I have heard numerous people complaining on this site and in person about or current president and have tired of it.
If everyone wants change of leadership in the next election, then the Democrats need to put forth a canidate that is remotely electable. To be honest, Bush should not have been that hard to beat in the last election, but Kerry was not very likeable, Ditto for Gore. (Of course maybe the Republicans will put up a good candidate this time.)
So, who does everyone think the Democrats will nominate for President? (Personally I think Hillary will be a mistake simply because she is not very likable. Her husband was very likable and we see how far it got him.)
Again, suggestions for Democratic (or republican) nominations.
Sergeant
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
I'm so sick of both parties. I'll be surprised if either of them nominate anyone even halfway competent.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I have heard numerous people complaining on this site and in person about or current president and have tired of it.
Well, dude. Easiest way to fix it is to talk him into going hunting with the veep.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Actually, Pres. Clinton's likeability got him pretty darned far. You have to be pretty likeable for people just not to care about being lied to to their faces.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I'm not sure that's as true anymore. I just saw a discussion on this site where SEVERAL people voiced the opinion "Yeah, politicians lie. It's what they do. Why should I let that affect my vote?"
Posted by Crotalus (Member # 7339) on :
Who I wish they would nominate:
Colin Powell for Republican
Joe Lieberman for Democrat
I respect both these men. And would feel pretty good if either one were elected.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I used to respect Colin Powell, until he let himself be totally p0wnz0rd.
I have never had any respect for Lieberman, who is -- as far as I can tell -- merely a slimeball trying to wrap himself in the appearance of integrity.
That said, the last nominee I really liked was Bradley, so YMMV.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
quote: Well, dude. Easiest way to fix it is to talk him into going hunting with the veep.
Actually the easiest way is to talk him into taking a car ride with Ted Kennedy
Posted by Sergeant (Member # 8749) on :
I guess I was unclear. I think that clinton's likeability (sp) was what kept him in office for 2 terms and got him through a lot of the scandals that he got himself into. As far as the scandals go, I think the republicans started this whole mess of wanting to investigate everything the president does in order to try to find fault in him.
The current ultra-partisan politics irritate me.
Sergeant
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Why, oh why have I heard talk of Jebby-boy trying to follow his brother?
Another shrubbery for President would make me cry on the inside.
-pH
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Actually the easiest way is to talk him into taking a car ride with Ted Kennedy.
Only if you think it's easier to talk Bush into being alone with Ted Kennedy. I dispute that.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
Hillary would lose, I think. Kerry would lose. Gore would have a pretty good shot, though - I think he's more consistent in his views than Kerry, more likeable than Hillary, and has managed to cut out the boring since his last campaign.
If the Democrats were smart, though, they'd fine somebody new - someone wtih a solid, discernable, principled vision who is simultaneously not crazy. For whatever reason, they seem to have a great deal of trouble doing that.
Posted by Sergeant (Member # 8749) on :
And a platform other than "Bush is Evil" would probably help
Sergeant
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Yes, but the exciting Al Gore is terrifying. He's like an alien.
Hillary's a zero, and Lieberman doesn't look like he believes most of what comes out of his own mouth.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
It's too early to try to elect a woman President. The thing is, a lot of Bush's advantage in the last election was that he presented a sort of father figure, and he has sort of a stereotypical American family, I guess.
-pH
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
How about a woman vice-president?
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
quote: Only if you think it's easier to talk Bush into being alone with Ted Kennedy. I dispute that.
He let Kennedy write the Education bill, he has praised him several times, it shouldn't be too hard.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I don't think it's too early for a woman president. More like there's not a reasonable woman candidate. Same with a minority candidate. I don't think anyone would have qualms about electing one if they were the best candidate, it's just that no one really is in the right position.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
quote: Bush's advantage in the last election was that there was nobody running against him.
Well, from my point of view, you had two choices, Vote for Bush, or Vote against Bush. So I think we are saying the same thing? Either way it came to be all about Bush, so it's no wonder that Bush won
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
At least this time there's no incumbant, so hopefully both parties will at least attempt to nominate somebody good.
I don't know much about Obama, but people seem to really like him. Maybe he'll be nominated.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:He let Kennedy write the Education bill, he has praised him several times, it shouldn't be too hard.
I find this delightfully naive.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
I definitely think it's too early. And I think that any woman/minority running would have to be fifty times more personable and spotless in reputation than whoever he/she was running against.
-pH
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Well, I didn't get to vote at all, but that's because the state of Florida lost my absentee ballot.
Thanks, Jebby.
-pH
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote: [Gore] has managed to cut out the boring since his last campaign.
Ahhh, the miracles of facial hair.
Incidentally, I can't think of a single, active politician that has a beard.
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
To be fair, even Kerry was _remotely_ electable; he lost by 3%.
But it would be good for the Democrats if they ran someone with identifiable positions. "Anybody but Bush" isn't enough.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
If I was a US citizen I'ld vote for hilery for VP and Adama as Prez for Democrat, if republican Powel.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Hillary vs Condoleeza.... It could happen... Then we'd have a woman pres for sure =)
I haven't studied Condy's politics... My lil bro has and he's all excited. He and I usually agree politically. So maybe this is what I should hope for.
Pix
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Any given Democrat could have lost by 3%. President Bush is considered that bad by that many people. John Kerry offerred almost no reasons for anyone to vote for him, nor, for that matter, did he do a particularly good job of highlighting little things like the President's inability to run on his first term.
I like the spin though. (I say this as a registered Republican who worked as a volunteer on John McCain's 2000 campaign) I believe that the current President has done a very bad job as well as disgraced his office and the country. One of the consistent aspects of his Presidency has been an unwillingness to take responsibility for anything in a meaningful way. Because of this, it has become incumbent on the American people to try to force the administration to live up to it's greatest duty, to take responsibility. So I criticize the President when I think he has done things badly or, and this is less common, not done things he should have because I actually take how my country is run seriously and not as some sort of sporting match.
But hey, you can just say "Well, it's just because he hates Bush." and ignore all that so that you can go back to your flag-waving. This is apparently your conception of responsible citizenry.
[ February 14, 2006, 11:39 AM: Message edited by: MrSquicky ]
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
quote:Originally posted by adam613: Bush's advantage in the last election was that there was nobody running against him.
And yet he was still only able to squeak by with a thin majority. Almost came in second in a one-man race, then, huh? Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
That's the situation exactly, KarlEd. The truly depressing part is not that the fact that he is so unliked that he almost lost in a one-man race, the truly depressing part is what that and the fact that the DNC could not find a man that could beat him. A truly pathetic showing of our two major political parties in the USA.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I'd like Martin Sheen to run. Is that unrealistic?
Posted by Shepherd (Member # 7380) on :
Yes
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
Spang:
As long as he has good writers telling him exactly what to do Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Yeah, but when you're president they're called advisers.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Even the writing in my opinion got a bit silly. I know it's a TV show so it's expected for things to end well, but c'mon...President Bartlett's administration solves the Palestinian problem and Social Security?
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: Hillary vs Condoleeza.... It could happen... Then we'd have a woman pres for sure =)
Or the first third party president in ages.
Posted by BaoQingTian (Member # 8775) on :
In a recent poll, 44% said they would not vote for H. Clinton under any circumstance. That's a lot of uphill work. I think Condi would be an interesting candidate who would probably have my support, but more info on her political beliefs and more of a record would be helpful. I hope Irami doesn't think I believe black people are like children for saying so.
Posted by Vid (Member # 7172) on :
All I know is things will seem pretty fishy if Hamas wins this election, too.
(As for contributing to the conversation, I'm a moderate Republican, and I'd like to see a strong candidate surface, be it left, right, or one of the Blue Penguins... a strong candidate that can at least try to meet on common ground with the other party would more than likely win my vote)
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
At this point, I'd vote for pretty much anyone that I believed was serious about bringing more T 'n A into the government.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
And the conversation takes a turn for the worse....
Posted by breyerchic04 (Member # 6423) on :
Wasn't Clinton pretty much a nobody until he was the candidate (I don't know for sure, I was in 1st grade). We have a senator here in Indiana that's had some presidential buzz and from what I know of his politics he's pretty reasonable, he was governor from 88 till 96). Evan Bayh in 08?
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:ven the writing in my opinion got a bit silly. I know it's a TV show so it's expected for things to end well, but c'mon...President Bartlett's administration solves the Palestinian problem and Social Security?
I'm only on season two, so it's not too out there yet. But I don't disagree.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Oh, that was Transparency and Accountability. Yeah ha!
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:We have a senator here in Indiana that's had some presidential buzz....
I liked Bayh fifteen years ago. He was a man of integrity and intelligence. That may still be true; I haven't lived in Indiana for a while. But I get the sense that he's become more of a traditional politician.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
Hmm. I'd back Obama. Or, say, Timothy Kaine, who speaks with remarkable precision and has a good track record for getting both sides behind him.
Please, please don't let Hillary or Lieberman run. If they came out on top of the pack, I don't think I could hold my nose long enough to vote. Heavens save us from morality as a political expediency.
Posted by smitty (Member # 8855) on :
You know, while I like Bush, I was mostly voting against Kerry.
While the more intelligent voters are ready for a woman or minority (does that word really apply anymore?) Pres, I think it would be an uphill battle.
I kind of figured there would be more of a frontrunner for at least one of the parties by this point. It's never to early for the parties to start shredding the other's candidate.
Posted by Dav (Member # 8217) on :
quote:Originally posted by starLisa:
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: Hillary vs Condoleeza.... It could happen... Then we'd have a woman pres for sure =)
Or the first third party president in ages.
It would be great if we could wrest power away from the entrenched Democrats and Republicans. It seems like there's enough discontent that any moderate third party that got its act together would have a good chance.
(At least I feel enough discontent to want a good third party candidate )
Posted by smitty (Member # 8855) on :
I don't care what party the decent candidate comes from
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
No, at this point it looks like I will write in Carter. Again!
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I really want Wesley Clark to run again. I don't think he's going to, but it's my dearest wish.
I think the former governor of Virginia, Mark Warner, sounds decent. I don't know a lot about him, just what I read in one of those women's magazines.
However, barring either of those, I'm hoping for a Clinton v Rice match, which at least will be hugely amusing.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
There are about a metric buttload of vets running for various offices for the Dems. Should make for an interesting race.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Sadly, the Dems appear to think that being a vet is something special. *wry laugh* They have learned ENTIRELY the wrong lesson from the present propagandist spin on military service.
Posted by Tarrsk (Member # 332) on :
I'd vote for Hillary over most Republicans, but she's too much of a Republican bogeyman to have any real chance of winning. Lieberman I'd only vote for as a last resort... he's way too censor-happy for me. I'd vote Obama in a heartbeat, but to be honest, he's probably too inexperienced yet. Give him a few more terms in the Senate and then come back to him.
Right now, my top choice would be Mark Warner, the ex-governor of Virginia. He's demonstrated that he can win elections, not only holding the governorship in a solid red state, but getting his chosen successor, Tim Kaine, elected as well, in one of the biggest electoral upsets of the past few years.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I don't like Wesley Clark just because he's a vet, although I do think that it adds to his qualifications. I like him because I think he would make a very good president, which ultimately is what's most important.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I don't understand the people who think Kerry didn't put forth a good platform. It was there if you wanted to see it. He got so much bad press (the man was about as much fun to listen to as a ceiling fan) that it's just automatic now to attack him.
Dean was probably the best candidate for the Dems. Had Kerry not overtaken him in Iowa, I think he could have won the election. He had the credentials, the vision, and the drive necessary to energize his base, as opposed to leaving them catatonic like Kerry did. Bush won on personality, not on his merits, just as Kerry lost on personality, and merits didn't really matter.
As for 08. The Dems need to run a good, fiscally responsible progressive governor. Senators should be taboo for the party right now, they are too controversial for the most part, and the Republicans will probably make short work of most of their voting records, using national security concerns to dice them up. The fact of the matter is, they need new energy. A progressive democratic senator, probably from the midwest, and not New England, could be a good VP, but they need a governor for the big P spot. Bill Richardson or Tim Kaine come to mind as the best possible choices. I would've said Gary Locke a couple years ago, but he retired from public life. Tim has cross party appeal and will bring in moderate Republicans, and Richardson has a long history of balancing the budget, bringing in foriegn investors into his state, and being environmentally friendly. He's everything the dems could want in a candidate, but he's no so liberal that he's out of the reach of moderate conservatives.
As for the Republicans, they'll have trouble with cross party appeal. McCain or someone silimar would steal away a LOT of moderate Democratic votes (depending on his challenger), but I think a lot of the conservative base would stay at home and not vote at all.
Condi Rice would do a VERY good job of energizing the DEMOCRATIC base against her. She's automatically associated with Bush and his Iraq policies, and quite frankly I think that does a lot more harm than good for their chances. She's the Hillary of their party, a polarizing figure that sets everyone on their party lines.
I've heard Jeb and Laura Bush's names bandied about as possible candidates. Laura doesn't stand a chance, she doesn't have the background. Jeb would scare a lot of people wary of continuing the Bush Dynasty in a Democracy. Further, he has a lot of black marks against him for things he did in Florida, not to mention the long memories of many from 2000's election. I don't think it could be assumed that he would carry Florida.
Their leadership is in shambles. Bill Frist and "The Hammer" I think are out of it. And the Abramoff scandal could hit anyone, with the majority of the hits falling on Republicans.
McCain and Powell still stand out to me as great candidates. It's either than or some youthful energy from the party's younger governors. All in all the though, the Democrats have a lot more options. They just need to come together this time with a coherent message.
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
I think Powell will be too associated with Bush for many people. I think McCain would be a pretty good president. I'm pretty liberal, and I could see myself voting for him. The GOP could use some younger faces, as some have suggested. Anyone unnassociated with scandal.
Then again, so much depends on the mood of the election year. I really think public memory for most things starts to diminish after 6 months or so and really drops off after a year. Excluding big things like war, blowjobs, and hunting mishaps.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)