As a Canadian, and a poorly informed student I find my knowledge of certain aspects of American politics (not of a globaly impactful nature) to be lacking. That said, please don’t think me stupid when I ask, who are they gearing up to run against Bush in 2004, and more importantly is he any good/ do you think he has a chance? Maybe everyone knows but me…
Al Sharpton, Bob Graham, Carol Moseley-Braun , Dennis Kucinich, Dick Gephardt, Howard Dean, John Edwards, John Kerry, Joseph Lieberman.
That’s the field of contenders for the Democratic nomination. I’d say Gephardt, Edwards, Kerry, and Lieberman are the ones with the legitimate shot of winning the nomination, but just my opinion.
Al Sharpton is the main man. Keep your eye on him.
Yup. He will be the first to give a resounding consessionary speech when he loses the primaries.
I would guess either John Kerry or Joe Lieberman will end up being the democratic nominee.
That’s not nice, playing games with our Canadian friends 
. my money’s on Lieberman, but I think Edwards would have the best chance in the general election.
Lieberman, Gephardt, Edwards and Kerry are considered to be reasonably qualified. Of the four, Edwards has relatively little government experience, but the other three have considerable experience. They would appear to have appropriate backgrounds to run for President.
There’s a wide difference of opinion as to whether they have a chance. Some experts think Bush will win easily (barring some dramatic, unexpected event). Others foresee a close race. AFAIK nobody thinks Bush is the underdog right now.
There are actual betting odds on this, from London, but I can’t find them. Anyone got a cite?
I believe it is William Hill, but it may have been that Irish company that took bets on how long Iraq would last against America (or something like that.)
Dennis Kucinich is the man. His crystal power and cosmic energy flows alone should seal the deal. If not, he can always bring in the big gun, his friend Shirley Maclaine. Together, they will channel the ghost of Kennedy and sweep into the oval office. Which they will then remodel along the guidelines of feng shui.
For those keeping score, here is the line on the candidates:
Al Sharpton: Race baiter and confidence man par excellence. Claim to fame: Being videotaped by the FBI in a drug sting.
Dennis Kucinich: All-around flake. Wants to create a department of ‘peace’. New Age spiritual nutbar. In tune with the energy flow of the country.
Carol Mosely-Braun: Serial ethics violator. Not sure what she majored in in college. Also good at race baiting - called George Will a Klansman because he had the nerve to question her ethics - which everyone else in the country was also doing.
John Edwards: Vote for him, or he’ll sue your ass.
John Kerry: Vietnam Veteran. A man’s man. Shoots doves. Did I mention he’s a Vietnam veteran? Carries around ‘lucky boonie hat’ in secret, but makes sure his aides tell all reporters about it so he can put it on and show them how tough he was. Also, he’s a Vietnam vet.
Dick Gephardt: Blue collar union supporter left twisting in the wind when Unions lost much of their political capital. Now he’s a candidate, with some honest-to-god opinions. We’re just not sure what they are.
Joseph Lieberman: The candidate for people who like everything George Bush has done, but who wish he were more Jewish.
Bob Graham: Not quite sure, but his family makes a damned fine cracker.
There you go. Any one of them will make the writers for The Daily Show wriggle with delight like puppies if elected. A stellar field, to be sure. Just ask Kucinich: He’s been living in outer space for a couple of decades now.
Ummm. That doesn’t sound particularily promising there, Sam.
Of course think what could be said of Bush: former coke-head whos claim to fame was his state killed more convicts than anyone else. Do any of these candidates have GOOD points?
Al Sharpton is a snappy dresser.
John Kerry was a Vietnam Vet.
I like Graham crackers.
Well, speaking as a very conservative (albeit libertarian-leaning) Republican, Kerry is certainly an honest man, a smart man, and I for one would not mind a President Kerry too much. Though, as Sam Stone intimated, he has a strange habit of referring repeatedly to his experience in Vietnam–to the point that a drinking game originated out of it. Lieberman too has good character, IMO.
I suppose I would vote for Howard Dean but none of the rest of those Dems are far enough to the left for me. I’d rather see Bush get another term to give folks more time to realize how grim conservative policies will make our lives. For that same reason I plan to go Republican in the primary so I can vote for whatever paleoconservative the Club for Growth throws up against Arlen Specter.
But really the Dems need to hold the left if they are to win the election. Perhaps they can count on most hardcore lefties to rally against Bush but not me. I won’t give my vote to Bush Lite. Give me a solid liberal that isn’t afraid to go after the people that are destroying our future. Hell, if all else fails I’ll just write in Michael Moore.
Bob Graham
I got to see him speak before and he had the audience worked up good. He can definitely win Florida. He has extensive executive and legislative credentials. Was in the military. Can capture the Southern base from Edwards. IIRC, he voted against the war and thus would be in the strongest position to attack Bush if this WMD isdue is not resolved soon.
Florida should be the ticket again and Graham is the only Democrat who is virtually guaranteed a win there.
Mambo, I like Graham (he’s the only one I would without a doubt vote for over Bush), but I don’t think he’s electable, despite his silly “electable wing” pronouncements. While his resume on national security and foreign affairs is very impressive, he is not very well-known except to close followers of politics and people in Florida, and he’s boring as hell when he speaks. It’s sad too, because he’s been an outspoken, and frequently justified, critic of the way the President has conducted the campaign against terrorism. Dean, for instance, isn’t particularly well-known, but at least he can give a good speech. I think Graham is unfortunately running for Vice-President.
I think that Howard Dean has been undersold in this discussion. He’s an outsider with charisma. He could emerge like Clinton did in '92.
Sam Stone, why do you feel that John Kerry’s service in Vietnam is something to be ridiculed?
You do realize, don’t you, that a true liberal Dem would mean the death of the Democratic party, right? Why not vote for Nader if you want a true lefty-lefty?
I’m not. I’m ridiculous its invocation in every 3rd sentence John Kerrey utters. But it ain’t no thang. I was just writing some comedy there. I actually think Kerrey is okay, although I think he tries a little too hard. The whole, “look at me, I’m a dove shooting, snowboarding, fearless leader guy!” is a little over the top. As is his ‘lucky boonie hat’, which he really does carry around in a ‘secret’ compartment in his briefcase for luck. But which isn’t so secret that it avoids being at press conferences, just in case someone should ask.
Maybe he does milk it, but so did Bob Dole and so does John McCain. I think politicians are just congentially incapable of keeping such a trophy as a legitimate war record hidden from view.
Aw, Sam’s probably just nervous because Kerry actually planted his arse in the front lines, unlike Dubya.
(Sam Stone rates the Democratic candidates? What next, Michael Moore reviews this week’s Wall Street Journal editorials?)