The Dem's Best? in 2008...

[Kevin Spidel]

Biden throws his hat in for 2008 Dem Nomination. See the link for the announcement on Face the Nation this morning!
http://newclips.crooksandliars.com/Face_the_Nation_Biden_for_President.wmv

For progressives the Blogs are reporting Feingold, and yes, there is footage of Obama on Oprah saying he is (on edit: "seriously" changed to "being asked by fellow Democrats") about thinking about it.
http://www.oprah.com/omagazine/200411/omag_200411_ocut.jhtml

We know Hilary has paid for polls about the presidential outlook, and has quietly begun talking about an exploratory committee. Gallop polls show he as a favorable leader with the public: http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/10728

And even the Gov. of New Mexico, Ambassador Richardson makes no secret he is playing with the idea.

[Clark2008]

1. The best is yet to come. n/t

[sweetladybug]

2. I hope President Gore will run for re-election in 2008.

I know alot of people that voted for Gore in 2000 and they will not be happy until he takes his proper place in history. Gore beat Bush in 2000 so why couldn't he win again in 08.

[Carolab]

13. ME TOO. Gore is our TRUE president. n/t

[BlueIris]

22. Yeah....

...no qualifiers, just agreement. He won, he should have been allowed to serve, he wasn't, it's a crime and a shame. I didn't even stop to think seriously about it until this fall because--well, I know what your average Gore supporter feels like now. That pain is so great, and is always there, that even though I want my beloved JK to run and win, I can't say that would be in any way better or more just than if Gore ran and were recognized as our President. Kisses, President Gore. You were never the problem.

[Clark2008]

33. I'm going to try and stop by his house on my way back from

Little Rock next month.

I have a letter to mail him to see (even though I know where he lives, duh).

Gore was my first political crush. The first politician I even interviewed when I was reporting. I miss his brain.

I've moved onto support Clark now, obviously, but I still have a sick, sad hole in my heart for what could have been and what we would not have lost. I honestly believe 9/11 either would not have happened or would not have been as bad had Gore been in the White House. :cry:

[BlueIris]

34. I'm one of those cynical blokes who believes

the attacks could not have been prevented. But of couse the response from a Gore Administration would have been entirely different. I don't think we would have seen the kind of massive, global destruction we have witnessed as a result of what the neo-cons did post-9/11. Here's what I feel the worst about with regard to Gore having been denied the Presidency--for Gore to have to get up every morning and live with the idea that had he been in charge, the world would not only still be largely peaceful, and be enjoying some modicum of prosperity, but that perhaps the disaster could have been avoided altogether? That must be agony for him.

[kodi]

37. Al Gore can unite the party. He should be the nominee.

If he runs, I will work for his campaign.

Gore will beat anyone who is nominateed by the GOP. He will go right for the throat when the smear-artists start slinging their crap.

Anyone who has seen him speak over the last 3 years knows that the caricature of a wooden persona was burned away long ago. what remains is a rip-snortin' liberal populist who has gavanized audiences.

All he has to do is ask "Are you and the nation better off now than we were 8 years ago?" then mention that just about every unfortunate thing he warned of in 2000 has come true.

[BlueIris]

38. That's a good point, about his "uniter" potential.

I'd love it if we could have the ticket in '08 that we SHOULD have had in '00: Gore/Kerry. That's one of my best dreams ever.

[KnowerOfLogic]

51. Yep; Gore/Clark or Gore/Boxer. nt

[mdelaguna2000]

56. Interesting concept... I'm listening. n/t

[longship]

3. None of which I can support before the nomination.

Just so that it's clear I'll repeat that

none of which I will support before the nomination.

Biden.... Not!
Obama.... Not!
Clinton.. Not!

I will only support candidates who take active and principled position against the war in Iraq.

It is the issue in the campaign. To ignore it is to lose again.

[Radical Activist]

8. Obama opposed the Iraq war early in the primary

and continued to oppose it. That's one of the reasons he beat three other Democrats to get nominated.

[longship]

18. Cannot support Obama now

He's very young and has just gained his seat in the Senate. I think he should stay there for a term or so and build up some national exposure.

Also, he seems a bit too moderate for my tastes. I don't know if I could ever support him prior to the convention. If he started a national campaign coming out strongly against the war in Iraq, that might change my mind, but probably not.

[Radical Activist]

25. Youth and inexperience

are certainly valid reasons to not support Obama. I have to disagree with your other reasons. He was the more progressive choice for US Senate in the Illinois primary and he has a solid record supporting and leading on progressive issues. I think its a mistake for people to accuse him of being a moderate because he didn't take a few symbolic stands on votes that Democrats were going to lose anyway.

[longship]

32. Your point is well taken.

I'm still kind of leery of him. If he has a progressive voting record in IL, he has yet to exhibit that trait in the Senate. I think Obama is going to be a fine Senator and may be a good choice. I would support him for the nomination long before I would support that sycophant Biden.

I really would like to see somebody with national exposure and who will carry the campaign home. Obama probably has the latter, but I remain uncertain about the former. He needs to find his progressive roots.

But mark my words, the extent to which the Dem candidate avoids getting out of Iraq as a campaign issue is the extent to which they lose.

[genius]

4. I can't sell out again. DK or similar liberal or an independent ticket.

[1monster]

5. If Biden is the best the Democratic Party can offer, then let's stick a

fork in it, folks.

Yes, if Biden is the nominee, then I have no choice but to vote for him. Better Biden than another Bush or any Republican I can think of.

[longship]

20. Unfortunately, if it's Biden

we will be stuck with another Repug term, unless he runs completely against his record, in which case the Repugs will make mincemeat out of him. We'd see pancake flippers all over the place.

No, if Biden gets the nomination, I may jump ship. It would be sure indication that it was sinking.

[bunkerbuster1]

72. Oh, hell, I'd vote for Joementum over any Reep, but jeez

It'd well and truly suck if that's what we'd nominate.

Biden's always annoyed me, going back to his wussy questioning of "Judge Thomas" during Clarence the Talking Tool's confirmation hearings.

[wyldwolf]

6. The "best" or "the best chance of winning?" THAT is the question.

Add Mark Warner into your equation as well:

http://www.draftmarkwarner.com/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/10/AR2005061000841.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-warner10jun10,1,2261873.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

http://www.salon.com/news/lotp/2005/06/13/virginia_governor/

Of course, Wes Clark is the dark horse in it all...

[Radical Activist]

9. Kerry was supposed to have the best chance at winning.

He was the reasonable, smart choice, and look how that turned out. I think its time we concede that inspiring people is the most important quality that will get someone elected, even if they are liberal.

[wyldwolf]

14. and he did

More votes than any other Dem in history.

I think its time we concede that inspiring people is the most important quality that will get someone elected, even if they are liberal.

Perhaps the wisest thing that will be said in this thread.

[janx]

16. How very true, practically speaking.

And in theory, that's the way it's supposed to work.

[BlueIris]

21. Love and kisses, President Kerry.

I know how '08 will work out.

Best of luck, anyway, Sir.

[election_2004]

24. Warner....

...would make a great VICE-president. I am a little nervous that he doesn't have enough experience for the top of the ticket.

[nickshepDEM]

29. He has the strongest record of any governor (democrat or republican)...

in the entire country.

[iwantmycountryback]

42. Democrat or Republican is a good question about Mark Warner?

I have a hard time personally telling which one he is.

[nickshepDEM]

45. And why is that?

State his conservative positions if you don't mind.

Is it the fiscal responsibility?
Balancing budgets?
Or maybe it's the creating jobs part?
Slashing the food tax?
His devotion to helping minorities?
Increasing public education funding more than any governor in state history?
Oh wait, it must be his involvement in the Virginia Health Care Foundation, which has provided 500,000+ underprivileged Virginians with health care. Right?

[election_2004]

63. I'm not bashing Warner's record....

I'm not saying Warner doesn't have a good record as Governor of Virigina. He does. I'm just saying that 4 years is not a whole lot of Executive experience, and that's why Warner might be more logical as a vice-president.

I think that Lincoln's record as a legislator is stronger and lengthier than Warner's gubernatorial tenure, and she also has the best demographic strength behind her to lead the Democrats to a substantial electoral victory. The two of them would make a great team. But I think Warner would be better suited in the "attack dog" role of a vice-presidential running mate.

[MasonJar]

7. I like Gore and Clark, but it is a dem all the way. We have seen

how vicious the pugs are...in the WH and in the Congress and in the country.

[1932]

10. No neoliberals please.

[ClarkUSA]

17. WTF?

:tinfoilhat:



Oh, welcome to DU. :eyes:

[1932]

31. No Demos whose problem with American imperialism is HOW we do it

and not THAT we do it.

That goes for Gore as well. Gore wanted to take out Hussein when he was co-president and he only had a problem with the idea once Bush did it.

[sweetladybug]

60. 1932 , yep Gore is just picking on poor rPresident Georgie Poo

And I don't think Gore would have led us into an illegal war like the appointed one did!

[1932]

65. That doesn't address the issue.

There are good and bad reasons not to like Hussein. The one I like is that he's a destabilizing fascist who caused misery for his citizens and that the world would be better off with an Iraq in which a large, wealthy, democratic middle class benefiting from the nation's human and natural resource capital.

The bad reasons are about expanding American empire and stealing the natural resources and oppressing a large impoverished class of Iraqis who will be willing to work at low wages in factory jobs so that wealthy people can get wealthier.

I'm suspicious of Democrats who don't put full employment at well-paying jobs and economic competition ahead of privatization and market liberalization (whether in the US or in a foreign country). I know which kind of Democrat Gore is, and everything I've seen about Clark suggests that he's in the Rubin-Summers-Gore-Lieberman camp, regardless of how he thinks America should have conquered Iraq.

[mdelaguna2000]

58. What a pair

Gore has the bite to survive - think this will be a vicious election. Wes, too, but he has so much class, his attacks don't seem to sting as much... his diplomacy showing? Don't flame me I was Clark 04 all the way, and I'm sure he's evolving monthly, not to mention the media "treatment" of him was so dismissive during the primaries - truly outrageous.

What a pair of brains we have in Gore and Clark. So much knowledge.

[Radical Activist]

11. The Obama quote doesn't sound like he's given it serious thought

at least not until his first term as Senator is done.

[janx]

12. Obama says nothing in that interview about running in 2008.

He's going to serve his term as senator. I've heard him say this before.

[Radical Activist]

15. Edwards or Feingold.

They look like the best options right now, imo. They both have a progressive message, a proven ability to get votes outside the east and west coast, and the ability to raise enough money to be serious contenders. They can both deliver a message that will inspire people, which is the most important quality that makes someone electable as President.

[election_2004]

23. Feingold is my U.S. Senator, and I love him, but...

I wonder if his second divorce will hurt his chances, both in the primary and the General Election?

[nickshepDEM]

30. Of course it would hurt his chances in the general election...

Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.

[iwantmycountryback]

48. Wow, great insight there

Do you suppose the fact that Warner is a 1-term Governor and rich carpetbagger from Connecticut who is a usually spineless Democrat may also hurt him? Feingold will have been a senator for 16 years by 2008, meanwhile Warner will be a governor for just 4 years and will have no substantial experience. He should run for the Senate against George Allen, he could serve the party much better there than as it's Presidential nominee.

[nickshepDEM]

50. Carpetbagger? He's spent the last 20+ years...

of his life in Virginia. If your gonna' accuse the man of something... At least get your facts straight first.

Regarding Feingold's senate experience. Where have you been for the past 45 years? Senators (especially lifers) do not make very good Presidential candidates. The divorce. I mean, *second* divorce was just the icing on the cake.

[iwantmycountryback]

53. Well I really doubt that actually

Icing on the cake? WTF does that mean? I think this country is going to be in such desperate conditions in 4 years they're not going to care about stupid shit like that, although obviously you will. Kerry wasn't a great candidate, and came about 60,000 votes in Ohio from becoming President, and beating a war-time President at that, so I don't really buy that line. Feingold is a true man of principle and a true Democrat, maybe Warner is a man of principle but he doesn't strike me as much of a Democrat. Your snide comments about Feingold's divorces are ridiculous, he has taken several courageous stands in the Senate, some that did not seem smart at the time. What courageous stands has Warner taken? Raising taxes with no fear about having to run for re-election because of term limits? Yeah that's definitely what I want as a Presidential candidate, a man who has only had 1 campaign for major office and has served 4 years as a Governor. Convince me that Warner is actually a Democrat and maybe I'll think about it.

[election_2004]

54. I don't see any problem with a Senator running....

They generally have more foreign policy experience than Governors.

That being said, I think Feingold's second divorce would definitely hurt him beyond repair (although that wouldn't stop me from voting for him in a General Election).

[cascadiance]

64. If Feingold having a second divorce screws him for pres...

how then, can Newt Gingrich even *think* of running for president in 2008, with his record of philandering affairs and divorces. I don't recall Feingold's divorces as being as nasty as Gingrich's have been. And Gingrich is a Republican for pete's sake, where their constituencies are supposed to care more for such things!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,143771,00.html

Bottom line is that I think if handled right, Feingold can deal with this. Just don't be cowed by it. If he and his advisors are going to be cowed by that situation, *THAT* is what will keep him from being president, not necessarily because he's had a divorce or two.

[election_2004]

67. Divorce....

Gingrich is NOT a serious contender for the GOP nomination...people would hold Gingrich's divorces (and his nutty reputation) against him the same way they'd hold Feingold's divorces against him.

[cascadiance]

68. Divorces?.... For Reagan? For Dole? For Kerry?....

Their divorces almost never came up in their campaigns! The opposition seemed to want to go after other issues than those in those campaigns.

[Totally Committed]

69. That's because (I think...) they all had one divorce...

is this #2 or #3 for Russ?

Plus, there were not as large a block of "Values Voters" to try and attract in those campaigns. The neo-cons have managed to really polarize the US now as never before. This is what mixing religion with politics hath wrought: a good man/fine public servant like Feingold is rendered unelectable just becauseof his private life. It is unfair to the max.

TC

[Mitt Chovick]

71. I think you get one free divorce,

the second hurts you whether you are Gingrich, Guiliani, or Feingold.

[AmericanDream]

62. Edwards/Feingold would be the dream progressive ticket

[election_2004]

19. Blanche Lincoln

Lincoln hands-down!

http://www.lincoln2008.com

Hopefully she will expand the strength of her PAC and use it to help fellow Southern Democrats win gubernatorial and U.S. Senate races in the 2006 midterms.

She could be the "dark horse" of the 2008 primaries.

[EndElectoral]

26. Boxer

[wisteria]

27. I will support Kerry if he runs again.

I think he was cheated out of this last one.He would also make a wonderful President. Wanting to lead for all the right reasons. If our candidate is Hillary (I honestly hope with all my heart and soul she isn't) I may not vote at all.It amazes me how every week her positive poll numbers go up. This week, somewhere around 56%of us would supposedly vote for her if she were to run,yet I haven't spoken with one person who would even consider her as a candidate none the less make her president, I really feel bad admitting this, but I just don't see her as Presidential in any way shape or form. She has name recognition and is using to further her own selfish ambitions.

[BlueIris]

39. ITA with all your points, wisteria.

As I've posted many, many times, I will be voting for whoever is next to Democrat under my ballot, even if who that is happens to be dead or a talking box of hair--but Biden and/or Hillary would be a bitter pill for me to swallow indeed. HRC for President is my worst nightmare ever. Not because she's female, or named Clinton, or a guaranteed loss because of those factors, but because of her positions and the way she has chosen to articulate them throughout the last four months. I'm done, alright? And bitter about it, too.

[cheezus]

28. the winning ticket: prairie populist/southern populist

I'd vote for Dorgan/Edwards :)

[BlueIris]

66. Interesting. nt.

[Mich Otter]

35. Biden won't get any support from me.

I hope I don't face the choice of voting for Biden in November 2008.

[usregimechange]

36. Wes Clark

[mdelaguna2000]

57. Seems kinda logical (love the man). n/t

[longship]

40. Clark, or somebody we have yet to mention.

I still have hope for some principled liberal to come out of the woodwork and help save the party. Somebody who won't cave-in, give up, or avoid the major issues, especially the one which will win the Dems back the White House namely,

Get us out of the Iraq meatgrinder

[iwantmycountryback]

41. Russ Feingold will be a great nominee

Feingold has a clearly progressive record and is a maverick who votes his conscience, and has opposed destructive measures such as the Patriot Act, NAFTA, the IWR, and others. He has shown he can get solid support in a purple state, getting 56% of the vote in Wisconsin, a state which Kerry won by about 10,000 votes if memory serves me correctly. Wisconsin would be an almost automatic victory for him and he could also do better in midwestern states like Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, and Ohio. The negative against him is that he is divorced, but I don't think that should matter a whole lot, and also being Jewish may hurt him unfortunately. Though it could definitely help him in Florida. I think Wes Clark would make a terrific VP candidate for him, and would be an incredibly strong ticket.

Feingold-Clark!

[CarolNYC]

43. I like Feingold a lot

Unfortunately, the negatives you mention may hurt him...although they really really shouldn't.

Could you live with Clark/Feingold? :)

[iwantmycountryback]

46. I suppose that would be ok.

;-) It'd probably be a pretty damn strong ticket either way. They are certainly both strong progressives unlike Mark Warner. I think Feingold's stances on NAFTA (or 'free trade' in general) would definitely help him in states like Ohio and Michigan that are just hemhorraging jobs. And he is also on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, so he has some "foreign policy experience" and is also on the important Judiciary and Budget committees. He's already formed a PAC called the Progressive Patriots Fund, clearly showing he is thinking about running. Also, I think his general appeal will help him a lot. He comes off as a "regular guy" and returns all of his pay raises to the Treasury. And he's about 1000x better than Biden too. :D

[CarolNYC]

49. agree totally on the Biden thing

Hey, I could support feingold as nominee very heartily....Good man.

[iwantmycountryback]

52. Feingold was the first Senator to call for a resolution

To call for a timetable from the President to withdraw troops from Iraq. Here's his statement on it:

Mr. President, I rise to introduce a resolution that addresses a gaping hole in the Administration’s rhetoric and strategy with respect to Iraq. My resolution calls on the President to define the mission of our military in Iraq, and to issue a plan and timeframe for accomplishing that mission. It has been over two years since the President launched the war in Iraq, but we still don’t have a defined mission or timeframe that would allow us to hold ourselves accountable for giving the military the tools they need to succeed in achieving those goals. My resolution also calls for a plan for the subsequent withdrawal of US troops, so that we can provide some clarity with regard to our intentions and restore confidence at home and abroad that there is an end date in mind.

This resolution does not establish a timeframe for troop withdrawal – that is for our military commanders to determine. Any such timeframe has to be flexible – there are variables that will affect how quickly various missions can be accomplished. But it’s hard to conceive of an effective strategic plan that isn’t linked to some timetables.

The rationale for our military action in Iraq has changed over time. The projections regarding the resources that would be required were wrong. And now, we seem to be in the midst of some vague policy of muddling through. When I speak to servicemen and women in Wisconsin and in Iraq, and when I speak to their families, their pride in their service is evident and it is well-earned. But their frustration with this open-ended commitment, with the stop-loss orders and the multiple deployments, with the extensions and the uncertainties, is equally evident, and it is painful. We can do better by them, by insisting on clarity, by insisting on accountability, and by assuring them that we have a plan with clear and achievable goals.

In fact, by leveling with the American people about our commitment in Iraq, the Administration can regain some of their confidence. After the shifting justifications for this war, after the premature declarations of “mission accomplished,” after the exciting and inspiring elections, we still don’t have any kind of finish line for our military engagement in Iraq. The American people and our troops deserve a sound plan that is linked to real timeframes and real achievements.

http://www.progressivepatriotsfund.com/content/134/statement-of-us-senator-russ-feingold-on-the-resolution-calling-on-the-president-to-create-a-timetable-for-achieving-goals-and-withdrawing-american-troops-from-iraq

[cascadiance]

61. Feingold is great on civil liberties!...

And always has been! He was one of only a handful of senators from either party (McCain was the only Republican) to vote against the Telecomm act back during Clinton's time, which in addition putting into law the unconstitutionally vague Communications Decency Act, also put in place the really problematic deregulation that has opened things up for the likes of Sinclair Broadcasting and Clear Channel to make our lives with the media miserable these days with it being consolidated way more than it should be to be healthy! He was on the right side of that vote and should continue to remind people of that.

Also, his leadership on campaign finance reform I think is another one of the most fundamental issues that needs to be fixed as well. A GOOD man!

Just needs to get more positive publicity and prominence. But if a good marketing job is done on him (and I think Dean could work that pretty well, given some time), I think he'll be the right guy! Look at how Clinton and Carter came out of the woodwork to win their elections. I don't think that they necessarily have to have a lot of name recognition to win (though it might help). What is essential though is that they have a decent record to defend and when people come to know them, like them for who they are. Feingold can definitely do that!

[BlueIris]

44. He's my #2 choice, after JK.

I'd feel completely comfortable supporting Feingold. Go, Russ!

[FrenchieCat]

47. Well ya know....mmmm....let me see...

I say Gen. Wes Clark.

All of the Democratic politicians candidates will walk around talking about all of the programs that they will institute and propose, without barely mentioning that THERE WILL BE NO MONEY in the treasury for any of those programs. Why? Because the f*cking money is over at the Pentagon.

Will they dare to mention "the third rail"....tax increases (hard to call them anything else afte rall of this time)?

Then the question will becomes; will any of those same smooth talking and promising elected politicians have the intestinal fortitude and Know-how to go to the pentagon and get some of our money (like the BIG PORK), or will they be cowed and have to PROVE that they are not SOFT ON NATIONAL DEFENSE by not touching or even raising the defense budget?

Keep in mind a very important point, Only Nixon could go to China....and I do believe that apart from McCain and Hagel (and I don't think that either will be very interested)....no other candidate (and absolutely no Democrat other than Wes) will have the gravitas and the honesty to even propose cutting shit over at the pentagon.

So maybe some think that if the "war(s)" go well, Clark will have no issue to run on....but I seriously disagree.

And if the War(s) do go well, then maybe Republicans win....just due to that fact.

[mdelaguna2000]

59. great Star Trek line

I LOVE that Vulcan saying, "Only Nixon could go to China..."

Clark is no Nixon, mind you...

[JNelson6563]

55. I got a mailing from Feingold the other day

A survey on National Issues. I think he's looking at it. I'm good with that.

Julie

PS Nto excited at all about the prospects of Hillary, Biden or Richardson.

[Capn Sunshine]

76. ANY DEM WHO SIGNED THE PNAC LETTER

*cough*Joe Biden(D-MBNA)*cough*

is an automatic DQ to me.

[mrgorth]

70. Schweitzer/Feingold

[Uncle Joe]

73. Prometheus Gore

is the best, and the fact that the Corporate Owned Media Monopoly Under Neocon Idiotic Superficial Theory Shits or (Communists) for short decided to slander Al Gore since 1998 over (he claimed to have invented the internet) while they simultaneously gave Bush oral sex, is a most compelling reason to put Al in the White House where he belongs. If someone could just find a stained press jacket, oh wait I forgot about Gannon/Guckert.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

74. Clark - Obama n/t

[Capn Sunshine]

75. 2006! 2006! 2006!!!!

WE MUST CONCENTRATE ALL OUR ENERGY ON GAINING GROUND IN THE 2006 ELECTIONS!

WE MUST FIX THE VOTING SYSTEM AND GAIN SEATS IN CONGRESS AND STATEWIDE

For cripes sake, if we can't concentrate on the first things, who gets the nom in 2008 is just so much superfluous garbage like speculation on Brad and Jennifer

[kwolf68]

77. Love Gore...Go Al

I am so ready for Mr. Gore….Like others, I will work for his campaign and will donate money to him. After this fiasco of Bush, A President Gore would really be able to heal the Neo-Con Scab. Others I’m still TBD, although I like Feingold alot. I don’t want any moderates who try to out-Republican Republicans. Oh sure, I’ll vote for Evan Bayh against whatever whack-job the Repukes roll out there, but my money purse will be much tighter and I probably won’t work for the campaign, not sure yet.

With a Gore run, I am 100% in the fold.