"What were we thinking to nominate that empty suit dork lightweight?"

[MIMStigator]

Is it easy for you to imagine thinking this about any particular candidate come the day after the election or maybe a few months later?

[Padraig18]

1. What is the purpose of even asking this question?

I can see nothing but a huge flame war breaking out. :eyes:

[MIMStigator]

4. It was what I thought of before I changed to my candidate

so I thought others should think about it

[robbedvoter]

2. Only 2. I found a rationale for almost all candidates to run - a passion

except for two. I'm not saying, except that Lieberman is not one of them. He trully believes in the beauty of war and the faith thingy - I don't like it - but there is a rationale for him. Every candidate's voice gets emotional (really) about something. Except the 2 empty suits I shall not name.

[Renew Deal]

3. There will be a lot of "I told you so's" if we lose

DON'T LOSE

[dobak]

5. I don't know about "empty suit dork"

I think "he" has some good qualities, but I also happen to think his chances against Bush are weak.

Who knows? :shrug:

[in_cog_ni_to]

6. There's really only 3 candidates

that I would say that about, but 2 of them don't have a chance in hell of winning. :7

[MIMStigator]

8. haa

:hi:

[Killarney]

7. No

I will be proud to stand by any of our nominees against Bush.

[Padraig18]

9. Each of our candidates has more substance...

... in the tips of their little fingers than * does in his entire body; IOW 'no', I am not worried about that.

[MIMStigator]

11. that's true but

our standards are higher than that so we could have buyers remorse

[Padraig18]

12. There will always be Dems who have 'buyer's remorse'.

It just happens.

[IndianaGreen]

10. I see you are speaking of George W. Bush again!

What were we thinking to nominate that empty suit dork lightweight?

I agree with you that Dubya is an empty suit, but a very dangerous empty suit.

[Party of the People]

14. That's exactly what I thought when I

read the title of this thread!



:yourock:

[MIMStigator]

15. Repukes get away with empty suits

our candidates have to be 10x stronger

[chookie]

13. ?

Gee -- I don't think any of the candidates can be called with justification an "empty suit." All of them stand for something significant; all strongly denounce His Chimperial Highness -- including Sen Lieberman -- and some of them not only see the big picture but have plans to restore honor and prosperity to our country, and address issues we have raised over the last 4 years.

What i will be thinking, and something which has occupied my mind for many months now -- is how The Ultimate Empty Suit was allowed to steal the White House in broad daylight , to then wreck havoc on our nation without significant opposition?

*They're* the ones running an Empty Suit, dear. And they certainly have gotten a lot of mileage out of his sorry ass, don't you think?

I pray that we will choose someone who can confront the Bush Crime Family, expose them, and discredit the neo-cons. I wish I had the wisdom to see all ends.

In the end, we could nominate Jesus Christ, with God the Father as VP, and the RNC would fry them during the campaign ! They intend to vilify ANYONE we put up.

We shouldn't be thinking about nominating someone who MUST be able to walk on water, but coming up with ways of defusing the vicious propaganda disinformation machine that is going to be set upon whoever we put up.

[imhotep]

16. Why don't you name names?

huh?

[JVS]

17. Yes. It certainly would be a shame if we nominated Clark

[Moderator]

18. I am locking this thread.

Please do not post inflammatory messages.

Thanks,
DU Moderator