhat to the left of Kerry because of his to-a-fault maybe support of labor. That's one of the historically defined "special interest" groups that Dems favor. But then, Gep was and continues to be a fairly strong supporter of military action.

Lieberman I put to the far right, and I would put Dean next to him.

Clark is pretty ill-defined at this point. Some of his positions look remarkably like Kerry's to me, but Kerry has a long record of his positions, and Clark does not.

Edwards is probably the most "middle" candidate.

Is your key issue foreign policy? Tax parity? Labor?

Each candidate has their relative strength.

I prefer Kerry because I think he brings the best balance. What I hope to see from this next election is a landslide AGAINST the rabid right wing agenda and hatred and fear that is this administration. I would like to see Tom Delay lose his seat (oh I wish!). I would like the doctrine of hate to be repudiated. I would like our nation to come together to solve its problems as a country rather than left hating right and vice versa.

That's my dream.

[LuminousX]

34. I don't vote on 'key' issues

I vote on pragmatism. Which person is the most flexible, has a good history working as a leader and a policy designer. The person I vote for needs to have held an elected office for multiple terms. The person I vote for needs to have a history of working with the opposition because this next President won't be able to ramrod anything.

[indigo32]

35. Very well summed up LuminousX

"Leadership" is I think the word I'm looking for here.

[ModerateMiddle]

36. This is one description that I read

about John Kerry that really made my heart warm:

Senator JOHN KERRY sat at the head of a conference table. I watched from the side of the room. To his left was Governor Tom Carper of Delaware and surrounding them were lawyers, lobbyists and various representatives from Amtrak. They were gathered at Kerry's senate office to discuss issues that were holding up the passage of the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 1997. Kerry listened intently. I saw him pick up on the words, but more importantly I knew he heard the sounds, catching weakness in subtle hesitations or strengths from the voices of the lobbyists. (I know this because in the many conversations I've had with John Kerry, he has exhibited an uncanny ability to catch vocal tones that reveal one's true disposition. He picks up on tones and verbally questions or reflects upon them with profound accuracy.) When the arguments were presented, Kerry spoke with authority. His voice has a deep resonance of intelligence and weight; it's a voice that commands attention. He pinpointed the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments and in a shepherd-like manner, he masterfully synthesized the opposing arguments to a point of seamless balance. "I have never seen anyone grasp issues as quickly as this man," said Gregg Rothchild, one of Kerry's many legal aides. "It is amazing how he can bring people together to a common denominator." I watched in awe. A room full of hard core politicians and lobbyists with vested interests were brought together to a point of sensible compromise. The Amtrak bill passed a week later.

It's things like this that I've heard about him that make me believe he really will be able to heal this nation.

http://www.americanwindsurfer.com/mag/back/issue5.5a.html

(edited to fix html problem)

[whirlygigspin]

40. it figures

This is more crap from the Kerry camp.

(who started this thread and why?)

I'm decided, if Kerry gets the nomination, I'll stay home.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

46. Anyone who sits around and lets Bush have another 4 years

is.......................

[DrFunkenstein]

43. If Kerry Can Work With Jesse Helms, He Can With Anybody

I think this little gem from the Boston Globe profile demonstrates how a flaming liberal like Kerry builds bridges with the centrists in his Party, and even further across to the other side of the aisle.

---

Kerry had spent the spring conducting an unauthorized investigation into reports that the Reagan administration was illegally providing aid to the rebel Nicaraguan Contra armies, which were attempting to overthrow the left-wing government of that Central American nation. At this closed session, he planned to urge the committee to launch an official probe.

...

Behind the scenes, Kerry had forged an unlikely alliance with Senator Jesse Helms, the hidebound conservative from North Carolina. As the senior Republican on the committee, Helms was the key to Kerry's hopes. And the key to Helms was the drug war.

In the course of their investigation, Kerry and his staff had found evidence that some contras had ties to drug smuggling. If there was one class of villain that Helms deplored as much as the communists, it was drug traffickers.

On matters of political philosophy, Kerry and Helms were polar opposites. Yet each was something of a maverick, contemptuous of the capital's courtiers and willing to rock the clubby Senate. "I spent time with Jesse," Kerry recalls. "I talked to him. Talked his language. Jesse didn't believe the same things I did in many cases, but he was a gentleman. He was a man of his word."

As Kerry finished his presentation, the senior members turned to Helms, taking his temperature on the issue. "Jesse? What do you think about this?" asked Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware, the ranking Democrat on the panel, according to a transcript of the then-secret session. "I know you are a contra supporter."

"I will tell you what I do not support, and John Kerry and I have talked about this: anybody sending drugs into this country," Helms told his colleagues. "I do not care whose side they are on."

Helms was on board. The committee reached a consensus: It would investigate the contras and the contra-drug connection.

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/062003.shtml

Follow up (oddly enough) in a Windsurfer Magazine article:

Jesse Helms entered the senate elevator with John Kerry and me. In my eyes, I conjured up preconceived images of this man who was reputed to have singlehandedly challenged free speech and artistic expression. I watched him in silence-a silence that could have easily continued without acknowledgement.

To my right, Senator Kerry broke in and said something I can't recall and Jesse Helms responded. Again, I can't recall the words but I remember the tone-a tone that surprised me. There was a familiarity to their voices, a tone of respect, of understanding and even affection. After their brief exchange, Kerry introduced me and I shook hands with the legend.

As we greeted, I looked into his eyes and caught sight of a frail and elderly statesman. Something changed in that brief encounter-something which made me realize, in retrospect-John Kerry does not burn his bridges. No matter how bad the battle rages, there is a clear truce of civility that binds these political gladiators.

http://www.americanwindsurfer.com/mag/back/issue5.5a.html

[DannyRed]

50. Do you SERIOUSLY

Think that touting Kerry's friendly cooperation with Jesse Helms is a good way to promote him as a candidate to anyone with politics more liberal than Margaret Thatcher?

WOW! Kerry can work with, and have respect for an unreconstructed racist piece of garbage!!

Cool.

Now he's REALLY got my vote!

[NewYorkerfromMass]

52. not surprising to hear from Dean camp

why hold back? why not just call Kerry a cockroach for working with another cockroach?
Boy I can't wait for 'people power' to go to DC and 'blow the whole thing up' (as they say) so we can start all over again. :eyes:

and you wonder why Dean's getting 'hit up' here?

[blm]

62. Wellstone worked with Helms and had a friendly

relationship with him. Does that make Wellstone less liberal in your eyes?

Dean boasted of his strong working relationships with the GOP in Vermont, while keeping the left at bay. He has built his career on compromise and centrism.

Kerry's lifetime rating is closest to Wellstone's of all the candidates yet you think liberals shouldn't want to vote for him?

[ModerateMiddle]

27. "Yeah, yeah, Dean started it"

Let's assume that is absolutely true. What compensation do the other campaigns want in return? What can we Dean supporters do to end this pettiness? What in the world do you want from us?

The real problem is that he hasn't STOPPED doing it. How recent was the stupid "cockroach" statement? Yeah, he's a fighter and because a whole LOT of people, mostly Dems, are tired of feeling like their folks aren't fighting. They seem to forget that the nation SHOULD have come together after 9/11 in a non-partisan way, but the creeps in power used the solidarity to push their right wing agenda. It confused the patriotic (D) folks in Washington who wanted that unity, but didn't know how to react, respond, or stop the right wing push.

So they rally behind Dean, who has demonstrated the will to really fight, with all of his gusto, against Bush. The problem REALLY is that Dean is fighting EVERYONE. Well, not the loyalists. And as is common, the tone set at the top, trickles downward, and a whole slew of Dean supporters think it's just fine to really demonize the other candidates. I *liked* Dean at the beginning, but his literal demonization of other candidates whom I consider to be strong, patriotic public servants is what turned me off from him. If these statements were true, it would be one thing, but the vitriol he spouts are almost all mischaracterizations of people's positions.

We in this household were liking both Kerry and Dean way back late last year. We were horrified at the march to war, but watched as Kerry agonized over his vote - to give "THE President" the authority to do what needed to be done (strong negotiations, credible military threat) and believe in our hearts that "THIS President" wouldn't do the right thing. We recognized that what Kerry was saying was the truth, for him, and for many people. He could have voted "Yes, but" or "No, but". Because of his belief back to 1998 that Saddam posed a real threat to the security of the US, his vote was "Yes, but".

We don't hold that vote against him, nor do we believe that the war would have been averted if he had voted differently. Frankly, we don't believe the war would have been averted if the resolution had failed both houses of congress (an impossibility at the time).

We liked Dean standing up and saying "No!" But it also really bugged me that he characterized Kerry as "supporting the war". It really breaks my heart when I see anyone here say that Kerry is a "war monger", because I so know that not to be true.

Dean had some pretty sharp elbows in his quest for front runner. But he hasn't been able to drop that stance. In interviews with folks he acts like they are the enemy. Many people seem to be cast as "the enemy" by Dean and his supporters. 1/2 million online supporters is WONDERFUL and his fundraising is magnificent. But neither of those things are going to be enough to heal this country that has been ravaged by fear, hate and rabid partisanship.

Dean does not appear to me to be the guy who CAN heal this country.

[LuminousX]

31. You've convinced me

You are making the wrong argument. Dean sucks and should be sent into exile. I am 100% behind the anti-Dean plan. But who should I support?

[mandyky]

65. And Dean will finish it

At least Dean is bringing up current attendance records for votes and not things candidates said 8 years ago. And if the pink tutu crowd doesn't like being compared to cockroaches, they COULD stand up and be Democrats with spine. I am glad Dean is hitting back.

Just out of curiousity, how did you figure Dean started all this?

[RogueTrooper]

26. This is a disgusting and divisive post

we should remember who it is we really are fighting.

[whirlygigspin]

30. reminds me of the Russian curse

Ivan & Boris are neighbors, they are both poor and miserable,
One day, Boris has the good fortune of finding a goat.
The next day, a fairy comes to Ivan's house to grant him one wish.
So what does Ivan wish for? That Boris's goat should die.


Moseley Braun for President

[NewYorkerfromMass]

47. right..... and that perfectly describes some of Dean's rhetoric

so tough. Dean's been sewing some bitter seeds. Best to talk about it instead of letting the bitterness root further.

[LuminousX]

53. How would you propose Dean and his supporters end the bitterness?

What acts of contrition would assuage your wounds?

[NewYorkerfromMass]

55. Dean needs to stop calling people names

Dean needs to raise the level of debate. All else will follow.

[LuminousX]

56. Dean has that much control?

As I mention to another poster, if a Dean person came to DU today, unfamiliar with the last 10-months of divisiveness here, what would they infer from the level of discourse?

As of yesterday, you won, at least a small battle. I will not support Dean in the primaries. I will not support anyone unless I am convinced that one of these jokers running for President deserves my support.

You can either continue to rag on Dean or convince me.

[RogueTrooper]

54. So this thread is about Dean then?

and I thought it was a generally disgusting and divisive thread. I did not realize that it was just a cheap excuse for supporters of other, less succesfull, campaigns to vent their impotent rage.

[Meshuga]

37. Dean had my vote here because...

I don't think he is electable because of his position on tax cuts and other factors. He seems to be leading the polls among democrats so I really fear Bush might win if Dean gets the nod. What a nightmare that would be! Four more years of Bush? Yuk!

But if the questions in this poll changed to:

Knowing that ALL nine candidates are electable against Bush, which candidate do you hope does NOT get the nod?

Dean would not be my choice here. Lieberman would probably get that vote.

[LuminousX]

38. But Dean is polling statistically even with Kerry, Lieberman, Clark...

So he is electable by all current standards.

Personally, I find this poll to be wrong on this site. Thread after thread has been posted about the need to boost and support candidates, not tear them down, yet we have this thread that seems to be designed to allow people to tear down the candidate of their choice.

[Meshuga]

39. True.

We are all going to play for the same team in 2004 in order to beat Bush. We need to unite and get used to supporting any of the nine candidates starting soon or we are going to be in trouble in next year...

[Rocinante]

58. I just saw this

I don't hang out in this forum so I don't know what the pc thing to say is but I will just say what I think. Does anyone think that any Dem candidate is worse than Chimp? Well dammit it sure seems like it. Supporting your candidate in the primaries is a noble cause, but we have to be united at the end and I don't see that happening because too many feelings are getting hurt. I've never been in this neck of the woods on DU before, but I plan to be from now on to try to bring unity to our cause. I'm just a regular person, not very articulate, but I aim for unity-we must have it.

[mmonk]

59. I'm not hoping against any of them

[indigo32]

66. Two thumbs up for that attitude :)

eom

[Robert Murphy]

61. Eaargh!!! Wesley! speak to me!!!

Er, Mr. rocket scientist here just accidentally voted against Wesley Clark--please note that the votes against him are off by plus one. ;)

Now I know how a Florida voter feels...

Robert