Al . . .

Jane!

Gore

Edwards ‘08!

Am I the only FDL reader is weary of dollar democracy? Of always being asked to donate to candidates?

I want these critters to pledge to get private money out of politics completely.

You want to support someone? Find barter ways.. give your time, write an op ed, Let’s get money out of politics. Public financing 100%

Jane!

Well, I guess Dodd’s still my candidate right now, even if MLB made him drop the contribution/raffle for the ALCS game seats.

I just have to blame them for costing me the Dream Date!

Total bummer. :}(

Once you’ve read this, you’ll want to vote for me.

http://freewayblogger.blogspot…..yukon.html

Every word of it is true.

EPU’d from below —

SufiLizard @ 74

Toby Wollin @ 69

I could not read after this:
“(Bush says)We have lost sight of what it means to be a nation willing to be aggressive in the world…”
No, George, we are very very aware now of what it means to be a nation which is willing to be aggressive in the world.
And we don’t like it at all.
It means that we’ve turned ourselves into a bunch of people who support thuggery against defenseless people thousands of miles away..simply because they don’t look like us, act like us or worship like us.
Thanks George. You guys have been doing a heck of a job for our self-esteem.

Sort of OT:

Since it looks like we’re ginning up a war with Iran, I thought it would be appropriate to take a look at the Persian culture.

Long before Islam, the Persian Empire was dominantly of the Zoroastrian religion. That religion was arguably the predecessor to later Christian and Islamic (and even Jewish) theology that supposed the duality of one God and one Devil.

In Zoroastrianism, their God was known as Ahura-Mazda, The God of Light. Their “devil” was known as Ahriman, or the God of Darkness. In their view, all of history was a battle between the forces of light and the forces of darkness. Ahriman’s minions of darkness were demons and human collaborators who persisted in “evil” behaviors and were constantly preventing humanity from living in harmonious peace.

That’s all off the top of my head, so feel free to correct me if I have some of the details wrong, but that’s a very rough summary of the religion of early Persia.

It occurred to me that we often have trouble finding an accurate label for the neo-cons, conservatives, neo-liberals, fascists, etc.

Perhaps just putting them under the umbrella of Ahriman would be appropriate.

I think you should take out “other” for the purpose of this poll since most of us want gore

I’m gonna make a pick even though “other” would have been my choice

All these votes already and no comments??

Why isn’t Al Gore on this poll? He’s my pick, first and foremost. As a second choice, I’m vacillating between Edwards and Dodd at this point. Either of them or any of the other Dem candidates would do as VP, but my favorite VP choice would be Howard Dean.

edwards. if gore runs, then gore/edwards

hillary is a competent republican. obama shows nothing. richardson claims experience in dealing with “bad guys” but during the debates, he’s all bluster and no substance. dodd is actually very impressive. biden is very sharp- but maybe secdef secstate sharp. kucinich has all the right positions, but doesn’t have the jenesaisquois leadership quality. edwards has that post ‘00 gore quality, where he seems free to be himself and learned from past mistakes.

Gore is the only “other.”

peanutbutter @ 10

All these votes already and no comments??

There are far more readers of FDL than there are commenters. Think that maybe 1% of readers comment or so.

My current favourite is Gore. Not that he’s in the race yet, but it’s not like I’ll get a vote anyway. :o)

OK, I’ll bite: what’s the difference between “other” and “none of the above”?

I, for one, applaud all the work Gore’s done on climate change, but I don’t want him to run for president again. And I don’t think he’s going to.

Just for the record.

I voted for Gore this time. as in “other”

Professor Foland @ 16

OK, I’ll bite: what’s the difference between “other” and “none of the above”?

“none of the above” means more and better dems :)

Professor Foland @ 16

OK, I’ll bite: what’s the difference between “other” and “none of the above”?

Ditto.

lotta early Edwards support – will this thread could be kept open for a while?

Is this the first FDL poll? I have never seen one before.

First choice: other (meaning Gore). My next two would be Edwards and Dodd, not necessarily in that order. Clinton doesn’t do anything for me, and neither does Obama. No spark, no interest, no whatever-it-is that makes you want to vote for them.

scarlet p. @ 7

Once you’ve read this, you’ll want to vote for me.

http://freewayblogger.blogspot…..yukon.html

Every word of it is true.

And when you make the movie, who’s going to do the music?

perris @ 9

I think you should take out “other” for the purpose of this poll since most of us want gore

I’m gonna make a pick even though “other” would have been my choice

Other and none of the above provide two ways out of answering the question. Which of the available candidate choices is your favorite. To me, favorite can also mean the one I dislike the least. Not which do you think will win – which one is your favorite. I chose Kucinich cuz he’s my favorite.

Re: Gore run EUP’d

As for Hillary… all she needs to see is the amount of love that Nancy and Harry are getting from anyone who is actually paying attention to know that she might be the Female Howard Dean of the 2008 race; ahead at the clubhouse turn and losing it in the stretch.

All the policy papers, plans, and stuff she says can not overcome her obvious unwillingness to learn from her 2002 vote. Lieberman-Kyl: Oops, she did it again.

Professor Foland @ 16

OK, I’ll bite: what’s the difference between “other” and “none of the above”?

“Other” probably does mean Gore,” or if they Red State folks lay off picking their faces and stop by it gives them a chance to cast a vote for Rudy or Grandpa Fred. “None of the above” means “I hate them all.”

SufiLizard @ 8

EPU’d from below —

SufiLizard @ 74

Sort of OT:

Since it looks like we’re ginning up a war with Iran, I thought it would be appropriate to take a look at the Persian culture.

Long before Islam, the Persian Empire was dominantly of the Zoroastrian religion. That religion was arguably the predecessor to later Christian and Islamic (and even Jewish) theology that supposed the duality of one God and one Devil.

In Zoroastrianism, their God was known as Ahura-Mazda, The God of Light. Their “devil” was known as Ahriman, or the God of Darkness. In their view, all of history was a battle between the forces of light and the forces of darkness. Ahriman’s minions of darkness were demons and human collaborators who persisted in “evil” behaviors and were constantly preventing humanity from living in harmonious peace.

That’s all off the top of my head, so feel free to correct me if I have some of the details wrong, but that’s a very rough summary of the religion of early Persia.

It occurred to me that we often have trouble finding an accurate label for the neo-cons, conservatives, neo-liberals, fascists, etc.

Perhaps just putting them under the umbrella of Ahriman would be appropriate.

We can always count on you, SufiLizard, to bring enlightenment to the Lake. The lamps always look so nice twinkling across the water.

Toby Wollin @ 24

scarlet p. @ 7

Once you’ve read this, you’ll want to vote for me.

http://freewayblogger.blogspot…..yukon.html

Every word of it is true.

And when you make the movie, who’s going to do the music?

Hoping for a Brian Eno/Ennio Morriconi collaboration…

All the announced Democratic candidates are mere pretenders. At best they are right of center, status quo Democrats or at worst they are Republican lite. America needs radical reform, not just tweaking things around the edges. Less than radical progressive reform would be to merely slow the inevitable slide to fascism.

Why isn’t Al Gore on this poll?

Um, because he isn’t running?

That’s just a guess.

Right now I’m supporting Obama. I feel that the Democrats have a bona fide political star in Obama, and I do think it’s a little bit typical of my party to pick at his every vote, and every comment, and to not realize what we have. I’m old enough to remember JFK, and I see similarities in the intelligence and wit, and the ability to electrify a crowd. I think any one of the viable Democrats running would make a pretty good president. But I do think that Obama would be the person that could help lift us out of this national nightmare.

Ann in AZ @ 11

Why isn’t Al Gore on this poll? He’s my pick, first and foremost. As a second choice, I’m vacillating between Edwards and Dodd at this point. Either of them or any of the other Dem candidates would do as VP, but my favorite VP choice would be Howard Dean.

You and me too.

Edwards, Kucinich and Dodd are all on my radar — they are showing more leadership on issues than the others. I admit to not looking to deeply at Dodd issue-by-issue yet — more just a response to his recent actions.

Obama is still too much of an enigma and Hillary is too corporate for me to be fully behind either of them. Any of them will be better than what we have now — let alone the Republican candidates.

Wow! Dennis is ahead of Clinton and Obama? Awesome! It still looks like a long shot for Dennis, but imagine if Edwards chose Kucinich as his running mate… I like the sound of that. We need a scrappy little guy in the VP’s office who is not afraid of telling it like it is, but who is reasonable and good-hearted.

Edwards is my first choice, but Gore instantly moves into that slot if he declares.

My eyes are on Dodd, and I’m still open to Obama.

I’m okay with Clinton if the alternative is Julie Annie, the Mormon, or the Actor.

And I still say watch out for Huckabee.

scarlet p. @ 30

Toby Wollin @ 24

And when you make the movie, who’s going to do the music?

Hoping for a Brian Eno/Ennio Morriconi collaboration…

“A Fistful of Signs…”

I voted for Edwards but I also like Richardson, Dodd, Kucinich, and, of course, Gore.

TRex @ 32

Why isn’t Al Gore on this poll?

Um, because he isn’t running?

That’s just a guess.

I’d vote for Gore if he was running. Since the poll mentions ‘2008 candidates’…John Edwards.

Edwards.

I would vote for Edwards no matter who else is planning to run. Gotta go with the candidates I have v. the ones some here wish we had. :)

OT – why don’t the bushdogs support the constitution?

Get Pinned by Article 1.

gotta hit the road now – people of LA, keep an eye open this afternoon on the freeways.

I have to say that Huckabee might be the real dark-horse on the other side. He’s not a phony like Julie Annie, and he’s not as much of a creation as Trust-Fund Romney. He’s gonna have to bear watching, especially if the fundies turn the 9/11 cross-dresser down at their upcoming Tweakers for the Lawd festival.

tw3k @ 26

Re: Gore run EUP’d

which is thus;

Biodun @ 59

A Gore run won’t happen:

What are the odds that Al Gore enters the presidential race?

We put that question this morning to Karen Skelton, who served as Gore’s political director while he was vice president. Her response: “He will not run. Negative odds. He’s got all he needs. He’s a Nobel Prize winner, which means he’s being rewarded for following his passion successfully in a way that’s changed the world. His passion was never politics for the fight, it was for the cause.”

For what it’s worth, Time magazine’s Eric Pooley, who has spent “a good deal of time” with Gore this year, has come to the same conclusion.

I disagree

gore’s pasion is making a differance, yes, he is making a differance now, yes he has no passion for the political fight that would inundate him if he ran

but if he is the man I believe he is, he will not be able to deny what he might do for this country and what might happen to this country if he does not

my prediction;

if hilary falls gore runs

tw3k @ 26

Re: Gore run EUP’d

As far as I’m concerned, until he personally says “I’m not going to run for President”, he’s in.

BTW, and really just a nitpick, I get bothered by lists that are not alphabetical by last name. I dunno. I guess I read too much into it.

I get way more pissed off, though, if names are completely left off, like Gravel and Paul in their respective races. ;)

Tithonia @ 33

Right now I’m supporting Obama. I feel that the Democrats have a bona fide political star in Obama, and I do think it’s a little bit typical of my party to pick at his every vote, and every comment, and to not realize what we have. I’m old enough to remember JFK, and I see similarities in the intelligence and wit, and the ability to electrify a crowd. I think any one of the viable Democrats running would make a pretty good president. But I do think that Obama would be the person that could help lift us out of this national nightmare.

I actually think Obama has the real potential to be a major player in the future, but I’m concerned that the comments that he doesn’t have enough experience might actually be true.

He seems too easily swayed by beltway politics, even though I believe that his heart (and his ideals) are in the right place.

I think we’re awfully quick to label Dems spineless when in actuality they are just sell-outs. But with Obama, I think he has not sold out, but needs a little more time to strengthen that spine of his.

I think his politics of hope is the right track, but when it comes to the actual implementation, I think he would benefit from being tempered in the political fires a little longer.

Just MHO.

Edwards
Dodd
Richardson

Gore jumps to the top if he enters

Hooray for Dennis! I could vote my conscience if he were to win the primary…

Tithonia @ 33

Right now I’m supporting Obama. I feel that the Democrats have a bona fide political star in Obama, and I do think it’s a little bit typical of my party to pick at his every vote, and every comment, and to not realize what we have. I’m old enough to remember JFK, and I see similarities in the intelligence and wit, and the ability to electrify a crowd. I think any one of the viable Democrats running would make a pretty good president. But I do think that Obama would be the person that could help lift us out of this national nightmare.

I dislike his Hillary-style triangulating, waffling. I don’t like his bipartisan speechifying b/c I’m not ready to make nice. I don’t like that he likes Joe Leiberman and he didn’t support the Democratic candidate in CT. His voting record seems ok though. I agree, he is charismatic. You could be right.

I like Kucinich b/c I like the things he wants to do and the things he has to say. I especially like the idea of a real national health care plan like the EU and Canada has.

So howzabout that General Strike, 11/6/07….not too far away. Would take some big names encouraging it to make it happen….and combined efforts of the progressive alternative media. Jane, what do you think? Are you backing it? Are there folks who know the movers and shakers at MoveOn and other large-scale organizers that can help get this ball rolling in a big way??

There’s small community organizing and at-large, Community Organizing and we’ll need a lot of both if this is gonna happen…..

Um, does anyone else find the Gore discussion a little diminishing to the other fine and viable candidates who are running?

Nothing against Gore–but he’s not running at the moment.

Jane, I have a question about the S-Chip legislation. Terry Everett is my representative in the House, and his aide called me back today. He told me that there were two reasons Rep. Everett didn’t vote for this legislation. One: The income level was increased to $83,000 to be eligible (I think I read somewhere that this was bogus, but I can’t find the link). Two: It lowers the proof of citizenship requirements and there might be (*gasp*) illegal alien children!! who get health care. Off the top of your head, can you point me to the facts about the income requirements? If not, I’ll keep digging. Thanks.

I am pleased that this straw vote thing is giving people a chance to voice their preference.

do-si-do @ 48

BTW, and really just a nitpick, I get bothered by lists that are not alphabetical by last name. I dunno. I guess I read too much into it.

I get way more pissed off, though, if names are completely left off, like Gravel and Paul in their respective races. ;)

That gives preference to people who are at the top of the list. If you’re doing it each month I believe it’s more accurate if the names are rotated.

(Should have added, I know this is slightly OT, but…I’m for a democracy that a candidate can run IN)….

Professor Foland @ 16

OK, I’ll bite: what’s the difference between “other” and “none of the above”?

Well logically, “none of the above” defines a set of all other persons and may be empty. “Other” defines the same set but can not be empty.

perris @ 46

tw3k @ 26

Re: Gore run EUP’d

which is thus;

Biodun @ 59

A Gore run won’t happen:

I disagree

gore’s pasion is making a differance, yes, he is making a differance now, yes he has no passion for the political fight that would inundate him if he ran

but if he is the man I believe he is, he will not be able to deny what he might do for this country and what might happen to this country if he does not

my prediction;

if hilary falls gore runs

yeah but he’d have to get in before hill fails tho, no?

Thanks for posting that, I was too lazy :)

I’ve been trying to go to the site Naomi Wolf mentioned in her post, AmericanFreedom Campaign.org, and it keeps coming up as though it doesn’t exist. The only Google posting for it is the one mentioned here at FDL in her post.

So I noodled around, followed some other links and tah-dah! I finally found the link:

http://www.americanfreedomcampaign.org/

SufiLizard @ 8

EPU’d from below —

SufiLizard @ 74

Sort of OT:

It occurred to me that we often have trouble finding an accurate label for the neo-cons, conservatives, neo-liberals, fascists, etc.

Perhaps just putting them under the umbrella of Ahriman would be appropriate.

The neo-cons call themselves and each other names like “Prince Darkness” (Richard Perle) and seem to take great pride in being a dark force bringing death and destruction.

mc @ 37

And I still say watch out for Huckabee.

He seems the same ole same ole. I see no evolution in his thinking.

Robert Morton @ 51

Hooray for Dennis! I could vote my conscience if he were to win the primary…

I really need him some more.

hackworth @ 52

Tithonia @ 33

Right now I’m supporting Obama. I feel that the Democrats have a bona fide political star in Obama, and I do think it’s a little bit typical of my party to pick at his every vote, and every comment, and to not realize what we have. I’m old enough to remember JFK, and I see similarities in the intelligence and wit, and the ability to electrify a crowd. I think any one of the viable Democrats running would make a pretty good president. But I do think that Obama would be the person that could help lift us out of this national nightmare.

I dislike his Hillary-style triangulating, waffling. I don’t like his bipartisan speechifying b/c I’m not ready to make nice. I don’t like that he likes Joe Leiberman and he didn’t support the Democratic candidate in CT. His voting record seems ok though. I agree, he is charismatic. You could be right.

I like Kucinich b/c I like the things he wants to do and the things he has to say. I especially like the idea of a real national health care plan like the EU and Canada has.

I absolutely love Dennis Kucinich. I love his intelligence and humor, too. I love that he stays in the race and brings his perspective to the debates. I don’t consider him a viable candidate, though.

Hugh @ 63

mc @ 37

And I still say watch out for Huckabee.

He seems the same ole same ole. I see no evolution in his thinking.

Well, he lost a lot of weight…

;-)

Gore jumps to the top if he enters…

I’d agree with that – but I’ve yet to see *any* sign whatsoever that he plans to do that…

And despite the fact that every presidential “quiz” I’ve taken shows Kucinich with a perfect score for me, I’m being realistic and voting elsewhere.

this is epu’d from downstairs and a froomkin post;

“(Bush says)We have lost sight of what it means to be a nation willing to be aggressive in the world…”

that is a madman talking

he thinks that because he has made war for no reason that now the country is willing to endorse unending war

he is mad, I am not a phsycologist but I am betting he this man is clynically insane

Since the media has hyped up the HRC winning by leaps and bounds, but I have seen no evidence in reality of this, could it be that it is being done to discourage Gore from entering?

SanderO @ 5

Am I the only FDL reader is weary of dollar democracy? Of always being asked to donate to candidates?

I want these critters to pledge to get private money out of politics completely.

You want to support someone? Find barter ways.. give your time, write an op ed, Let’s get money out of politics. Public financing 100%

No in many ways, I think it may be the most important single issue. Sara over at tnh had a great idea. Each registered voter has 2$ to contribute to the ?Presidential? election (I’m probably not doing justice to Sara’s idea). All the funds come from registered voters.

Well for the record. My first choice is Kucinich. He’s the only candidate whom I think is correct on every single issue. He’s the only candidate with a viable health care plan in my opinion.

My second choice is Edwards, though his health plan and comments about Iran have diminished my enthusiasm for him.

The rest of the candidates are sort of tied for third, with the exception of Hillary who is dead last.

I honestly think Gore can do more good in the private sector, and I think he’d have a tougher time winning in the general election if he did declare than some of the other Democratic candidates who are already declared. He’d win the Democratic primary easily, but I don’t think the rest of the electorate is as enamored of him as we dyed-in-the-wool progressives are.

Jane Hamsher @ 57

do-si-do @ 48

BTW, and really just a nitpick, I get bothered by lists that are not alphabetical by last name. I dunno. I guess I read too much into it.

I get way more pissed off, though, if names are completely left off, like Gravel and Paul in their respective races. ;)

That gives preference to people who are at the top of the list. If you’re doing it each month I believe it’s more accurate if the names are rotated.

Oh! exactly my point. I didn’t realize you were rotating them and posting this more than once. Thanks for setting me straight! *g*

Lindy @ 55

Jane, I have a question about the S-Chip legislation. Terry Everett is my representative in the House, and his aide called me back today. He told me that there were two reasons Rep. Everett didn’t vote for this legislation. One: The income level was increased to $83,000 to be eligible (I think I read somewhere that this was bogus, but I can’t find the link). Two: It lowers the proof of citizenship requirements and there might be (*gasp*) illegal alien children!! who get health care. Off the top of your head, can you point me to the facts about the income requirements? If not, I’ll keep digging. Thanks.

The $83,000 thing is bullshit:

http://www.factcheck.org/bushs…..rance.html

do-si-do @ 54

Um, does anyone else find the Gore discussion a little diminishing to the other fine and viable candidates who are running?

Nothing against Gore–but he’s not running at the moment.

I do not find the Gore discussion diminishing to the other fine and viable candidates who are running; although I think the other candidates are viable and certainly a huge improvement over what the Rethugs have to offer, I find them all inferior to Gore on several levels.

tw3k @ 65

Robert Morton @ 51

Hooray for Dennis! I could vote my conscience if he were to win the primary…

I really need him some more.

OT, but how do I have my Facebook link appear when I leave a comment? I’ll hazard a guess that my Website should be a link to my profile, but if that fails could someone clue me in? Thanks!

perris @ 68

this is epu’d from downstairs and a froomkin post;

“(Bush says)We have lost sight of what it means to be a nation willing to be aggressive in the world…”

that is a madman talking

he thinks that because he has made war for no reason that now the country is willing to endorse unending war

he is mad, I am not a phsycologist but I am betting he this man is clynically insane

Bush is starting to look weary and wild-eyed. Like a despot who lives and breathes and is intoxicated by his own emissions.

He is bonkers.

-GSD

GSD @ 76

perris @ 68

this is epu’d from downstairs and a froomkin post;

that is a madman talking

he thinks that because he has made war for no reason that now the country is willing to endorse unending war

he is mad, I am not a phsycologist but I am betting he this man is clynically insane

Bush is starting to look weary and wild-eyed. Like a POW or a despot who lives and breathes and is intoxicated by his own emissions.

He is bonkers.

-GSD

And the one holding the big red button labeled “Total Nuclear Destruction of Humanity”

Sleep Well.

why wasn’t steny hoyer included in the presidential poll?
with those cufflinks he could redirect the sun and blind evildoers.

I would gently suggest the addition to the straw poll of the name ‘Gore’.

Robert Morton @ 75

tw3k @ 65

I really need him some more.

OT, but how do I have my Facebook link appear when I leave a comment? I’ll hazard a guess that my Website should be a link to my profile, but if that fails could someone clue me in? Thanks!

Oops, left out a “listen” up there.
Ah, register up at the last block on the right, then you’ll have an input field for FB.

Robert Morton @ 75

tw3k @ 65

I really need him some more.

OT, but how do I have my Facebook link appear when I leave a comment? I’ll hazard a guess that my Website should be a link to my profile, but if that fails could someone clue me in? Thanks!

Go to the “Meta” box at the bottom of the far right column
Register with FDL
Wait for an e-mail from FDL with a password
Go to your Facebook Profile and copy the URL. Make sure you get the actual Profile with the long number at the end rather than just the layout.
After you get the FDL password, come back here and click on the Login link. Login to your FDL Profile, fill in the appropriate information including pasting the Facebook link info in to the appropriate box in your FDL profile.
Save profile.
You should then have the facebook icon showing when you comment.
You have to re-log in each time you restart your machine or browser.

jayt @ 67

And despite the fact that every presidential “quiz” I’ve taken shows Kucinich with a perfect score for me, I’m being realistic and voting elsewhere.

I often wonder if “realistic” is killing our democracy. Not to single you out Jayt, but that seems to be a common theme. So many people love Kucinich’s positions on the issues, but everyone’s bought into the notion that he’s not a viable candidate.

Why isn’t he a viable candidate, if he’s so good on all the issues?

I’m seriously trying to figure that out, that’s not meant to be a rhetorical question.

Heh. Clinton and Kucinich tied at 10% each. Try that against your meme for size, MSM.

Since I can’t vote for Adlai Stevenson (could do a write in but….) I like Dennis Kucinich so he gets my pressure point pen.

GSD @ 76

perris @ 68

this is epu’d from downstairs and a froomkin post;

that is a madman talking

he thinks that because he has made war for no reason that now the country is willing to endorse unending war

he is mad, I am not a phsycologist but I am betting he this man is clynically insane

Bush is starting to look weary and wild-eyed. Like a despot who lives and breathes and is intoxicated by his own emissions.

He is bonkers.

-GSD

He kinda giggled the other day when he was saying the FISA bill needs an immunity clause.

Almost like of those Yes Man videos.

dodd is my candidate…..voted in the straw poll…

The poll asks which is your favorite candidate. There is no stipulation that the candidate be viable.

That means Kucinich for me. If viable were included, I would pick Edwards. What if we could get Kucinich to be number one in the polls? Then we could tell the insurance companies and big pharma and the war machine to go to hell.

Thus far the straw poll indicates who is preferred and who is not. It will be interesting to see what the poll says tomorrow morning.

peanutbutter @ 4

Edwards ‘08!

Yep.

dakine01 @ 81

Robert Morton @ 75

snip…

You should then have the facebook icon showing when you comment.
You have to re-log in each time you restart your machine or browser.

Much better driving directions :)

QuakerGirl @ 62

SufiLizard @ 8

EPU’d from below —

The� neo-cons call themselves and each other names like “Prince Darkness” (Richard Perle) and seem to take great pride in being a dark force bringing death and destruction.

They all think they’re Pacino in Devil’s Advocate. Instead, they’ve become the foreshadowing of Stranger in a Strange Land, wherein the president of the U.S. is ushered into a global meeting and nobody notices.

The Repervs have given us the diminution of the U.S. Perverting democracy every step of the way.

Mentioned at the end of last thread–an outstanding op-ed in today’s Strib re academic freedom and debate in the crucible of the Dease action against Tutu. here’s the link: http://www.startribune.com/562/story/1479297.html

I’m aghast that no one has said this as yet … Run Jane Run ! *g*

Ann in AZ @ 74

…I find them all inferior to Gore on several levels.

Please elaborate. On what specific levels is Gore superior? (again, I am asking in the interest of serious discussion, not as a sardonic snark)

Bluetoe @ 13

Gore is the only “other.”

I also voted other for Gore.

tw3k @ 85

GSD @ 76

Bush is starting to look weary and wild-eyed. Like a despot who lives and breathes and is intoxicated by his own emissions.

He is bonkers.

-GSD

He kinda giggled the other day when he was saying the FISA bill needs an immunity clause.

Almost like of those Yes Man videos.

Psychopathic mass murderer.

If there were a box for Freepers to select, it would say, “none of the above – they are all commie b*stards”.

I’ve been for Edwards for a while. But Dodd has been magnificent lately and so voted for him in this poll.

Petrocelli @ 92

I’m aghast that no one has said this as yet … Run Jane Run ! *g*

On a ticket with Colbert?

No campaigning within 100 feet of the polls. I’m itching to do it. But I won’t.

A.Citizen @ 95

tw3k @ 85

He kinda giggled the other day when he was saying the FISA bill needs an immunity clause.

Almost like of those Yes Man videos.

Psychopathic mass murderer.

Too True! Has he toped Saddam’s score yet?

QuakerGirl @ 84

Since I can’t vote for Adlai Stevenson (could do a write in but….) I like Dennis Kucinich so he gets my pressure point pen.

dim memories here of a photo of Adlai Stevenson reading a newspaper photographed from a low angle with a hole in his shoe sole.
Did that affect that election? I wouldn’t know.

nomolos @ 98

Petrocelli @ 92

I’m aghast that no one has said this as yet … Run Jane Run ! *g*

On a ticket with Colbert?

Unity08!

nomolos @ 98

Petrocelli @ 92

I’m aghast that no one has said this as yet … Run Jane Run ! *g*

On a ticket with Colbert?

LOL !!! It would be the smartest ticket in years !

Yuh know, why is it that “Kucinich isn’t viable” is accepted as truth? Really. Physical appearance? Because on ideas and enthusiastic reception by (certain) audiences he’s viable as all get out.

His wife’s 6′0″ tall, I read; just take the average of candidate and spouse, if height’s your thing …

Oklahoma kiddo @ 99

No campaigning within 100 feet of the polls. I’m itching to do it. But I won’t.

Have I ever mentioned how much I love your posts OK?

Mabel’s Wig Shack @ 101

dim memories here of a photo of Adlai Stevenson reading a newspaper photographed from a low angle with a hole in his shoe sole.
Did that affect that election? I wouldn’t know.

It was not the sole reason

tw3k @ 102

nomolos @ 98

On a ticket with Colbert?

Unity08!

What I would give to see Jane V Hillary in a debate …

Kucinich actually lines up with my positions the best, so I voted for him. If you offered run-off voting, I would have voted for Edwards.

peanutbutter @ 4

Edwards ‘08!

Yes, Edwards! Overwhelmingly, enthusiasitically. But why the MSM hardsell on Hillary? So many of my progressive/liberal/Dem friends and fam can’t stomach her, and many say they WON’T vote for her? What gives?

nomolos @ 106

Mabel’s Wig Shack @ 101

dim memories here of a photo of Adlai Stevenson reading a newspaper photographed from a low angle with a hole in his shoe sole.
Did that affect that election? I wouldn’t know.

It was not the sole reason

*groans*

Petrocelli @ 107

tw3k @ 102

Unity08!

What I would give to see Jane V Hillary in a debate …

That’d liven it up :)

SufiLizard @ 82

jayt @ 67

And despite the fact that every presidential “quiz” I’ve taken shows Kucinich with a perfect score for me, I’m being realistic and voting elsewhere.

I often wonder if “realistic” is killing our democracy. Not to single you out Jayt, but that seems to be a common theme. So many people love Kucinich’s positions on the issues, but everyone’s bought into the notion that he’s not a viable candidate.

Why isn’t he a viable candidate, if he’s so good on all the issues?

I’m seriously trying to figure that out, that’s not meant to be a rhetorical question.

Maybe because by the time I vote in a primary (and you too, if I’m not mistaken)(Indiana), Kucinich will have effectively been eliminated.

And, despite my agreement with him on the issues, there’s just something about him, his eyes, his presentation, that I don’t fully trust.

A.Citizen @ 95

tw3k @ 85

He kinda giggled the other day when he was saying the FISA bill needs an immunity clause.

Almost like of those Yes Man videos.

Psychopathic mass murderer.

I wonder if the UN will wake up to “where the buck stops” on this issue since they’ve decided to take a look at private contracting firms like Blackwater:
“The United Nations wants probes to determine whether private security contractors in Iraq have committed war crimes and for governments to ensure that the rule of law is applied, U.N. officials said on Thursday.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071011/ts_nm/iraq_dc

Petrocelli @ 107

tw3k @ 102

Unity08!

What I would give to see Jane V Hillary in a debate …

The national debt could be paid off with tickets for that debate

I am always amazed at how far Hillary is behind in polls like this (Here and at Kos) and yet is so way far ahead and pulling farther out in the national polls.

I actually was in the Hillary breakout session at YKos, and was more impressed than I expected to be with her. I would be okay (not excited but okay) with her as the nominee. It actuallly upsets me to read so much Hillary Hate in the commments… especially at Kos. It is like they have swallowed whole the what the right has to say about her.

If you combine “none of the above” and “other” that beats you know who.

carmen @ 108

Kucinich actually lines up with my positions the best, so I voted for him. If you offered run-off voting, I would have voted for Edwards.

A very imp. point about DK is his pro- life stance, has he changed that as yet ?

carmen @ 108

Kucinich actually lines up with my positions the best, so I voted for him. If you offered run-off voting, I would have voted for Edwards.

Yeah. Why doesn’t that translate to viability? Are the Repub candidates too “manly”? (Yeah, I know. This is pickup truck Amurka we’re talkin’ ’bout. Sigh.)

I’d like to see three polls.

First would be of Obama, Clinton, Edwards. This would reflect what most of us expect to have to choose from.

Second would be all of the candidates. This would show whose positions we agree with, regardless of whether we expect to be able to vote for them.

Third would be all candidates plus Gore.

I know this would take more work, Jane. But I think the different sets of information could be valuable to FDL.

jayt @ 112

SufiLizard @ 82

I often wonder if “realistic” is killing our democracy. Not to single you out Jayt, but that seems to be a common theme. So many people love Kucinich’s positions on the issues, but everyone’s bought into the notion that he’s not a viable candidate.

Why isn’t he a viable candidate, if he’s so good on all the issues?

I’m seriously trying to figure that out, that’s not meant to be a rhetorical question.

Maybe because by the time I vote in a primary (and you too, if I’m not mistaken)(Indiana), Kucinich will have effectively been eliminated.

And, despite my agreement with him on the issues, there’s just something about him, his eyes, his presentation, that I don’t fully trust.

Well that’s a fair enough explanation.

And you are correct I’m in Indiana, where I believe our primaries will be held about 2 weeks after the general election (I’ll have to check my calendar to verify).

I love having ABSOLUTELY no say in who the Democratic nominee is.

Bartcop used to refer to Bush as The Giggling Murderer.

-GSD

Petrocelli @ 117

carmen @ 108

Kucinich actually lines up with my positions the best, so I voted for him. If you offered run-off voting, I would have voted for Edwards.

A very imp. point about DK is his pro- life stance, has he changed that as yet ?

I believe he changed that prior to ‘04 elections. He’s Catholic, but I think it took him a while to reconcile his religious with political views. I think he made the correct choice. (Separation of church and state and all).

I voted “none of the above” because I wish Gore would run! My second choice is Edwards.

I don’t think Gore will run and I don’t think Edwards will win the nomination against Hillary. But any of them will be better than whoever the Republicans select.

i will not repeat not cast a vote for HRC….i think she’s in the tank with DLC and lobbyists that are calling shots in both parties….it’s time for a third party!! or should i say a 2nd party cuz right now we have the repugocrats….ughhhhhhhhh

Toby Wollin @ 113

A.Citizen @ 95

Psychopathic mass murderer.

I wonder if the UN will wake up to “where the buck stops” on this issue since they’ve decided to take a look at private contracting firms like Blackwater:
“The United Nations wants probes to determine whether private security contractors in Iraq have committed war crimes and for governments to ensure that the rule of law is applied, U.N. officials said on Thursday.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071011/ts_nm/iraq_dc

That is good news.

Too bad the dems can’t manager oversight better.

jayt @ 67

Gore jumps to the top if he enters…

I’d agree with that – but I’ve yet to see *any* sign whatsoever that he plans to do that…

And despite the fact that every presidential “quiz” I’ve taken shows Kucinich with a perfect score for me, I’m being realistic and voting elsewhere.

This is utterly illogical, not “realistic”. In fact, it’s the product of brainwashing. I remember shouting imprecations at the tv in 2004 when I heard a woman in Iowa say they wouldn’t be voting for Dean because Kerry was more “electable”…as if she weren’t participating in an election already. Now you’re saying the same thing. Just vote for Kucinich already. You’ll have enough chance to be “realistic” by voting for Clinton in the general election.

Nice to see someone who voted for AUMF ahead in the polls here.

Prairie Sunshine @ 91

QuakerGirl @ 62

The neo-cons call themselves and each other names like “Prince Darkness” (Richard Perle) and seem to take great pride in being a dark force bringing death and destruction.

They all think they’re Pacino in Devil’s Advocate. Instead, they’ve become the foreshadowing of Stranger in a Strange Land, wherein the president of the U.S. is ushered into a global meeting and nobody notices.

The Repervs have given us the diminution of the U.S. Perverting democracy every step of the way.

Mentioned at the end of last thread–an outstanding op-ed in today’s Strib re academic freedom and debate in the crucible of the Dease action against Tutu. here’s the link: http://www.startribune.com/562/story/1479297.html

Prairie Sunshine – Thanks for the link. A lot of people don’t know Condoleeza Rice did such things as Provost at Stanford. She wanted to control who the speakers would be. There were battles and some professors resigned.

Grandma Jo @ 115

I am always amazed at how far Hillary is behind in polls like this (Here and at Kos) and yet is so way far ahead and pulling farther out in the national polls.

I actually was in the Hillary breakout session at YKos, and was more impressed than I expected to be with her. I would be okay (not excited but okay) with her as the nominee. It actuallly upsets me to read so much Hillary Hate in the commments… especially at Kos. It is like they have swallowed whole the what the right has to say about her.

I would imagine what you percieve as ‘Hillary Hate’ is actually not ‘hate’ (at least not from the centre…centre-left…or left-wing political views)but more of a distrust of ‘Dempublicanism.’

Grandma Jo @ 115

I am always amazed at how far Hillary is behind in polls like this (Here and at Kos) and yet is so way far ahead and pulling farther out in the national polls.

I actually was in the Hillary breakout session at YKos, and was more impressed than I expected to be with her. I would be okay (not excited but okay) with her as the nominee. It actuallly upsets me to read so much Hillary Hate in the commments… especially at Kos. It is like they have swallowed whole the what the right has to say about her.

For me, it is what she says that I do not like coupled with her crowning by the MSM.

Grandma Jo @ 115

…It is like they have swallowed whole the what the right has to say about her.

Actually, if what the right had to say about her was true I would be a big fan. The problem is they portray her as some flaming liberal, when in actuality (it seems to me at least) she’s the most Republican of all the Democratic candidates.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion, and honestly I hope you’re right, because it looks like she may be our nominee; but the criticism of Hillary from the right is completely different than the criticism from the left.

brendan @ 126

jayt @ 67

Gore jumps to the top if he enters…

I’d agree with that – but I’ve yet to see *any* sign whatsoever that he plans to do that…

And despite the fact that every presidential “quiz” I’ve taken shows Kucinich with a perfect score for me, I’m being realistic and voting elsewhere.

This is utterly illogical, not “realistic”. In fact, it’s the product of brainwashing. I remember shouting imprecations at the tv in 2004 when I heard a woman in Iowa say they wouldn’t be voting for Dean because Kerry was more “electable”…as if she weren’t participating in an election already. Now you’re saying the same thing. Just vote for Kucinich already. You’ll have enough chance to be “realistic” by voting for Clinton in the general election.

Nice to see someone who voted for AUMF ahead in the polls here.

I guess you missed Kerry’s interview (Time?) where he stated that he(Kerry) and some aides twisted Edwards’ arm to vote ‘Yea’ even though Edwards had serious reservations about it.

Petrocelli @ 131

brendan @ 126

This is utterly illogical, not “realistic”. In fact, it’s the product of brainwashing. I remember shouting imprecations at the tv in 2004 when I heard a woman in Iowa say they wouldn’t be voting for Dean because Kerry was more “electable”…as if she weren’t participating in an election already. Now you’re saying the same thing. Just vote for Kucinich already. You’ll have enough chance to be “realistic” by voting for Clinton in the general election.

Nice to see someone who voted for AUMF ahead in the polls here.

I guess you missed Kerry’s interview (Time?) where he stated that he(Kerry) and some aides twisted Edwards’ arm to vote ‘Yea’ even though Edwards had serious reservations about it.

Speaks real well of Edwards, huh?

The presidential quiz I took did not include a health care option for single payer. It gave me Kucinich first, Hilary second. I felt like the quiz was rigged to benefit her, because by my measuring of positions, my view is Kucinich first, Edwards second.

These polls often seem to bring out Edwards as the big winner. Happens that way at DKos as well. Odd how our numbers for Edwards are so at odds with national polls, even of Dems. National polls keep showing Edwards in a relatively weak 3rd place with Hillary (blech) a strong lead.

Is this the normal pundit selection or are we firepups and Dkosers so out of the Dem “mainstream”…?

As much as I might want to get into a HRC thing, I’m not going to do it. For the time being.

SufiLizard @ 130

Grandma Jo @ 115

…It is like they have swallowed whole the what the right has to say about her.

Actually, if what the right had to say about her was true I would be a big fan. The problem is they portray her as some flaming liberal, when in actuality (it seems to me at least) she’s the most Republican of all the Democratic candidates.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion, and honestly I hope you’re right, because it looks like she may be our nominee; but the criticism of Hillary from the right is completely different than the criticism from the left.

It may not BE the same between the left and right but it often SOUNDS the same with the levels of vituperative noise generated about her.

kuchinich is my favourite followed by edwards.

margaret thatcher and dr. phil )hillary and obama( dont impress me too too much-

but hell i figure hillary would put a liberal judge on the supreme court. wouldn’t she……..

brendan @ 126

jayt @ 67

Gore jumps to the top if he enters…

I’d agree with that – but I’ve yet to see *any* sign whatsoever that he plans to do that…

And despite the fact that every presidential “quiz” I’ve taken shows Kucinich with a perfect score for me, I’m being realistic and voting elsewhere.

This is utterly illogical, not “realistic”. In fact, it’s the product of brainwashing. I remember shouting imprecations at the tv in 2004 when I heard a woman in Iowa say they wouldn’t be voting for Dean because Kerry was more “electable”…as if she weren’t participating in an election already. Now you’re saying the same thing. Just vote for Kucinich already. You’ll have enough chance to be “realistic” by voting for Clinton in the general election.

Nice to see someone who voted for AUMF ahead in the polls here.

IMHO Lincoln was pretty ugly, well hell, most of the presidents where not HDTV ready. Too bad that is a modern media trend.

Petrocelli @131:

C’mon guys…Ow! My arm!

Oh, figurative “arm twisting”. It makes you wonder what else he can be talked into doing.

I wonder how many people would click the “other” candidate button if “Al Gore for instance” was placed after it. Something tells me the results of that poll might be slightly different.

brendan @ 132

Petrocelli @ 131

I guess you missed Kerry’s interview (Time?) where he stated that he(Kerry) and some aides twisted Edwards’ arm to vote ‘Yea’ even though Edwards had serious reservations about it.

Speaks real well of Edwards, huh?

Actually it does, he never came out and blamed others for his vote.

He admitted that it was a mistake and he has done many other progressive things, more than any other current candidate.

brendan @ 126

jayt @ 67

Gore jumps to the top if he enters…

I’d agree with that – but I’ve yet to see *any* sign whatsoever that he plans to do that…

And despite the fact that every presidential “quiz” I’ve taken shows Kucinich with a perfect score for me, I’m being realistic and voting elsewhere.

This is utterly illogical, not “realistic”. In fact, it’s the product of brainwashing. I remember shouting imprecations at the tv in 2004 when I heard a woman in Iowa say they wouldn’t be voting for Dean because Kerry was more “electable”…as if she weren’t participating in an election already. Now you’re saying the same thing. Just vote for Kucinich already. You’ll have enough chance to be “realistic” by voting for Clinton in the general election.

Nice to see someone who voted for AUMF ahead in the polls here.

Please see comments #112 and 120, above.

Oh, and thank you for pointing out that I have no ability to think for myself. I was unaware of that.

Hope this isn’t OT but is election news: dKos reports that Nancy Pelosi will be backing and fundraising for Al Wynn against Donna Edwards. Makes perfect sense, no?

I consider Kucinich to be one of the strongest candidates I’ve seen in a long time. No, he isn’t pretty boy nor Mr. Neanderthal and he can speak in complete sentences and he speaks with logic and his heart which in my mathematics adds up to {{{very strong and powerful}}}.

TJ @ 133

The presidential quiz I took did not include a health care option for single payer. It gave me Kucinich first, Hilary second. I felt like the quiz was rigged to benefit her, because by my measuring of positions, my view is Kucinich first, Edwards second.

I need to make a little score card so I can keep the votes straight.

Praedor Atrebates @ 135

These polls often seem to bring out Edwards as the big winner. Happens that way at DKos as well. Odd how our numbers for Edwards are so at odds with national polls, even of Dems. National polls keep showing Edwards in a relatively weak 3rd place with Hillary (blech) a strong lead.

Is this the normal pundit selection or are we firepups and Dkosers so out of the Dem “mainstream”…?

I have to seriously question the veracity of those polls. I’ve said this before, but it’s true, I don’t know a single person who likes Hillary Clinton. Every Democrat and Independent I’ve talked to (in person) will list her dead last in their choice for Democratic nomination.

I know there are some supporters online here, and I mean no disrespect, but I’m not exaggerating at all with my personal experience.

do-si-do @ 48

BTW, and really just a nitpick, I get bothered by lists that are not alphabetical by last name. I dunno. I guess I read too much into it.

I get way more pissed off, though, if names are completely left off, like Gravel and Paul in their respective races. ;)

It is a little odd that the order of the list happens to be the order of popularity.

I’d be tempted to freep the poll to see whether you can move the poll list by moving the results…

Well, time for my nap, I say.

Praedor Atrebates @ 135

These polls often seem to bring out Edwards as the big winner. Happens that way at DKos as well. Odd how our numbers for Edwards are so at odds with national polls, even of Dems. National polls keep showing Edwards in a relatively weak 3rd place with Hillary (blech) a strong lead.

Is this the normal pundit selection or are we firepups and Dkosers so out of the Dem “mainstream”…?

Yea, this is the wing of the party that is a pain in the ass. NYT

brendan @ 140

Petrocelli @131:

C’mon guys…Ow! My arm!

Oh, figurative “arm twisting”. It makes you wonder what else he can be talked into doing.

Jeez Brendan, it seems as though you’ve never made a mistake in your life.

Secondly, you aren’t suggesting than Edwards caused the Iraq debacle by voting “yea”, are you ?

Praedor Atrebates @ 134

These polls often seem to bring out Edwards as the big winner. Happens that way at DKos as well. Odd how our numbers for Edwards are so at odds with national polls, even of Dems. National polls keep showing Edwards in a relatively weak 3rd place with Hillary (blech) a strong lead.

Is this the normal pundit selection or are we firepups and Dkosers so out of the Dem “mainstream”…?

I think Jane remarked yesterday that the Progressives are “a party within a party”. (Here’s where I make my comment about how, if the Repubs split into two parties, the Progressives could split from the Centrist Democrats, with arguably great advantages to be gained. (D*** sight better media coverage of our view, for one thing!))

Gore…and if he doesn’t come in then i’ll write in Kucinich

tw3k @ 129

Grandma Jo @ 115

I am always amazed at how far Hillary is behind in polls like this (Here and at Kos) and yet is so way far ahead and pulling farther out in the national polls.

I actually was in the Hillary breakout session at YKos, and was more impressed than I expected to be with her. I would be okay (not excited but okay) with her as the nominee. It actuallly upsets me to read so much Hillary Hate in the commments… especially at Kos. It is like they have swallowed whole the what the right has to say about her.

For me, it is what she says that I do not like coupled with her crowning by the MSM.

I don’t hate her. She just isn’t what I was told a Democrat is about. I was always told the Democrat is always looking out for the little guy(maybe not as much anymore, but more so than any Republican). Hillary and the DLC are basically moderate Republicanism. NAFTA and the like. And what was with the HoJo/Kyl vote? We don’t need to hand The Decider any more blank checks. Why didn’t she read the NIE before the Iraq war? Why would she even give O’Hanlon the time of day as far as a position(re. foreign policy)?

Do we get to write in Christy and/or Jane? How about Marcy for Chief Inspector General, or Greenwald for AG?

Peanut for First Child.

Praedor Atrebates @ 135

These polls often seem to bring out Edwards as the big winner. Happens that way at DKos as well. Odd how our numbers for Edwards are so at odds with national polls, even of Dems. National polls keep showing Edwards in a relatively weak 3rd place with Hillary (blech) a strong lead.

Is this the normal pundit selection or are we firepups and Dkosers so out of the Dem “mainstream”…?

I’ve always have felt the “Dem” has shifted right. IMHO

dakine01 @ 136

SufiLizard @ 130

Actually, if what the right had to say about her was true I would be a big fan. The problem is they portray her as some flaming liberal, when in actuality (it seems to me at least) she’s the most Republican of all the Democratic candidates.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion, and honestly I hope you’re right, because it looks like she may be our nominee; but the criticism of Hillary from the right is completely different than the criticism from the left.

It may not BE the same between the left and right but it often SOUNDS the same with the levels of vituperative noise generated about her.

as the new president picked her way through the smoldering cinders of tehran….

Out of curiosity… Why are there an “Other” button selection and a “None of the Above” selection? Aren’t those basically the same thing as it applies to this list and the framing of the question?

Should we just add the two together to determine that true number? If so, “Other – None of the Above” is beating every candidate but Edwards and is tied with Obama.

That’s saying something!

amazona@143

how shocking that pelousy is backing al wynn……………. NOT

Petrocelli @ 141

brendan @ 132

Speaks real well of Edwards, huh?

Actually it does, he never came out and blamed others for his vote.

He admitted that it was a mistake and he has done many other progressive things, more than any other current candidate.

He was pretty good on CSPAN the other day.

brendan @ 132

Petrocelli @ 131

I guess you missed Kerry’s interview (Time?) where he stated that he(Kerry) and some aides twisted Edwards’ arm to vote ‘Yea’ even though Edwards had serious reservations about it.

Speaks real well of Edwards, huh?

So you’d rather have Clinton? Who is not sorry one bit? Don’t you think Edwards could have learned from his mistake? Don’t you think Kennedy learned from Bay of Pigs?

Jane, you rock! I printed and faxed the whole thing to them, after calling back and telling the aide to expect it.

jayt @142:

I apologize for the “brainwashing” remark. I said it as a recovering victim of brainwashing myself. I stand by the “illogical”, though. By the way, that thing you don’t trust about his eyes: beadiness.

So the “Other/None of the Above” candidate has just pulled ahead of Obama and is now running a distant second to John Edwards.

Steady kiddo.

lahoma

tw3k @ 154

Praedor Atrebates @ 135

These polls often seem to bring out Edwards as the big winner. Happens that way at DKos as well. Odd how our numbers for Edwards are so at odds with national polls, even of Dems. National polls keep showing Edwards in a relatively weak 3rd place with Hillary (blech) a strong lead.

Is this the normal pundit selection or are we firepups and Dkosers so out of the Dem “mainstream”…?

I’ve always have felt the “Dem” has shifted right. IMHO

If you ever look at those poll internals(the national ones), Obama and Edwards lead when you look at high information voters(meaning they are paying attention). Clinton leads because so many people aren’t paying attention yet. As you can guess, most people here are high info voters.

Praedor Atrebates @ 135

These polls often seem to bring out Edwards as the big winner. Happens that way at DKos as well. Odd how our numbers for Edwards are so at odds with national polls, even of Dems. National polls keep showing Edwards in a relatively weak 3rd place with Hillary (blech) a strong lead.

Is this the normal pundit selection or are we firepups and Dkosers so out of the Dem “mainstream”…?

A similar thing happened with Kerry in the last election. He didn’t have much name recognition going for him either. At least Hillary has that. Kerry was flat on his face and guess what, emerges the Golden Boy. How, I still ask?

Joe Klein’s conscience @ 151

tw3k @ 129

For me, it is what she says that I do not like coupled with her crowning by the MSM.

I don’t hate her. She just isn’t what I was told a Democrat is about. I was always told the Democrat is always looking out for the little guy(maybe not as much anymore, but more so than any Republican). Hillary and the DLC are basically moderate Republicanism. NAFTA and the like. And what was with the HoJo/Kyl vote? We don’t need to hand The Decider any more blank checks. Why didn’t she read the NIE before the Iraq war? Why would she even give O’Hanlon the time of day as far as a position(re. foreign policy)?

At one time there was a lot of overlap between the parties. You had the conservative R out on the right and the liberal D out on the left but the “moderate” D was comparable to the liberal R and the conservative D was comparable to the “moderate” R.

Now? Not so much.

scarecrow @ 153

Do we get to write in Christy and/or Jane? How about Marcy for Chief Inspector General, or Greenwald for AG?

Peanut for First Child.

In the primary, if it is wrapped up by the time it gets to PA, I am going to write in Feingold.

brendan says
October 12th, 2007 at 12:35 pm

S’all cool. I enjoy a spirited thread.

Joe Klein’s conscience @ 151

tw3k @ 129

For me, it is what she says that I do not like coupled with her crowning by the MSM.

I don’t hate her. She just isn’t what I was told a Democrat is about. I was always told the Democrat is always looking out for the little guy(maybe not as much anymore, but more so than any Republican). Hillary and the DLC are basically moderate Republicanism. NAFTA and the like. And what was with the HoJo/Kyl vote? We don’t need to hand The Decider any more blank checks. Why didn’t she read the NIE before the Iraq war? Why would she even give O’Hanlon the time of day as far as a position(re. foreign policy)?

And as evasive as her answers are as a candidate what will they be when she enters the Unitary Executive. She doesn’t seem to favor restoring balance.

Someone is using her laptop on the wifi I notice. ;0)

scarecrow @ 153

Do we get to write in Christy and/or Jane? How about Marcy for Chief Inspector General, or Greenwald for AG?

Peanut for First Child.

w00t, and a big LOL at First Child.

juslin @ 157

amazona@143

how shocking that pelousy is backing al wynn……………. NOT

steny pelosi
harry hoyer
nancy reid

stir

enjoy cream of bleat

sighhhh – feingold was my choice but he backed out early its difficult to really get behind the people running…tho i’ll stand with dodd – yeah he’s not in the top tier but votes haven’t been cast in primaries as yet…

Here’s what Gore said,

“In Africa there’s a proverb that says ‘if you want to go quickly, go alone. If you want to go far, go together’, we have to go far, quickly.”

FWIW.

Petrocelli @ 149

brendan @ 140

Petrocelli @131:

C’mon guys…Ow! My arm!

Oh, figurative “arm twisting”. It makes you wonder what else he can be talked into doing.

Jeez Brendan, it seems as though you’ve never made a mistake in your life.

Secondly, you aren’t suggesting than Edwards caused the Iraq debacle by voting “yea”, are you ?

Not the kind of mistake that got hundreds of thousands of people killed.

You’re not suggesting that as a U.S. Senator he didn’t “cause” the Iraq debacle, are you?

Look, this argument is admittedly a little pointless. I’ll vote for Clinton, Edwards, whoever the Democrats nominate. But I have a right to be a little appalled that the AUMF vote was not only not disqualifying, but that two of three frontrunners voted for it.

Joe Klein’s conscience @ 164

tw3k @ 154

I’ve always have felt the “Dem” has shifted right. IMHO

If you ever look at those poll internals(the national ones), Obama and Edwards lead when you look at high information voters(meaning they are paying attention). Clinton leads because so many people aren’t paying attention yet. As you can guess, most people here are high info voters.

Yup :/ and MSM is just drilling the point.

In addition to his other good qualities, I think electing a Nobel Peace Prize winner would do a heck of a lot of good in repudiating the darkness of the past six years and restoring America’s reputation in the world.

scarlet p. @ 44

gotta hit the road now – people of LA, keep an eye open this afternoon on the freeways.

Read your ‘adventures’ post. Loved it! Job well done. I thank you for your devotion to the cause.

I voted for Edwards, as I don’t believe Gore is getting into the race.

Petrocelli @ 92

I’m aghast that no one has said this as yet … Run Jane Run ! *g*

if only!

LS @ 174

Here’s what Gore said,

“In Africa there’s a proverb that says ‘if you want to go quickly, go alone. If you want to go far, go together’, we have to go far, quickly.”

FWIW.

Damn I love Gore. I don’t believe he’ll enter but if he did…

My vote in the poll was functionally useless. I’m in Indiana and by the time the primary goes through here the candidates will essentially be selected.

I HATE the primary system we have and want a national primary so Iowa and New Hampshire don’t get to choose for everyone else every friggin time.

SufiLizard @ 82,

The reason is that positions on the issues are only one part of what it takes to be an effective president.

I recall an early debate where Kucinich effectively and devastatingly answered a question on health care, explaining clearly why his concept, basically Medicare for all, beat the pants off of what Edwards was proposing (and he’s right). He gave several other answers along the same line. Then he started doing a geeky little dance, like a marionette, crying out “Look! No strings! No strings!” You see, he’s the candidate with no strings on him. But he often comes across like a severe Asperger’s case, a geeky person who has no idea how he comes across. One moment he’s spot on, the next he’s a severe embarrassment. You kind of fear what will happen if a person like that is in charge, and how he will be able to effectively negotiate. The answer, I think, is that he won’t be able to; he’s good at being right, he’s not good at connecting to the unpersuaded. He would make Jimmy Carter look like an effective president (Carter was a good man with his heart in the right place, but he was a very ineffective president).

I chose Edwards on the poll, despite having some problems with him and despite that I agree more with Kucinich, because I think he has the other attributes needed to lead, and to get the country to start giving a damn about the poor.

Aravir @ 179

I voted for Edwards, as I don’t believe Gore is getting into the race.

Maybe it’s just me but if people make assumptions about him, correctly or not, and then in polls according to their assumptions… How is the guy ever going to get convinced to jump in to the race?

Nate @ 156

Out of curiosity… Why are there an “Other” button selection and a “None of the Above” selection? Aren’t those basically the same thing as it applies to this list and the framing of the question?

Should we just add the two together to determine that true number? If so, “Other – None of the Above” is beating every candidate but Edwards and is tied with Obama.

That’s saying something!

It says (in part) that there are some who endeavor to be contrarian and demonstrate their maverick attitude in said selection. Such individuals may be thusly compelled to waste their votes in a poll, whereas in a voting booth, they would make an actual selection.

None of the above can be good if any Freepers come around. Freepers could skew the poll in odd ways otherwise.

dakine01 @ 166

Joe Klein’s conscience @ 151

I don’t hate her. She just isn’t what I was told a Democrat is about. I was always told the Democrat is always looking out for the little guy(maybe not as much anymore, but more so than any Republican). Hillary and the DLC are basically moderate Republicanism. NAFTA and the like. And what was with the HoJo/Kyl vote? We don’t need to hand The Decider any more blank checks. Why didn’t she read the NIE before the Iraq war? Why would she even give O’Hanlon the time of day as far as a position(re. foreign policy)?

At one time there was a lot of overlap between the parties. You had the conservative R out on the right and the liberal D out on the left but the “moderate” D was comparable to the liberal R and the conservative D was comparable to the “moderate” R.

Now? Not so much.

And all the years of stupid wedge issue voting.

Now we have a former president and a Vice-President who have won the Nobel. And incidentally, both are Democrats. Gee, I’m proud to be a Dem today.

Congratulations Jane, Christy, and Firepups!

You drew blood (metaphorical) from a Bush Dog.

You have real poltical clout –

Congrats on your good work for a good cause.

I say “were” because Baron Hill is changing his vote and coming down on the side of helping sick kids. Good for him!

LS @ 174

Here’s what Gore said,

“In Africa there’s a proverb that says ‘if you want to go quickly, go alone. If you want to go far, go together’, we have to go far, quickly.”

FWIW.

Bush, on the other hand, said “If you fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice and…err…uhmm…ahem………..I wont be fooled again.”

Hillary comes across a politician in the worst sense, not the best. She makes deals with the devil because she believes it is in HER interest and she, once again, knows what’s best for the people.

I’d like to hear a politician speak about represent the vast majority of Americans and not THEIR vision of how it should be.

There are some bad players which have arisen to enormous power and quasi legitimacy. This needs to disassembled.. the MIC, the insurance industry… the financial sector, Pharma and so on. But to say that is unamerican. She thinks she can keep these in check. No way. They need to be busted apart and replaced, de novo. We went off on the wrong track and these corporations are in competition with the needs of the people and are winning every time.

You can’t fight city hall. That’s Hill.

I want a more radical and progressive candidate not a corporatist light.

juslin @ 173

sighhhh – feingold was my choice but he backed out early its difficult to really get behind the people running…tho i’ll stand with dodd – yeah he’s not in the top tier but votes haven’t been cast in primaries as yet…

Good for you! I think everyone should go with the candidate who most inspires them, and not be influenced by who they think is likely to win. There’ll be plenty of time for that later.

Praedor Atrebates @ 181

LS @ 174

Here’s what Gore said,

“In Africa there’s a proverb that says ‘if you want to go quickly, go alone. If you want to go far, go together’, we have to go far, quickly.”

FWIW.

Damn I love Gore. I don’t believe he’ll enter but if he did…

My vote in the poll was functionally useless. I’m in Indiana and by the time the primary goes through here the candidates will essentially be selected.

I HATE the primary system we have and want a national primary so Iowa and New Hampshire don’t get to choose for everyone else every friggin time.

If we had a “national primary”, no candidate would get 50% plus 1 of the necessary delegates. The end result would be back to someone brokering a nominee in the “smoke filled backrooms” which is kinda what the primaries were supposed to do away with.

Iowa has been the lead-off caucus state because Jimmy Carter figured out how to campaign there and used that as a springboard to the NH primary which he won.

NH is the first primary because of the tradition that the elected president for every election from Eisenhower thru today, except for Big Dog in ‘92, has won the NH primary. It is also their state law. Mainly because the folks in Iowa and NH force the canidates to respond as individuals to individuals and not act only as cyphers hiding behind TV ads and advance people all the time.

I voted “other” meaning Gore also. If he does not run, I would choose Edwards with Dodd coming up close behind.

If either Clinton or Obama get the nomination, we’re screwed. Clinton is too connected to big money corporate donars. I don’t like her hawkish stance. She’s smart and powerful I’ll admit, and if it were a different kind of time, I’d probably back her. But not in these times.

Obama seems to lack any real substance – he’s a play it to the crowd kind of guy who showed what he was made of during the Sammy Alito nomination. While he did eventually join the filibuster, he hung back and positioned himself strategically and trashed his own party on the Sunday morning shows – while guys like Senator Feingold were just standing up and doing the right thing.

Joe Klein’s conscience @ 159

brendan @ 132

Speaks real well of Edwards, huh?

So you’d rather have Clinton? Who is not sorry one bit? Don’t you think Edwards could have learned from his mistake? Don’t you think Kennedy learned from Bay of Pigs?

They’re both skilled professional politicians, and I don’t say that to be disparaging. Edwards has tacked left out of political necessity. Clinton is the establishment. As far as advertised policies go, to me they’re interchangeable empty vessels that it’s up to us as voters, lobbyists, citizens and constituents to fill with less noxious content than heretofore. If I stick to thinking of them as merely politicians, I can even almost forgive them their war votes, but I’d still like to reserve some contempt for them as human beings.

kirk murphy @ 187

Congratulations Jane, Christy, and Firepups!

You drew blood (metaphorical) from a Bush Dog.

You have real poltical clout –

Congrats on your good work for a good cause.

I say “were” because Baron Hill is changing his vote and coming down on the side of helping sick kids. Good for him!

w00t!

The numbers are telling the tale.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 186

Now we have a former president and a Vice-President who have won the Nobel. And incidentally, both are Democrats. Gee, I’m proud to be a Dem today.

And a current president who really likes using dynamite.

brendan @ 196

Oklahoma kiddo @ 186

Now we have a former president and a Vice-President who have won the Nobel. And incidentally, both are Democrats. Gee, I’m proud to be a Dem today.

And a current president who really likes using dynamite.

Dyn-O-Mite!

dakine01 @ 191

Praedor Atrebates @ 181

Damn I love Gore. I don’t believe he’ll enter but if he did…

My vote in the poll was functionally useless. I’m in Indiana and by the time the primary goes through here the candidates will essentially be selected.

I HATE the primary system we have and want a national primary so Iowa and New Hampshire don’t get to choose for everyone else every friggin time.

If we had a “national primary”, no candidate would get 50% plus 1 of the necessary delegates. The end result would be back to someone brokering a nominee in the “smoke filled backrooms” which is kinda what the primaries were supposed to do away with.

Iowa has been the lead-off caucus state because Jimmy Carter figured out how to campaign there and used that as a springboard to the NH primary which he won.

NH is the first primary because of the tradition that the elected president for every election from Eisenhower thru today, except for Big Dog in ‘92, has won the NH primary. It is also their state law. Mainly because the folks in Iowa and NH force the canidates to respond as individuals to individuals and not act only as cyphers hiding behind TV ads and advance people all the time.

How about dumping the delegates the way the electoral college should be dumped and award based on straight percentage vote? Highest percent wins that state.

If you wish, give each state 10 votes. The votes are awarded to each candidate proportional to how they polled in the primary in that state. At the end, highest vote count wins.

The poll should have been set up as an instant run off or some other type of voting and should have included Gore.

Redshift @ 190

juslin @ 173

sighhhh – feingold was my choice but he backed out early its difficult to really get behind the people running…tho i’ll stand with dodd – yeah he’s not in the top tier but votes haven’t been cast in primaries as yet…

Good for you! I think everyone should go with the candidate who most inspires them, and not be influenced by who they think is likely to win. There’ll be plenty of time for that later.

Amen!

nobel prize?
what’s that?
he’s the guy who invented the cure for polio.

now gore is claiming he cured polio?

(imagined conversation in the frozen food section by joe.q. public and jane. q. public proving yet again why tehran should be reduced to rubble)

SanderO @ 189

Hillary comes across a politician in the worst sense, not the best. She makes deals with the devil because she believes it is in HER interest and she, once again, knows what’s best for the people.

I’d like to hear a politician speak about represent the vast majority of Americans and not THEIR vision of how it should be.

There are some bad players which have arisen to enormous power and quasi legitimacy. This needs to disassembled.. the MIC, the insurance industry… the financial sector, Pharma and so on. But to say that is unamerican. She thinks she can keep these in check. No way. They need to be busted apart and replaced, de novo. We went off on the wrong track and these corporations are in competition with the needs of the people and are winning every time.

You can’t fight city hall. That’s Hill.

I want a more radical and progressive candidate not a corporatist light.

I agree. You speak many truths and you have articulated these points beautifully.

Joe Buck @ 182

SufiLizard @ 82,

The reason is that positions on the issues are only one part of what it takes to be an effective president.

…

I chose Edwards on the poll, despite having some problems with him and despite that I agree more with Kucinich, because I think he has the other attributes needed to lead, and to get the country to start giving a damn about the poor.

Well said. I like a lot of Kucinich’s positions, but I’ve never been inclined to support him, not because of the conventional wisdom that “he can’t win,” but because I didn’t feel like he had much ability to get them enacted.

It has been said that the Republicans have written off the ‘black vote’. Perhaps certain elements within the Demcratic Party have written off the progressive vote.

dakine01 @ 191

Praedor Atrebates @ 181

Damn I love Gore. I don’t believe he’ll enter but if he did…

My vote in the poll was functionally useless. I’m in Indiana and by the time the primary goes through here the candidates will essentially be selected.

I HATE the primary system we have and want a national primary so Iowa and New Hampshire don’t get to choose for everyone else every friggin time.

If we had a “national primary”, no candidate would get 50% plus 1 of the necessary delegates. The end result would be back to someone brokering a nominee in the “smoke filled backrooms” which is kinda what the primaries were supposed to do away with.

Iowa has been the lead-off caucus state because Jimmy Carter figured out how to campaign there and used that as a springboard to the NH primary which he won.

NH is the first primary because of the tradition that the elected president for every election from Eisenhower thru today, except for Big Dog in ‘92, has won the NH primary. It is also their state law. Mainly because the folks in Iowa and NH force the canidates to respond as individuals to individuals and not act only as cyphers hiding behind TV ads and advance people all the time.

It sure would be nice to have a vote that counts in the primary…

with the MSM selling HRC… methinks she might not do as well as MSM is predicting – these polls are soooo media driven

Praedor Atrebates says
October 12th, 2007 at 12:44 pm

I HATE the primary system we have and want a national primary so Iowa and New Hampshire don’t get to choose for everyone else every friggin time.

What the heck’s wrong with you, man? Next thing – along with a national primary day, you’ll be advocating public financing of elections…

And if That happens, well hell, an ELECTION’s liable to break out.

grumble…where’s my goddamm lapel pin?…grumble.

Mabel’s Wig Shack:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonas_Salk

Mabel’s Wig Shack @ 201

nobel prize?
what’s that?
he’s the guy who invented the cure for polio.

now gore is claiming he cured polio?

(imagined conversation in the frozen food section by joe.q. public and jane. q. public proving yet again why tehran should be reduced to rubble)

LOL !!!

Praedor Atrebates @ 198

dakine01 @ 191

If we had a “national primary”, no candidate would get 50% plus 1 of the necessary delegates. The end result would be back to someone brokering a nominee in the “smoke filled backrooms” which is kinda what the primaries were supposed to do away with.

Iowa has been the lead-off caucus state because Jimmy Carter figured out how to campaign there and used that as a springboard to the NH primary which he won.

NH is the first primary because of the tradition that the elected president for every election from Eisenhower thru today, except for Big Dog in ‘92, has won the NH primary. It is also their state law. Mainly because the folks in Iowa and NH force the canidates to respond as individuals to individuals and not act only as cyphers hiding behind TV ads and advance people all the time.

How about dumping the delegates the way the electoral college should be dumped and award based on straight percentage vote? Highest percent wins that state.

If you wish, give each state 10 votes. The votes are awarded to each candidate proportional to how they polled in the primary in that state. At the end, highest vote count wins.

As far as I’m aware right now, all delegates are distributed proportionally based on the voting per centages assuming a minimum 15% of the vote for any particular candidate. Primaries and delegates won are NOT winner take all as with the electoral college.

Mabel’s Wig Shack:

Oops. Gotcha.

jayt @ 207

Praedor Atrebates says
October 12th, 2007 at 12:44 pm

I HATE the primary system we have and want a national primary so Iowa and New Hampshire don’t get to choose for everyone else every friggin time.

What the heck’s wrong with you, man? Next thing – along with a national primary day, you’ll be advocating public financing of elections…

And if That happens, well hell, an ELECTION’s liable to break out.

grunble…where’s my goddamm lapel pin?…grumble.

get your pin right here

I think this came from LS

If I were to set up the triple poll I mentioned earlier (119), would anyone be interested in participating?

Oklahoma kiddo @ 204

It has been said that the Republicans have written off the ‘black vote’. Perhaps certain elements within the Demcratic Party have written off the progressive vote.

The white leadership of the Democratic Party cares little about fixing voter suppression problems among Afican-Americans and other minorities anywhere outside their own districts.

jayt @ 207

Praedor Atrebates says
October 12th, 2007 at 12:44 pm

I HATE the primary system we have and want a national primary so Iowa and New Hampshire don’t get to choose for everyone else every friggin time.

What the heck’s wrong with you, man? Next thing – along with a national primary day, you’ll be advocating public financing of elections…

And if That happens, well hell, an ELECTION’s liable to break out.

Of course. Silly me. Wouldn’t want THAT.

The neocons are really pushing America with a big stick foreign policy. For whatever reason… hegemony??? they like militarism and aggression. But they have also equating an position other than this as weak, conciliators, wimps, cowards, cut and run you’ve heard them all.

This makes it hard for the opposition to sound like they are anything but defeatist.

They used the “fear” factor and sheepled the people and the MSM is always looking for “sexy” tv.. literally sex and violence to sell their product. Why do we have to have commercially driven TV anyway?

See… there is so much which has gone wrong with unfettered free market capitalism one doesn’t know where to begin. But say anything about taking away someone’s wealth.. and you are being a communist anti American slacker.

We need some very very bold initiatives to get this corrected, not the little BS that we hear from dems today… and certainly from Hill. If you’re not part of the solution, then you’re part of the problem.

juslin @ 206

with the MSM selling HRC… methinks she might not do as well as MSM is predicting – these polls are soooo media driven

The MSM wants Hillary because they will attract more viewers for their endless, sordid stories about her and Bill.

TJ @ 213

If I were to set up the triple poll I mentioned earlier (119), would anyone be interested in participating?

sure!

ok, talking about gore, check this out and then read my comment at the end

Fox News: Gore’s Never ‘Actually Done Something For Peace;’ Give Petraeus The Prize

Fox News And Right-Wing Bloggers Attack Gore’s Nobel Prize
On Fox and Friends this morning, co-host Steve Doocy wasted no time in attacking the announcement that Al Gore has been named a co-winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. “Here’s something extraordinary,” Doocy sarcastically said. “What do Al Gore, Yasser Arafat, and that crazy Jimmy Carter have in common?” Co-host Gretchen Carlson responded, “They all won the Nobel Peace Prize?”

Fox then displayed a chyron of the last few winners of the Nobel Peace Prize, causing another co-host Brian Kilmeade, to complain: “There’s the last five winners — see Mohamed El Baradei. What do they have in common? I don’t know about the 2006 winner, but I will say 2005 and 2007 both anti-Bush.”

The Fox panel then turned its attack on An Inconvenient Truth, noting a recent court ruling by a British judge that Gore’s film should be accompanied by “guidance notes” when shown in schools. That ruling is now being challenged by schools and teachers. After reporting on the British controversy over Gore’s film, Doocy said:

You know, I’m not a scientist. I don’t know if any of that stuff is true. I don’t think any of it’s true. I just know that my daughter watched the movie last week. … [She said Gore] took three shots at George Bush. And my daughter, who’s just 18, was turned off by how it was political. So there you go.

Right-wing bloggers are echoing the same themes in their attack on Gore:

“Look on the bright side: after Arafat, Carter, and Iranian marionette Mohammed ElBaradei, the award couldn’t possibly be more degraded.” – Hot Air’s Allahpundit

“Keeping to the trend of politicized awards, the Nobel Peace Prize has been given jointly to Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” – National Review’s Jay Richards

“The Nobel Prize committee has basically surrendered to hysterics, mass exaggerators, and liars, most of who are not even climatologists or even any type of scientist.” – William Teach at Pirate’s Cove

“I wasn’t even aware that they had a Nobel Prize for deceptive rhetoric.” – Confederate Yankee

“This continues the trend of the Peace Prize being awarded, not for achievements in spreading peace, but to highlight the Committee’s political agenda.” – James Joyner at Outside The Beltway.

you know when a man does not want to fight?

you know how if someone thinks there’s a possibility that man MIGHT fight they try to embarrass him out of that fight?

you know how most of the time that actually MAKES the man fight where before he would not?

I am hoping they KEEP comming after gore, cuz that juuuuust might get him in the fight

I have heard Louis Black ask the question something to the effect of “how f%^& did the Democrats come up with Kerry” If Hilary is the nominee he will be doing the same joke using her name. The one thing guaranteed to unite the fundies, bigots and wingnuts on the right it will be their absolute terror at the idea of her being the president. While it is long past time we had a female president Hillary has far too much baggage to be the one

Even if she manages to win we will just have Bush/Cheney lite. The corporatist and capitalist class will have won.

At this point if you add Obama and Hillary together you get half the votes cast for Edwards.

juslin @ 206

with the MSM selling HRC… methinks she might not do as well as MSM is predicting – these polls are soooo media driven

bah, the whole dam thing is a bright shiny object at point. more n better dems!

feingold/waxman

Any New Yorkers on this site who can give us their sense of Hillary in her state?

I was with three New Yorkers at dinner and I asked them how they felt about Hillary as their senator and as a candidate. They are staunch Democrats, well informed and politically active both in their community and on the national and international scene. All three said she does a great job as senator and like her as the Democratic presidential candidate. All three support her. They have issues but no more or less than with anyone else. So, I listened carefully.

When Hillary was first elected senator of NY these same people were quite displeased with her. Now they are supporters based on her performance.

jayt @ 207

Praedor Atrebates says
October 12th, 2007 at 12:44 pm

I HATE the primary system we have and want a national primary so Iowa and New Hampshire don’t get to choose for everyone else every friggin time.

What the heck’s wrong with you, man? Next thing – along with a national primary day, you’ll be advocating public financing of elections…

And if That happens, well hell, an ELECTION’s liable to break out.

grumble…where’s my goddamm lapel pin?…grumble.

707!

I went to a democracy and an election broke out!

dakine01 @ 191

NH is the first primary because of the tradition that the elected president for every election from Eisenhower thru today, except for Big Dog in ‘92, has won the NH primary. It is also their state law.

No offense, but that justification for NH pretty much requires a time machine. It’s certainly that way because of tradition, but not because the NH winner has won the presidency, since it was established before that happened.

Mainly because the folks in Iowa and NH force the canidates to respond as individuals to individuals and not act only as cyphers hiding behind TV ads and advance people all the time.

Which again provides no justification for why it should always be Iowa and NH. Iowa isn’t even a particularly small state, and lots of the rest of us would like our chance to force the candidates to respond as individuals, rather than assume that people in Iowa and NH are making them respond to our concerns just because they’re dealing with them one-on-one.

Perhaps Hillary will demand a recount.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 79

I would gently suggest the addition to the straw poll of the name ‘Gore’.

I send the motion of my esteemed colleague from Oklahoma.

Redshift @ 226

dakine01 @ 191

NH is the first primary because of the tradition that the elected president for every election from Eisenhower thru today, except for Big Dog in ‘92, has won the NH primary. It is also their state law.

No offense, but that justification for NH pretty much requires a time machine. It’s certainly that way because of tradition, but not because the NH winner has won the presidency, since it was established before that happened.

Mainly because the folks in Iowa and NH force the canidates to respond as individuals to individuals and not act only as cyphers hiding behind TV ads and advance people all the time.

Which again provides no justification for why it should always be Iowa and NH. Iowa isn’t even a particularly small state, and lots of the rest of us would like our chance to force the candidates to respond as individuals, rather than assume that people in Iowa and NH are making them respond to our concerns just because they’re dealing with them one-on-one.

when did the rest of us cede our choice to Iowa & NH?

John @ 220

I have heard Louis Black ask the question something to the effect of “how f%^& did the Democrats come up with Kerry” If Hilary is the nominee he will be doing the same joke using her name. The one thing guaranteed to unite the fundies, bigots and wingnuts on the right it will be their absolute terror at the idea of her being the president. While it is long past time we had a female president Hillary has far too much baggage to be the one

Even if she manages to win we will just have Bush/Cheney lite. The corporatist and capitalist class will have won.

The corporatist and capitalist class run the country. If Dennis Kucinich ever got elected that would be the last election we’d ever have, and Kucinich would end up like Allende. I’ll settle for the stepping stone of “Bush/Cheney lite” in lieu of holding out for shangri-la.

And there’s one big difference between Clinton and Kerry. Clinton will win.

cleter @ 228

Oklahoma kiddo @ 79

I would gently suggest the addition to the straw poll of the name ‘Gore’.

I send the motion of my esteemed colleague from Oklahoma.

Yes, please with sugar on top.

perris @ 219

ok, talking about gore, check this out and then read my comment at the end

you know when a man does not want to fight?

you know how if someone thinks there’s a possibility that man MIGHT fight they try to embarrass him out of that fight?

you know how most of the time that actually MAKES the man fight where before he would not?

I am hoping they KEEP comming after gore, cuz that juuuuust might get him in the fight

That is why and honest fight on your ground would be so gd revolutionary. Just how well Ron paul is doing talking what he thinks.

LS
was that you with the Constitution pins?

dakine01 @ 210

As far as I’m aware right now, all delegates are distributed proportionally based on the voting per centages assuming a minimum 15% of the vote for any particular candidate. Primaries and delegates won are NOT winner take all as with the electoral college.

I’m not sure about the Dems, but from what I was reading (probably on TPM), for the GOP it varies by state. One reason Giuliani may win the nomination is that his strength is in northern states that award winner-take-all, whereas more of the southern states are proportional.

I just can’t stand the mental image involving the tongue piercing. TMI

TJ @ 213

If I were to set up the triple poll I mentioned earlier (119), would anyone be interested in participating?

Yes.

Elliott @ 233

LS
was that you with the Constitution pins?

Yes, I posted it the other day.

brendan @ 230

And there’s one big difference between Clinton and Kerry. Clinton will win.

if the republicans have any chance at all it’s if hilary is the democratic candidate

they are drooling at the mouth for her to run, they trash everyone and anyone else so they don’t have a chance and they are giveing her as much rope as they can so she wins the primary

if hilary is the democratic candidate she might well win but it will be inspite of her not because of her

Redshift @ 226

dakine01 @ 191

NH is the first primary because of the tradition that the elected president for every election from Eisenhower thru today, except for Big Dog in ‘92, has won the NH primary. It is also their state law.

No offense, but that justification for NH pretty much requires a time machine. It’s certainly that way because of tradition, but not because the NH winner has won the presidency, since it was established before that happened.

Mainly because the folks in Iowa and NH force the canidates to respond as individuals to individuals and not act only as cyphers hiding behind TV ads and advance people all the time.

Which again provides no justification for why it should always be Iowa and NH. Iowa isn’t even a particularly small state, and lots of the rest of us would like our chance to force the candidates to respond as individuals, rather than assume that people in Iowa and NH are making them respond to our concerns just because they’re dealing with them one-on-one.

Redshift,
I understand what you are saying but part of the reality is, the current moves to have earlier and earlier primaries and/or caucuses are not being done to give folks like you and me any say in the selection of the party candidates; it is to try to capture what is perceived as the big economic effect of having an early primary.

And there’s no way that states like MI, FL, CA, or NY are actually looking to establish retail level politics which is what NH and IA are all about.

I’m sure some of the other smaller states could do the same retail politics but for all the nay-sayers who decry the two as not reflective of the public at large and the two parties, those people in IA and NH who are active politically really do make a concerted effort to do things correctly.

LS @ 237

Elliott @ 233

LS
was that you with the Constitution pins?

Yes, I posted it the other day.

http://www.pinsforpatriots.com…..lated.html

LS @ 237

Elliott @ 233

LS
was that you with the Constitution pins?

Yes, I posted it the other day.

you always show up with great links, linklady LS

perris @ 219

ok, talking about gore, check this out and then read my comment at the end

Fox News: Gore’s Never ‘Actually Done Something For Peace;’ Give Petraeus The Prize

“I’m starting a war for peace!” — F.R. Gumby, via Monty Python

Please re_do the survey with Gore as a choice.

Edwards is OK , but we really need Gore! Plus, I promise, Gore will be a runaway!!!!!!

Elliott @ 241

LS @ 237

Yes, I posted it the other day.

you always show up with great links, linklady LS

lol

Redshift @ 234

dakine01 @ 210

As far as I’m aware right now, all delegates are distributed proportionally based on the voting per centages assuming a minimum 15% of the vote for any particular candidate. Primaries and delegates won are NOT winner take all as with the electoral college.

I’m not sure about the Dems, but from what I was reading (probably on TPM), for the GOP it varies by state. One reason Giuliani may win the nomination is that his strength is in northern states that award winner-take-all, whereas more of the southern states are proportional.

Unless the Dem rules have been changed significantly (which I doubt) the proportional award of delegates came out of the McGovern commission that reformed the Dem delegate selection process in ‘72

FWIW, Bush also lost the NH primary in 2000. Clinton wasn’t the only one.

Well, 2 Yes is not a resounding result, but I’ll see what I can do. One of the 3 polls will include Gore, for all of you out there suggesting it. (See my comment at 119)

SanderO @ 216

The neocons are really pushing America with a big stick foreign policy. For whatever reason… hegemony??? they like militarism and aggression. But they have also equating an position other than this as weak, conciliators, wimps, cowards, cut and run you’ve heard them all.

This makes it hard for the opposition to sound like they are anything but defeatist.

They used the “fear” factor and sheepled the people and the MSM is always looking for “sexy” tv.. literally sex and violence to sell their product. Why do we have to have commercially driven TV anyway?

See… there is so much which has gone wrong with unfettered free market capitalism one doesn’t know where to begin. But say anything about taking away someone’s wealth.. and you are being a communist anti American slacker.

We need some very very bold initiatives to get this corrected, not the little BS that we hear from dems today… and certainly from Hill. If you’re not part of the solution, then you’re part of the problem.

Can’t tell you how many times I’ve tried to discuss capitalism with active Democratic Party workers. People are so brainwashed and frightened to speak about it much less question it that they clam up and change the topic. It is the forbidden topic. Capitalism is godly. To question capitalism is to question god. I ask what is the premise of capitalism? They have no idea. When I ask what kind of capitalism in particular do they support, I get a blank stair. I’d love to see this topic on this site.

LS @ 235

I just can’t stand the mental image involving the tongue piercing. TMI

… itth noth way-wey painful, omly whem french kiffing …

perris @ 238

brendan @ 230

And there’s one big difference between Clinton and Kerry. Clinton will win.

if the republicans have any chance at all it’s if hilary is the democratic candidate

they are drooling at the mouth for her to run, they trash everyone and anyone else so they don’t have a chance and they are giveing her as much rope as they can so she wins the primary

if hilary is the democratic candidate she might well win but it will be inspite of her not because of her

Hillary Clinton is going to massacre the Republicans. This stuff about her “mobilizing” the Republican base is a big, fat bluff. On the other hand, she will motivate women. And the press will take her side, believe it or not. She’s the establishment candidate.

Elliott @ 229

Redshift @ 226

No offense, but that justification for NH pretty much requires a time machine. It’s certainly that way because of tradition, but not because the NH winner has won the presidency, since it was established before that happened.

Which again provides no justification for why it should always be Iowa and NH. Iowa isn’t even a particularly small state, and lots of the rest of us would like our chance to force the candidates to respond as individuals, rather than assume that people in Iowa and NH are making them respond to our concerns just because they’re dealing with them one-on-one.

when did the rest of us cede our choice to Iowa & NH?

When the reforms to the selection process were first starting to take effect in the ’70s which took the power away from the back room bosses (think Mayor Daly et al) and the primaries started becoming more frequent.

Kucinich is my first choice. I could vote for Edwards without holding my nose.

dakine01 @ 239

Redshift @ 226

No offense, but that justification for NH pretty much requires a time machine. It’s certainly that way because of tradition, but not because the NH winner has won the presidency, since it was established before that happened.

Which again provides no justification for why it should always be Iowa and NH. Iowa isn’t even a particularly small state, and lots of the rest of us would like our chance to force the candidates to respond as individuals, rather than assume that people in Iowa and NH are making them respond to our concerns just because they’re dealing with them one-on-one.

Redshift,
I understand what you are saying but part of the reality is, the current moves to have earlier and earlier primaries and/or caucuses are not being done to give folks like you and me any say in the selection of the party candidates; it is to try to capture what is perceived as the big economic effect of having an early primary.

And there’s no way that states like MI, FL, CA, or NY are actually looking to establish retail level politics which is what NH and IA are all about.

I’m sure some of the other smaller states could do the same retail politics but for all the nay-sayers who decry the two as not reflective of the public at large and the two parties, those people in IA and NH who are active politically really do make a concerted effort to do things correctly.

and to but myself in again, I understand what you’re saying, dakine1, but times have changed and with today’s instant communications and contacts, that kind of retail politics can be nationwide.

cleter @ 246

FWIW, Bush also lost the NH primary in 2000. Clinton wasn’t the only one.

FWIW, Bush also lost both elections …

QuakerGirl @ 224

Any New Yorkers on this site who can give us their sense of Hillary in her state?

I was with three New Yorkers at dinner and I asked them how they felt about Hillary as their senator and as a candidate. They are staunch Democrats, well informed and politically active both in their community and on the national and international scene. All three said she does a great job as senator and like her as the Democratic presidential candidate. All three support her. They have issues but no more or less than with anyone else. So, I listened carefully.

When Hillary was first elected senator of NY these same people were quite displeased with her. Now they are supporters based on her performance.

Some find Hillary’s stance on Middle East policies troubling compared to the Senator’s views on this issue prior to becoming a Senator. And some are disturbed that the Senator finds campaign money from many of the same interests as does Joe Lieberman.

As a New Yorker she is OK as a senator. She’s not an embarrassment like Al D’Amato or Rick Lazio might have been. But she’s no Bernie Sanders, or Paul Wellstone.

She’s too established inside the establishment.

Fems like the fact of gal power. And that is fine. But her ideas are way more important than her gender.

Who will be the first to take down the “system” to be “anti establishment”?

I’m from the old school of progressives. The problems run real deep. And require some painful surgery.

QuakerGirl @ 248

Can’t tell you how many times I’ve tried to discuss capitalism with active Democratic Party workers. People are so brainwashed and frightened to speak about it much less question it that they clam up and change the topic. It is the forbidden topic. Capitalism is godly. To question capitalism is to question god. I ask what is the premise of capitalism? They have no idea. When I ask what kind of capitalism in particular do they support, I get a blank stair. I’d love to see this topic on this site.

That is true.

QuakerGirl @248:

Tula O’Connell’s posts are relevant.

Brendan@230 “And there’s one big difference between Clinton and Kerry. Clinton will win.”

I hope you are correct; just don’t agree;)

Some of us, myself included, would have walked across live coals for HRC to be elected president a few years ago. Things are much different now.

Elliott @ 253

dakine01 @ 239

Redshift,
I understand what you are saying but part of the reality is, the current moves to have earlier and earlier primaries and/or caucuses are not being done to give folks like you and me any say in the selection of the party candidates; it is to try to capture what is perceived as the big economic effect of having an early primary.

And there’s no way that states like MI, FL, CA, or NY are actually looking to establish retail level politics which is what NH and IA are all about.

I’m sure some of the other smaller states could do the same retail politics but for all the nay-sayers who decry the two as not reflective of the public at large and the two parties, those people in IA and NH who are active politically really do make a concerted effort to do things correctly.

and to but myself in again, I understand what you’re saying, dakine1, but times have changed and with today’s instant communications and contacts, that kind of retail politics can be nationwide.

Sorry elliott, but I have to disagree. The whole aspect of the “retail politics” as practiced in IA and NH is getting the candidate away from the national scene and handlers and TV crews and forcing them into the living rooms for the small, one-on-one get-togethers. If everything is national, that personal touch is lost.

Petrocelli @ 249

LS @ 235

I just can’t stand the mental image involving the tongue piercing. TMI

… itth noth way-wey painful, omly whem french kiffing …

lol!! Thumthig like kthat…ith the igea kthat ith mither and mithith Kuthinith in inthimath momenths…shudder

LS @ 244

Elliott @ 241

you always show up with great links, linklady LS

lol

speaking of great pins, constitutional theme,
c&l has this cut and paste from the new york times

NY Times: (h/t Rachel Maddow)

The way Representative John Yarmuth of Kentucky sees it, lawmakers on Capitol Hill and Americans everywhere have forgotten who the Founding Fathers really intended to run the country — not the President who was more of a Constitutional after-thought but the Congress, the people’s elected representatives.

Mr. Yarmuth said he and many of the 41 other freshman Democrats in the House had been puzzling for some time over just how to remind voters of this, how to mold a most basic lesson of American civics so that it could be carried far and wide by the modern techniques of political messaging. And then an idea struck.

Today, on the House floor, Mr. Yarmuth began distributing small buttons, seemingly made of parchment, with the words, “Article 1″ – as in Article 1 of the Constitution, which states, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

In other words: Mr. President, the Congress would like to remind you, that you, dear pal, are Article 2.

bold is mine

now the democrats have to BRUTALIZE anyone that doesn’t want to wear THAT pin

combine that with the pin you posted and man, hard to beat

John @ 259

Brendan@230 “And there’s one big difference between Clinton and Kerry. Clinton will win.”

I hope you are correct; just don’t agree;)

Yes, this time the Northeastern senator with the complicated, hard to explain past will absolutely triumph! Let’s keep trying that until it works!

dakine01 @ 261

Elliott @ 253

and to but myself in again, I understand what you’re saying, dakine1, but times have changed and with today’s instant communications and contacts, that kind of retail politics can be nationwide.

Sorry elliott, but I have to disagree. The whole aspect of the “retail politics” as practiced in IA and NH is getting the candidate away from the national scene and handlers and TV crews and forcing them into the living rooms for the small, one-on-one get-togethers. If everything is national, that personal touch is lost.

Ok, I’ll agree there’s no substitute for human contact, but then that takes me back to: I don’t want them to be the deciders. I want a say for a change.

perris @ 263

LS @ 244

lol

speaking of great pins, constitutional theme,
c&l has this cut and paste from the new york times

NY Times: (h/t Rachel Maddow)

The way Representative John Yarmuth of Kentucky sees it, lawmakers on Capitol Hill and Americans everywhere have forgotten who the Founding Fathers really intended to run the country — not the President who was more of a Constitutional after-thought but the Congress, the people’s elected representatives.

Mr. Yarmuth said he and many of the 41 other freshman Democrats in the House had been puzzling for some time over just how to remind voters of this, how to mold a most basic lesson of American civics so that it could be carried far and wide by the modern techniques of political messaging. And then an idea struck.

Today, on the House floor, Mr. Yarmuth began distributing small buttons, seemingly made of parchment, with the words, “Article 1″ – as in Article 1 of the Constitution, which states, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

In other words: Mr. President, the Congress would like to remind you, that you, dear pal, are Article 2.

bold is mine

now the democrats have to BRUTALIZE anyone that doesn’t want to wear THAT pin

combine that with the pin you posted and man, hard to beat

Yeah! One for each lapel.

Redshift @ 242

perris @ 219

ok, talking about gore, check this out and then read my comment at the end

“I’m starting a war for peace!” — F.R. Gumby, via Monty Python

as think progress already noted, the award has specific guidelines which include DECREAESING military personel

petraus fails every test for this award

The prize for peace was to be awarded to the person who “shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding of peace congresses.”

LS @ 262

Petrocelli @ 249

… itth noth way-wey painful, omly whem french kiffing …

lol!! Thumthig like kthat…ith the igea kthat ith mither and mithith Kuthinith in inthimath momenths…shudder

lol! omg thath issh teh phhuuunnnieeee

QuakerGirl,

My recently deceased brother in law was an Italian who was an intellectual leader of the Refundazione, which was the “new” communist party. We had many many talks about capitalism and class struggle and so forth. Workers in the EU at least understand how the system works. Here people only want some material comfort and a fair shake. They don’t want to understand that they are a cog in a very big and ugly system.

But the capitalists are fine keeping the big picture out of the discussion. They’re about maxing out the system for THEIR needs. And they are doing it. Workers can win in capitalism.

Let me repeat:

Workers can’t win in capitalism.

perris @ 263

LS @ 244

lol

speaking of great pins, constitutional theme,
c&l has this cut and paste from the new york times

NY Times: (h/t Rachel Maddow)

The way Representative John Yarmuth of Kentucky sees it, lawmakers on Capitol Hill and Americans everywhere have forgotten who the Founding Fathers really intended to run the country — not the President who was more of a Constitutional after-thought but the Congress, the people’s elected representatives.

Mr. Yarmuth said he and many of the 41 other freshman Democrats in the House had been puzzling for some time over just how to remind voters of this, how to mold a most basic lesson of American civics so that it could be carried far and wide by the modern techniques of political messaging. And then an idea struck.

Today, on the House floor, Mr. Yarmuth began distributing small buttons, seemingly made of parchment, with the words, “Article 1″ – as in Article 1 of the Constitution, which states, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

In other words: Mr. President, the Congress would like to remind you, that you, dear pal, are Article 2.

bold is mine

now the democrats have to BRUTALIZE anyone that doesn’t want to wear THAT pin

combine that with the pin you posted and man, hard to beat

I’d like to see that! :)

don’t don’t don’t believe the hype….HRH is NOT a shoo-in – i don’t care what the MSM says…and bushco announced that she’s the dem nominee…..ohh my god

I suppose I’m an anachronism. A fuddy-duddy if you will. I subscribe to the quaint Carter notion that principle trumps pragmatism.

LS @ 266

perris @ 263

speaking of great pins, constitutional theme,
c&l has this cut and paste from the new york times

bold is mine

now the democrats have to BRUTALIZE anyone that doesn’t want to wear THAT pin

combine that with the pin you posted and man, hard to beat

Yeah! One for each lapel.

And one for the tongue! To stick it out at dubya.

tw3k @ 273

LS @ 266

Yeah! One for each lapel.

And one for the tongue! To stick it out at dubya.

yeth!

dakine01 @ 239

Redshift,
I understand what you are saying but part of the reality is, the current moves to have earlier and earlier primaries and/or caucuses are not being done to give folks like you and me any say in the selection of the party candidates; it is to try to capture what is perceived as the big economic effect of having an early primary.

And there’s no way that states like MI, FL, CA, or NY are actually looking to establish retail level politics which is what NH and IA are all about.

I’m sure some of the other smaller states could do the same retail politics but for all the nay-sayers who decry the two as not reflective of the public at large and the two parties, those people in IA and NH who are active politically really do make a concerted effort to do things correctly.

Fair enough. I can accept a perfect-as-the-enemy-of-the-good argument, that any change that’s likely to happen won’t be better. I just get tired of all the attempts to justify Iowa and NH as if they’re somehow better at choosing candidates, and are speaking for all of us, rather than their own interests.

SanderO @ 256

As a New Yorker she is OK as a senator. She’s not an embarrassment like Al D’Amato or Rick Lazio might have been. But she’s no Bernie Sanders, or Paul Wellstone.

She’s too established inside the establishment.

Fems like the fact of gal power. And that is fine. But her ideas are way more important than her gender.

Who will be the first to take down the “system” to be “anti establishment”?

I’m from the old school of progressives. The problems run real deep. And require some painful surgery.

Maybe rather than “painful surgery” (like grafting Dennis Kucinich’s head onto the body politic?) it requires long treatment and rehabilitation.

Elliott @ 274

tw3k @ 273

And one for the tongue! To stick it out at dubya.

yeth!

lol

Quick drive-by, haven’t read the comments.

Gore won’t run.
I’m for Edwards, for now.
Probably will vote for the Dem candidate, although I’m fed up with our current crop of spineless congresscritters.

Back to my desk.

Petrocelli @ 249

LS @ 235

I just can’t stand the mental image involving the tongue piercing. TMI

… itth noth way-wey painful, omly whem french kiffing …

Please keep the flag pin, Article 1 pin, and Constitution pin on your lapel! ;)

Elliott @ 274

tw3k @ 273

And one for the tongue! To stick it out at dubya.

yeth!

Maybe the tongue pin should be a Phlageth.

brendan @ 276

SanderO @ 256

As a New Yorker she is OK as a senator. She’s not an embarrassment like Al D’Amato or Rick Lazio might have been. But she’s no Bernie Sanders, or Paul Wellstone.

She’s too established inside the establishment.

Fems like the fact of gal power. And that is fine. But her ideas are way more important than her gender.

Who will be the first to take down the “system” to be “anti establishment”?

I’m from the old school of progressives. The problems run real deep. And require some painful surgery.

Maybe rather than “painful surgery” (like grafting Dennis Kucinich’s head onto the body politic?) it requires long treatment and rehabilitation.

Well the initial surgery would be HDTV material!

LS @ 280

Elliott @ 274

yeth!

Maybe the tongue pin should be a Phlageth.

“don’t you be sticking your flag out at me, young lady!”

I don’t see a link to choices. Am I missing something?

Redshift @ 275

dakine01 @ 239

Redshift,
I understand what you are saying but part of the reality is, the current moves to have earlier and earlier primaries and/or caucuses are not being done to give folks like you and me any say in the selection of the party candidates; it is to try to capture what is perceived as the big economic effect of having an early primary.

And there’s no way that states like MI, FL, CA, or NY are actually looking to establish retail level politics which is what NH and IA are all about.

I’m sure some of the other smaller states could do the same retail politics but for all the nay-sayers who decry the two as not reflective of the public at large and the two parties, those people in IA and NH who are active politically really do make a concerted effort to do things correctly.

Fair enough. I can accept a perfect-as-the-enemy-of-the-good argument, that any change that’s likely to happen won’t be better. I just get tired of all the attempts to justify Iowa and NH as if they’re somehow better at choosing candidates, and are speaking for all of us, rather than their own interests.

Also, this notion that Iowa and New Hampshire somehow effectively counter the money establishment isn’t true any more, if it ever was. Patrick Buchanan and John McCain won New Hampshire, but we know the rest.

msmolly @ 278

Quick drive-by, haven’t read the comments.

Gore won’t run.
I’m for Edwards, for now.
Probably will vote for the Dem candidate, although I’m fed up with our current crop of spineless congresscritters.

Back to my desk.

carter disagrees

Carter: ‘No doubt’ Gore is the best qualified person for president David Edwards and Jason Rhyne
Published: Friday October 12, 2007

del.icio.us

Print This Email This

Nobel Peace Prize laureate Jimmy Carter hopes that the newest addition to the exclusive Nobel club — Al Gore — might capitalize on his prize win by making a late entry into the 2008 presidential race.

aqui

The unitary executive has made congress a rubber stamp at best.

Congress has given away the people’s power to the executive branch.

The war powers act is not worth the paper it is written on… is it?

LS @ 280

Elliott @ 274

yeth!

Maybe the tongue pin should be a Phlageth.

It would be a prize for an answer to the flag lapel q.

When do the polls close?

Ask the Rovians… or the Randians… or the AEI or one of them groups who pull the puppet strings.

Redshift @ 275

dakine01 @ 239

Redshift,
I understand what you are saying but part of the reality is, the current moves to have earlier and earlier primaries and/or caucuses are not being done to give folks like you and me any say in the selection of the party candidates; it is to try to capture what is perceived as the big economic effect of having an early primary.

And there’s no way that states like MI, FL, CA, or NY are actually looking to establish retail level politics which is what NH and IA are all about.

I’m sure some of the other smaller states could do the same retail politics but for all the nay-sayers who decry the two as not reflective of the public at large and the two parties, those people in IA and NH who are active politically really do make a concerted effort to do things correctly.

Fair enough. I can accept a perfect-as-the-enemy-of-the-good argument, that any change that’s likely to happen won’t be better. I just get tired of all the attempts to justify Iowa and NH as if they’re somehow better at choosing candidates, and are speaking for all of us, rather than their own interests.

I don’t think folks actually claim they are better at the picking, just far more experienced at the process, which is what makes them feel better at it than other states. They are used to forcing the candidates to deal with peole as individuals rather than just as focus or interest groups. The candidates get a chance to hone a message off camera and out of the glare. It allows them to build a little more slowly.

Even though he didn’t win NH in ‘92, it still allowed Big Dog to get his feet under him. Carter could never have won in ‘76 without IA and NH. NH forced Little Boots to show his true colors to win SC, even though way too many foks chose to ignore that.

A lot of good comes out of those early states, and a lot of the carping about them is jealousy over the perceived economics.

msmolly @ 283

I don’t see a link to choices. Am I missing something?

The blue View Stats, under the vote button, to see the results

msmolly @ 283

I don’t see a link to choices. Am I missing something?

Me neither. I’m still undecided. My heart says Kucinich, but I’m probably split between Dodd and Edwards at the moment.

Mr. Sandman @ 292

msmolly @ 283

I don’t see a link to choices. Am I missing something?

Me neither. I’m still undecided. My heart says Kucinich, but I’m probably split between Dodd and Edwards at the moment.

They were there a little while ago. Something happened.

brendan @ 284

Redshift @ 275

Fair enough. I can accept a perfect-as-the-enemy-of-the-good argument, that any change that’s likely to happen won’t be better. I just get tired of all the attempts to justify Iowa and NH as if they’re somehow better at choosing candidates, and are speaking for all of us, rather than their own interests.

Also, this notion that Iowa and New Hampshire somehow effectively counter the money establishment isn’t true any more, if it ever was. Patrick Buchanan and John McCain won New Hampshire, but we know the rest.

brendan,
Don’t forget, the Republicans ARE the money establishment. Which kicked into over drive when McCain and Buchanan won in NH. I speak mainly from experiences as a Dem who has lived in NH and has family living there still.

FWIW, the polling feature is not displaying properly for me using either Firefox 2.0.0.7 or MS IE.

John Edwards

Since Gore is not declared, I am leaning toward Dodd, and giving Richardson a second look.

Kusinich and Gore

I am running some plug-in security thing in Firefox. With Safari, I can see everything at the top just fine! It is a nuisance and I’m going to reinstall Firefox without it.

I’m supporting Edwards.

John Edwards

Without trying to take away from Jane’s poll, here is a triple poll.

The first is Obama, Clinton, Edwards. This would reflect what most of us expect to have to choose from.

Second is all of the current candidates. This would show whose positions we agree with, regardless of whether we expect to be able to vote for them.

The third is all candidates plus Gore.

Please answer all three questions

Triple Poll

Triple Poll results

Please excuse the annoying advertising.

I voted for Edwards. It boils down to this:

Edwards represents principles the Dems have largely abandoned (sold-out). I believe he knows how to fight and I believe he knows who the enemies are. I think Hillary Clinton is not so bad, but she is poison in a general election and will make what ought to be a run-away Dem victory a very close race, and we all know what happens when things get close.

Nobody has given as much thought in terms of policy proposals as Edwards, and he is typically first to put them forward.

I would not support a Gore run for President anymore. He would be viewed as simple opportunist if he did it now–someone full of himself as a savior. (I don’t believe that, but he would be quickly perceived that way and we’d have yet another close election, just like with Hillary.)

Got a call from an Edwards campaign person the other night and it was after 9pm. After I politely asked if they’d refrain from calling so late in the future (my younglings were sleeping), I assured the nice young lady that we’d be voting for John. She apologized and excitedly told me that John would be in our town in Southern NH this Sunday at one of the middle schools for a public appearance.

We’ll see how he sounds on Sunday, but he’s got my vote right now.

I joked that the crowd might be sparse since the Patriots-Cowboys game was Sunday and she immediately reminded me that it was a 4 o’clock game. Ahhh…they did their homework.

Why just a Middle School do you suppose? This is a pretty small town.

Woops, I just learned that there is an annoying message on the results page of the Triple Poll. Please turn down your volume to avoid it.

derrick (aka coriolanus) @ 301

John Edwards

Coriolanus! Snap! Great to see you.

I must have missed this. When was the poll?

There would have been 20 for Biden.

Confused also-

suspect that post originally contained a link to the poll, but post info was replaced with results.

But, it’s not clear to those of us who just arrived at FDL from day job, and started catching up.

I would have liked to vote!

The unofficial triple poll I created will remain open.

TJ @ 302

Without trying to take away from Jane’s poll, here is a triple poll.

The first is Obama, Clinton, Edwards. This would reflect what most of us expect to have to choose from.

Second is all of the current candidates. This would show whose positions we agree with, regardless of whether we expect to be able to vote for them.

The third is all candidates plus Gore.

Please answer all three questions

Triple Poll

Triple Poll results

Please excuse the annoying advertising and turn down your volume to avoid the audio advertisement.

Valley Girl @ 308

Confused also-

suspect that post originally contained a link to the poll, but post info was replaced with results.

But, it’s not clear to those of us who just arrived at FDL from day job, and started catching up.

I would have liked to vote!

Check out the triple poll posted above at comment 302.

Thx Bionic and TJ- got it.

Prediction: by September ‘08, it’s running 98% Clinton!


John Edwards 993 43%
Barack Obama 289 13%
Dennis Kucinich 246 11%
Hillary Clinton 234 10%
Other 171 7%
Chris Dodd 141 6%
None of the above 127 6%
Bill Richardson 60 3%
Mike Gravel 19 1%
Joe Biden 19 1%


Drat! The table upstairs was changed anyway. Right.

Guess what? I like John Edwards, too. I like his populist stance. But I’d vote for Al Gore (again) in a milli-second. Maybe our best ticket would be be Gore-Edwards.

EPUland …

Second worst thing about Hillary is Madeline “It’s worth it!”

OMG!!! Finally, some signs that the entire country is so freakin’ stupid as to want to go another round with bill clinton’s d*ck!!! Maybe that’s one swift boat they can only paddle around in their little kiddie pool. Maybe it won’t see the full on fleet service again. TG!!

Thank you for this ray of hope right here Jane and alllll the lovely people who have her about right where she belongs…. 10%.

Keep hope alive that we CAN move forward with a REAL Democrat!!!! Made my whole day!

MY vote will be cast for Edwards in the primary and Edwards/Kucinich in the General. Gore needs to endorse him immediatly!!

Whooo HOoooo!!! NOT Hillary!!! :D

~~~ModNote: Edited for content to clear filters.~~~

whooops….. I mean NOT so freakin’ stupid as to want to … above at 317. :-)

very late to the polls but I have to go with

Edwards

A.Citizen @ 89

peanutbutter @ 4

Edwards ‘08!

Yep.

Yep.

dachoste @ 12

edwards. if gore runs, then gore/edwards

hillary is a competent republican. obama shows nothing. richardson claims experience in dealing with “bad guys” but during the debates, he’s all bluster and no substance. dodd is actually very impressive. biden is very sharp- but maybe secdef secstate sharp. kucinich has all the right positions, but doesn’t have the jenesaisquois leadership quality. edwards has that post ‘00 gore quality, where he seems free to be himself and learned from past mistakes.

My sentiments exactly!

President – John Edwards

VP – Barack Obama

Sec of State – Richardson or Biden

Sec of the Interior – Chris Dodd

Sec of Defense – Wes Clark???

Cabinet Level post on Global Poverty – Kucinich (hybrid of Dept of Peace)

Appoint a Senior Advisor Responsible for Global Poverty: The new Cabinet-level position within the White House will coordinate global development policies across the federal government. The adviser will have the authority to coordinate budgets among the relevant programs at the U.S. Agency for International Development, U.S. and other relevant agencies. During Cabinet meetings in the Edwards Administration, the official will be a voice for the fight against global poverty.