As a Democrat, my goal in the primaries is to elect a candidate who I think can actually win the office of President.
I really like Obama, and didn’t figure Hillary had a shot in hell of actually winning the General Election. However, Hillary is doing a damned good job keeping up with the boys in the debates, and polls, so far. Whodathunk?
Everybody claims Rudy doesn’t have a chance in hell, but he seems to be polling quite well with the Republicans nationwide.
If I had to cast my ballot today - I would probably go with Hillary - but still keeping Obama as a very good alternative, should Hillary screw up somehow (which I highly doubt at this point.)
So, at this point in time - (feel free to change your minds a few weeks/months from now) who would you vote for as your candidate?
I think Obama would be a slightly more dynamic leader than Clinton, but he’s not as smart a politician. Clinton will get by doing whatever voodoo it is that’s letting her win when supposedly every other voter hates her guts.
I love Obama. Hillary is the conservative all conservatives love to hate. I don’t understand all the Hillary hate on the conservative side-- she’s their best hope in '08.
The last “rate your issues and we’ll tell you which candidate’s views and voting history are most akin to yours” online quiz I took came out with a dead heat for Gravel and Kucinich. Yeah, the loonies. Woopie!
I try not to get emotionally attached to anyone until after the primaries. What’s the point?
Right now, from this side of the Atlantic, all the major contenders are looking pretty good. I personally don’t like Hillary Clinton, but I can see her being a VP, and the US would get double value because of Bill. I don’t think the Republicans have sorted themselves out to the same degree, except that McCain’s a busted flush.
I’ve said it before but Obama has something of the air of JFK, and an Obama + Clinton ticket looks pretty unbeatable to me. OTOH Thompson is trying to be Reagan, and making a pretty good fist of it, but then he is an actor, and I wonder if the people will see through it.
He has been losing points with me, but I am still for Rudy. If Thompson or Mitt pull of the nomination, I will vote for HRC or Obama. If it comes down to something like Mitt vs Edwards. I will give up and vote Green Party again, like I did in 2000.
I despise most of the pubs and Edwards. I like Rudy, but he worries me on some fronts. I like Obama, but so far, he is still just a personality and no substance. HRC is acceptable, but damn, I hate the idea of another Clinton, Bush or Kennedy ever getting in office again.
McCain, I could still stomach, but he lost a lot of points with me over the last 2 years and he has no chance anyway.
Huckabee, if he’s still in the race after the first round. Romney is second. I don’t really know much about Thompson, which I think is part of his game plan, but he’s not out of the picture.
/looks at thread title
/realizes it isn’t about dating the presidential candidates
/sighs in relief
Ok, carry on.
One of those tests in another thread said I might like Gravel, and he looks good in many ways although there’s no way he could win. Otherwise, I’d have to go with Obama, the lack experience thing made me hesitant at first but he seems like he could do it. I really don’t want to see Hillary in office (again?). On the otherside, I can’t get over McCain’s more recent pandering, and Giuliani puts together things I dislike about both parties. Everyone else I’m not too interested in.
There is something to be said for the advantage Governors have over Senators/Representatives. All that administrative leadership experience is definitely worth considering.
My early choices: Bill Richardson - President, John Edwards - Vice President
I like Edwards’ ideas and would give him a strong policy role in the administration, ala Cheney, but I don’t see his leadership stripes. Now, realisticly Richardson has not emerged as a contender so I can’t call him as a final choice.
As much as it pains me to say it*, I’m going for Hillary-Richardson as the ticket for a win. Obama wouldn’t do VP, and Hillary shouldn’t ask him. He would be upstaging her and all that.
*By the time the next inauguration rolls around we will have had 28 consecutive years so far with a Bush or a Clinton in the White House (Pres or VP). The prospect of extending that another 8 years, it’s just not what America is about, y’know.
Apparently, according to several of those online “which candidate is right for you” things, either Paul or Richardson. I don’t like Paul and I don’t know Richardson…
Then again, a different one had Tancredo and Clinton within 2 points of each other, so I guess I’d really like to see a Tancredo/Clinton ticket (I’m not sure what I did wrong on this little quiz, but I felt a warp in the spacetime continuum)
Ron Paul. Maybe Tancredo or even Thompson, but only if Edwards is on the opposing ticket and even then holding my nose with a vise. Otherwise, the LP candidate.
Back in 1992, when I saw the first interview with Bill and Hillary, my reaction was, “I’d rather vote for her than for him.” I always thought he was too slick for his own good, and he was my absolute last choice among the democratic candidates of 1992. I couldn’t bring myself to vote for him in 1996, and went for Nader instead. Hillary isn’t liberal enough for me, but I’d be happy to have her as a candidate if it weren’t for the baggage she’s carrying from eight years of her husband’s presidency.
I desperately want to see an end to the vicious, take-no-prisoners partisanship that the neocons began in the Reagan era and have taken to a new nadir in the Bush administration under slime like Rove and Cheney.
There’s simply no denying that Hillary is the most polarizing of the Democratic candidates and the one most likely to galvanize the religious right, the neocons, and other rightwingers into continuing the politics of destruction and hatred that have plagued this country for the last 27 years. This is why she’s my last choice among the Dems running, as her husband was 16 years ago.
I admit that Obama may be somewhat inexperienced and is something of an unknown, but there’s something about his open and optimistic personality that I think has a chance to restore some measure of civility to politics in this country. It might not happen, but I’ll be shocked if we take the smallest step in that direction under Hillary.
That said, I’ll vote for the Democratic candidate, even if it’s Hillary. But I’ll be pretty unhappy and pessimistic about the next four years.
Hillary/Richardson. Though I’d also like to see the Dems increase their seats in the senate, so perhaps I’d prefer Richardson to go run for the empty seat in New Mexico.
Hillary is probably the candidate whose views are closest to mine. I like Obama, but the Republican’s nominated a likable but inexperienced candidate in '00, and given how that turned out I’d rather see both parties move away from that sort of thing. My main knowledge of Edwards is from watching him get butchered by Cheney in the '04 VP debate, so I’m not crazy about watching him try again.
Meh, the Republicans will make anyone who wins the nomination into a polarizing figure, the only reason that Hillary is currently seen as more polarizing then Obama or Edwards is that she’s already gone through this process, but Obama and Edwards, if they win the nomination, will end up being just as galvanizing for the groups you mentioned before election day rolls around.
I’m holding out for Bill Richardson. He’s got good, solid foreign policy experience, and he seems sensible. My fiance likes Mike Gravel, aka the crazy guy.
