Democratic Hopefuls: A Primer, Please?

Great Debates
1

I have no idea yet who I am going to vote for in the primaries (though Sharpton and Lieberman are not on my short list). My sister is for Dean, and she and I usually agree on politics; but I’d like to know more about each candidate. Can y’all fill me in? Not just “he sucks!” or “he has no chance!” but what is each person for and against; what are their good and bad qualities?

**John Edwards—

Bob Graham—

Howard Dean—

John Kerry—

Joe Lieberman—

Al Sharpton—

Carol Mosely-Braun—

Dick Gephardt—

Dennis Kucinich—**

2

Jesus, I thought this would be up to two pages by now, with people touting their favorites and duking it out.

Nobody?

3

You asked a large, diffuse question. Try focusing on single candidates and issues, not the entire damn election. We have plenty of detailed discussions going already.

Links to each candidate’s sites here, along the left-hand side.

4

I’ll bite.

John Edwards— He has made lots of money, but he doesn’t really seem to do anything beyond that and the occasional criticism of Bush.

Bob Graham— He will probably be the VP pick. Because he is from florida and has a strong record on national security.

Howard Dean— Based his message around healthcare and a balanced budget. He is pretty much the anti war candidate and has a good record with GLBT issues. What is unique about him is that he has a great record in Vermont(they currently have a surplus, and Dean increased healthcare coverage and education while he was in office), and his fundraising primarily comes from regular people. On a personal note I think he is going to win simply because he is a much smarter and more skilled politician than his opponents.

John Kerry— He is Howard Dean on the issues except he is for the Iraq war and he is a veteran.

Joe Lieberman— Very pro war and pro censorship he is running to the right of Bush. Strong on civil rights. He has managed to stay in the race, but I don’t think he is going anywhere.

Al Sharpton— Hes gonna lose

Carol Mosely-Braun— Also going to lose

Dick Gephardt— Economic liberal Moderate on social issues. Lack of fundraising probably means he will fall behind soon.

Dennis Kucinich— far lefty.

5

I have opinions, but they are not as informed as they will be later on, so PLEASE FEEL FREE to knock them down/convince me otherwise…

First of all, I use this site, Issues2000.org, as a helpful guide to researching what candidates have said/done vis a vis certain issues.

I tend to vote on the more liberal side of democrats, so for that reason Joe Lieberman, who is the most conservative democrat I have ever heard of, would probably rank for me at the bottom of this list (despite the fact that, as a Jew, I am fascinated to see a Jewish candidate in the running, and doing well by all accounts).

John Kerry and Dick Gephardt I have had great respect for, but I can’t say I am pleased with their September 2002 vote in favor of authorizing Bush to initiate hostilities with Iraq. That was a serious mistake in my opinion, but it doesn’t mean I wouldn’t vote for them.

The latest spin about Howard Dean (and I can’t opine whether or not the spin is true until I actually research it myself), anyway, the latest spin about him is that he’s nowhere near as liberal as he’s being made out to be. Actually more of a moderate.

I’m afraid I know nothing about Al Sharpton except what his detractors pin on him: that he is divisive, incendiary, and irrational. Anyone care to defend him? I would listen if you did.

I know nothing at all about John Edwards, Carol Mosely-Braun, and Bob Graham

Dennis Kucinich seems to be a solid, progressive (if barely known) candidate. So far I agree with him the most, and will vote for him, though I am not expecting him to win the nomination, or even last until next year.

If Kucinich loses, I will switch to Kerry, despite his war vote. We need a Democrat that has the personal strength of will, and qualities of leadership to stand up to Candidate Bush and the Republican Spin Machine ([aside]Band name!![/aside]) If anyone can stare down that pampered AWOL’ing chickenhawk, AND look impressive doing it, it’s John Kerry.

6

The best I can come up with is the tiniest glimmer of hope for Dean. But Bush has to get blown by a male intern of Arab descent with connections to Al Qaeda for Dean to actually win the election. sigh

7

John Kerry: Probably going to win the nomination. It appears it’s between him and Dean, but he’s a party standard and seems to be a strong leader. Fairly Clinton-like in many respects. Voted for war in Iraq, criticized Bush’s efforts at diplomacy. New Democrat, Vietnam vet (as he’ll never stop reminding us), sometimes considered too aloof and elitist but has been trying to shake that image. Wife is heir to the Heinz fortune and thus has lotsa money.

Howard Dean: Very grassroots campaign - much support and fundraising done through the Internet. Interesting alternative to Kerry, and in my eyes, the best chance the Democrats have if Bush is at least somewhat strong (not guaranteed to win, but I don’t think Kerry is different enough from Bush that voters would think it would be worth the switch - also governors have a better track record of being elected Pres than legislators). Has been vocal on balanced budget, equal rights for gays, and universal healthcare. Critical of war in Iraq, don’t think (but not sure) he’s articulated a foreign policy vision for the country. Definitely will press domestic issues if he wins the nom.

Dick Gephardt: Party man whose time has come and gone. Blue collar union supporter through and through. Not a very strong leader, voted for war, critical of free trade in many respects. Representative of the old Democrats, doesn’t really seem in touch with modern concerns. IMO, most of his support comes from party apparatus and name recognition.

John Edwards: Trial lawyer. Campaign heavily built up by media coverage, but still very low name recognition. In debates comes off cocky and unimportant. Has criticized Bush on health care and North Korea, among other things. Not going to win the nomination; few outside his constituency and those very interested in politics know anything about him.

Bob Graham: My personal favorite, and the only Democrat I would definitely vote for over Bush (most of the others, have to see how things go in the next year, and what positions they take). Basically moderate, New Democrat, very strong on national security issues. Opposed the authorization for war in Iraq because it didn’t include support for use of force against HAMAS and Hezbollah. Has pushed for stronger fight against terrorist groups (incl. al-Q), and critical of Bush abandonment of Afghanistan. Recently said if Bush lied about Niger uranium, should be impeached. Somewhat eccentric, not much name recognition outside of politics-followers, probably will get VP nom for Florida constituency and nat’l security strength.

Joe Lieberman: Good on name recognition, as former veep candidate. Orthodox Jew, which came up to some (but not a large) extent in the last campaign. Very conservative in some resepects: hawkish, including on Iraq, said First Amendment means “freedom of, not from, religion”, and pro-media censorship. Not going to get the nom as long as Democrats realize they have to separate themselves from Bush in this election.

Al Sharpton: Ha.

Carol Moseley-Braun: Liberal-to-moderate, very low name recognition. Speculation she’s running to take the black vote away from Sharpton. Not going to get the nom, but if Dems win, might be given a high-level Cabinet position (assuming the speculation is true).

Dennis Kucinich: A joke. Anti-free trade (has called for immediate withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO), wants to create a Department of Peace. Economic failure during tenure as mayor of Cleveland. No image and little credibility on important issues -> not going to get it.

8

On C-SPAN.org, there is a wonderful debate among the nine, moderated my George Stephanopolus. (sp?) Check it out. It’s quite informative, as are the other political links on C-SPAN.org.

Here’s my general impression on each of the candidates, alphabetically.

Howard Dean- Former governor of Vermont. He’s the current fundraising leader, and is doing well in the polls. He is most well known as the candidate who has expressed deep reservations about the war in Iraq, though he has tried to make himself more outspoken on the issues of healthcare, the massive defecit, and gun control, which is an issue in which he seems quite states-rights oriented. I’m attending the Dean rally in August in my hometown!

John Edwards- He hasn’t been very vocal on the issues, at least not on my radar. From things I seem to remember, he is heavily funded by trial lawyers. In general, I don’t know much about his issues, but he is certainly capable of putting up a strong showing, if he gets enough funding and gets his face out there.

Dick Gephardt- Seems like an old-style, union man Democrat. Proposed an ambitious healthcare initiative, which proves to me that he isn’t afraid of taking risks. Seems a bit trade-protectionist for my tastes, though. A horse that’s been around the racetrack one too many times.

Bob Graham- VP candidate. Has said that he didn’t support the Iraq war resolution in the senate because it wasn’t tough enough. He’s running sixth in fundraising, in front of Kucinich, Mosley-Braun, and Sharpton. Won’t win, but might win the VP nomination.

John Kerry- The consensus is that he looks the most “presidential.” Has become increacingly critical of the war in Iraq, though he voted for the resolution. He’s a Vietnam vet, so attacks on his patriotism will probably not work. Has a good chance of winning. Only compeditor right now is Dean.

Dennis Kucinich- Protestors’ candidate. Think of any issue that has been protested about, and Kucinich probably sides with the protestors. He’s anti-war in Iraq, wants to establish a “Department of Peace,” anti-GMO, anti-trade, anti-corporate healthcare. The way he’s going, he might want to make “Free Tibet” an issue. :rolleyes: He wants the US to exit NATO, exit the WTO, and other such far left stuff. While he was mayor of Cleveland, the city went bankrupt, though he says that it was to prevent a monopolization of the utilities. He also seems to have a penchant for wanting to write executive orders. The question is, will he yell during the state of the union?

Joe Lieberman- Bush Lite. Massively pro-Israel in that conflict. A tad pro-censorship for my tastes. (Was the main politician to pile on Marilyn Manson after the Columbine massacre.) Looking for the “family values” vote, so it seems. For some reason, he keeps bringing up the 2000 election which he ostensibly won. “I can beat Bush in 2004. After all, I already have!” He seems to have a good record on terrorism and defense, and was, if I recall, one of the drafters of the PATRIOT Act, or the Homeland Security bill, or some such legislation.

Carol Mosley-Braun- Will not win. Has a sketchy past wherein she was in trouble with corruption. Doesn’t seem to address the issues.

Al Sharpton- Mr Racially Divisive. Has been a class warrior all of his life, so probably won’t attract the sort of fundraising necessary to win. You know about Sharpton. Don’t vote for him, though he has brought some spunk and a fresh view on the issues.

In terms of personal opinions, I absolutely would never vote for Kucinich, Mosley-Braun, Lieberman, or Sharpton. I would not enjoy voting for Graham or Gephardt. I would not particularly object to voting for Kerry or Edwards. I will vote for Dean in the primaries.

Sorry if the above analysis of the candidates seemed a bit slanted. I suggest checking out their various appearances on C-SPAN for a better view.

9

Wow, Fang. Our analyses of the candidates seem remarkably similar, even in a simulpost.

I guess our objective views of the candidates’ positions are pretty spot-on, if we agree so much.

:slight_smile:

10

Graham will almost certainly not be the VP pick. He’s a bit nutty, not particularly likable, and not somebody who excites the Democratic base. The Florida connection is a plus, but that’s all he has going for him. Look probably to somebody from outside the current crop of candidates (Gen. Clark or Bill Richardson, for instance). Dean would also make a good choice for VP, if he doesn’t win the nomination and isn’t discredited by the process.

Don’t be silly. Dean is a terrible politician in most respects. He’s often abrasive, easily rattled when strongly challenged, and has no big-stage experience at all. Dean’s vociferous opposition to all things Bush certainly gives him a leg up with the hardcore partisans who are actually paying attention to the race at this point, but it remains to be seen whether he can translate that into the nomination, much less a general election win.

Kerry voted last October to authorize the president to use force, but has been strongly critical of Bush’s handling of Iraq since the end of the war. Kerry is a damned good candidate in most respects, though he is somewhat deficient in the personal charisma department.

11

I’m not interested in what they have to say about themselves; a self-puffing press release isn’t going to give me much real information.

12

On the other hand Graham is a strong VP pick because he is very strong on security. The other two guys could do it, but I think that going into the next election Graham will have an edge because of that.

Bush is all of those things and Gore was none of them(though I wouldn’t say Dean is easily rattled). When I say good politician I mean that Dean will get people to like him, not that he is good at looking like a politician.

13

Sterra, RenMan, Fang & Soup_du_jour, thanks! V. thought-provoking. I’ll have to ask my sister “what about Graham?”

14

A conservatives view:

John Edwards—

Bob Graham—

I am going to skip Edwards and Graham. They are boring, IMHO. I pay attention to politics and I don’t know much about them. The name recognition of these two with most folks is very minimal.

Howard Dean—

Dean, either by choice or luck depending on ones level of cynicism has filled the gap left by the other candidates on the extreme left. He is anti-war and anti-Bush and loud about it. He won the moveon.org mock election by a landslide which shows how popular he is among liberals.

Dean running against Bush would definately be called a wing-revolt. The Dems would be slaughtered in such a contest because the swing voter soccer moms can’t stomach someone this liberal.

John Kerry—

Kerry is my senator and if I had to pick a Dem to be the next president he would be it. He is a politician through and through. I get the sense that he decides most issues based on what he thinks the voters want, much like Clinton did.

Kerry was for the war and is a veteran. However, recently he has changed his tune and has critized Bush and the war. I suspect he regrets having voted for the war and now wishes he could move to the left on this issue but can’t because of his voting record.

The fact that Kerry is from Massachusetts is a black mark against Kerry. The rest of the country doesn’t look favorably on us “taxachusetts” folks. Also, he looks french. :wink:

Joe Lieberman—

Has the highest name recognition of all the Dem candidates due to his running with Gore last time around. His conservative traits, and pro-war stance don’t make him a favorite with the far left crowd. However, just the name recognition alone will carry him far. This automatic leg up on the others could make him the winner if he campaigns cleverly.

Al Sharpton—

The very fact that Sharpton is running proves that he cares more about himself than the Democrat party to which he belongs. His presense makes the other candidates look foolish to swing voters. He is so far left on some issues that he steals thunder from other candidates who would be the most liberal leaning on some issues.

Carol Mosely-Braun—

Brought in to diffuse Sharpton.

Dick Gephardt—

Boring. He simply won’t be able to beat Bush because of his lack of any personality. Especially after Gores dull persona was largely blamed for his failure, I would think lots of people won’t vote for Gephardt just because they know he has little chance of winning. However, he is a very connected player and has a legitimate shot.

Dennis Kucinich—

Who?

15

So, what, he needs to do more of that talking-to-the-dead stuff?

“I’m hearing from a dead president… Last name starts with N, and there’s an X in it… He feels bad for what he did and wishes he had switched parties when he had the chance… But because it’s too late, he thinks I’m the best hope for the country…”

:wink:

16

My views:

John Edwards: Trial lawyer of fairly liberal views. Possibly running because he thinks that he’ll lose re-election to the Senate. Highly popular among fellow trial lawyers (who have given him plenty of cash), but not among much of the rest of the electorate.

Bob Graham: Moderate, especially on foreign affairs. Hasn’t had much success in raising funds. Probably retiring from the Senate. Started out late due to his health. Somewhat old.

Howard Dean: Moderate when Governor of Vermont, now running as the candidate of the left. A “grassroots” candidate.

John Kerry: Standard New England liberal. Ironically, he’s promised not to use his best asset (his wife’s money).

Joe Lieberman: Moderate. Unpopular with party left. Is having problems with his campaign.

Al Sharpton: God save us from him becoming President.

Carol Mosely-Braun: Reputation is terrible, has (literally) no campaign funds, is running to 1) take away votes from Sharpton, and, 2) to help a Democratic Senate candidate in Illinois.

Dick Gephardt: Economic liberal with something of a populistic streak (anti-free trade), a little less liberal on social issues. Is the candidate of organized labor.

Dennis Kucinich: Kind of a flake. Almost certainly unfit for executive office. Reputation among black voters not good, at least in Cleveland. Will move to Canada if he becomes President.

17

What do you base this on?

18

It’s worth knowing about Dean that despite being often described as ultraliberal, he received an A rating from the NRA for his stance on gun control (he’s fond of saying that there’s no reason gun control laws in Vermont should be the same as in New York). A Republicans for Dean blog started up recently.

19

Dean certainly is no ultraliberal, although he doesn’t seem to mind the support he gets from the left wing. He got that support because he was the only major candidate to come out strongly against the war, Kerry, Lieberman, Gephart, and Edwards all voted for it. That doesn’t make him a hard core leftist, though.

20

To be fair, Dean’s strong stance against the war in Iraq isn’t the only reason for the “ultraliberal” charge; his signing into law Vermont’s civil unions bill has an awful lot to do with it too.