He’d chew himself up. Doesn’t anyone remember how Gore lost votes for sighing audibly? What’s gonna happen when Dean gets pissed and says “You’re lying?”
I’d likely vote for him over Bush. He’d have short coattails. leading to a split government which would control spending.
His biggest downside, in my eyes, is his voice. He sounds like Elmer Fudd whining about his head cold. I just don’t see him inspiring confidence in anyone.
Ah, the virtues of gridlock. I’m a big fan as well-- much to be said about having them too busy fighting each other to actually do anything.
I’d recommend Grover Cleveland, myself.
He’s a far better President than any of the current Democratic candidates would make today.
I know, I know. I missed a key word from the thread title.
Look, people, let me make it clear to you. I do not care about the horse-race aspects of the election! If I did, I could read the newspaper watch the evening news, and follow the polls. I am, by nature, an anti-conformist, so one of the better ways to make me reconsider doing something is to tell me “Everybody’s doing it.” It’s probably a character flaw, but at least I’m aware of it and I make allowances for it.
I’ve seen the names of the usual suspects here, and I actually have heard of these guys, believe it or not. I’d also prefer not to rehash the last several elections; they were bad enough the first time, especially the last one.
Give me a reason to vote for one of these candidates other than, “I think he can win.” Please.
CJ
You have to realize, Siege, that this is an extremely important issue for many voters. Given what happened in 2000, a lot of Democrats are willing to compromise somewhat on a candidate if they think he will win because they find most anything preferable to Bush.
I don’t know who I’m behind right now. If you look deeper than out-of-context quotes culled by the GOP and Matt Drudge, you’ll find Clark has not changed his views about Iraq. He argued before the Senate prior to the war that while Saddam needed to be dealt with at some point, Al Qaeda was a much bigger priority. I’m not saying that as a Clark partisan; I was making the same complaint until recently. If you take the whole of what he said, he may or may not agree with your personal position (and like a lot of people he seemed to buy most of the stuff about WMDs), but he hasn’t been so inconsistent as portrayed.
I think his problem is that he’s not much of a Democrat. A friend of mine told me recently that ‘he would do everything the same as Bush except the economy.’ And that was praise. Save for the fact that he’s pro-choice, I agree with that assessment, and I despise the guy. He’s not a viable candidate because he has so much in common with Bush. The Democrats could make hay with Bush’s foreign policies (alienation of our friends, etc.), and that would be impossible if Lieberman were the candidate because he agrees with them.
Howard Dean. Let me put it this way. The country’s current financial policy is a recipe for disaster. We have incurred huge deficits already, and we’re promising to pay out huge amounts of money through the Social Security and Medicare systems once the baby boomers start retiring. Neither Bush nor any of the other Democratic candidates seems to care. Bush has basically said that he thinks the economy will grow fast enough to take care of the problem, and Kerry or Lieberman would doubtlessly say the same thing once they got elected. The problem is that federal deficits always grow faster than the official projections and that Congress always comes up with new ways to spend money even when we’re already running a deficit (and that Bush refuses to even consider vetoing spending bills). Dean has a proven record of fiscal responsibility in Vermont, and he wouldn’t be afraid to take on Congress and fight for less spending.
That’s actually one of my biggest concerns. I’m not a Baby Boomer, more leading edge of Generation X, and from what I can see, even though I’ve been paying into Social Security for over 20 years now, there’s going to be little or nothing left by the time I get to retirement age. I’m also seeing the effect of Bush’s tax cuts – among other things, my state’s income tax is going up and my city has doubled its parking tax, including doubling the rate you pay at parking meters. Some of that’s due to gross financial mismanagement, but some of it’s also due to less Federal funding.
I am not in Iowa, by the way, and my primary’s not for some time, so please keep the advice coming, although the morning news has already told me who’s doing better in the polls.
CJ
Keep in mind that SS is not a retirment program. You are not paying into some fund in order to withdraw money later. It is, by design from it’s inception, a method for current workers to finance current retirees. If there isn’t anything left when you retire, it’ll be because the system is designed poorly. So, if this is a significant concern, look for candidates that talk about changing the system.
Also ask yourself if these things should be paid for out of federal funds in the first place. Ask yourself if the people in another state should be paying for your state’s services. In some cases (especially federal mandated programs) this is the case. But in most instances, it is not. Parking fees, for example, most likely are for city or county services, most of which should be funded at the local level.
I think this says all that needs to be said about the Democrats’s chances in the general election. Reminds me of the Will Rogers quote -
That having been said, I was impressed with Lieberman during his debate with Cheney in the last election. Seemed a thoughtful candidate, and I expect he would have the best chance of being able to work with a Republican-controlled Congress over the next five years.
FWIW. I am trying to leave aside all the “horse race” considerations for now. And, on request, I will not list the reasons to eliminate the other Democrat candidates.
Regards,
Shodan
Very reasonable and correct observations, John Mace.
People who generally agree with them, especially on notions about local funding of local matters and Social Security reform, won’t be voting in Democratic caucuses and primaries, so it’s a moot point.
CNN put up a very handy guide to the positions of the folks running for the nomination. It’s sortable by candidate and issue.
But, the point is that when states and local governments are being squeezed harder to pay for various federal mandates, increased security costs after 9/11, etc. without the financial support from the feds, they are forced to raise fees and taxes in other ways. The fact these fees or taxes are not directly on services that the federal government ought to be providing money for is irrelevant.
But, Siege: You can comfort yourself by knowing that while your small portion of Bush’s federal income tax cut is likely being eaten up by increases in taxes (and fees for services, tuition for colleges, etc.) on the state and local level, the same is not happening for someone who is in, say, the top 1% in income. Such a person is seeing vast reductions in the federal taxes they pay and only modest increases in the local and state taxes (which are nearly always less progressive taxes). I hope that this helps to warm your heart…Your sacrifices are not in vain! 
In that case, you might want to check out http://www.presidentmatch.com/ You take a survey of your opinions and they tell you to what extent each candidate matches your opinions. Don’t know how good their algorithm and information is, but I got a 100% match with Kucinich and a 1% match with Bush, which sounds pretty accurate to me from what I know of these candidates! (I still am not likely to support Kucinich because I value “Can get the current occupant out of the White House” as much as agreement with me on the issues. After all, even Lieberman, the Dem I am by far the least enamoured on, had a 67% match with me on the issue.)
100% match with Kerry. Didn’t expect that.
Thanks for the site, jshore.
Thanks for the site, jshore, but they claim Bush never served in the military.
Still got 100% match with Bush (big surprise there) and a 62% match with Lieberman.
Regards,
Shodan
Bush may have served a portion of his National Guard obligation , but he did not complete his obligation. Perhaps it would be more accurate to state “Completed Military Service.” Playing dress-up on an aircraft carrier doesn’t count.
Nonetheless, that was a very interesting site that jshore provided.
You’re right, it would be more accurate to state that Bush “completed his military service”, since he was honorably discharged.
To say that he never served in the military is more on the order of an outright untruth.
Regards,
Shodan
Well, since I explicity said (in the part you quoted, no less) that I was not talking about federal mandated programs, I’m not really sure what your point is. If we discount federal mandated programs, or even increased security costs, is it still irrelevant who pays for what? If so why don’t we just abolish all state and local taxes, and pay for everything on the federal level?
My 7 reasons to vote for Joe Lieberman:
Free trade. AFAIK he is the only Dem candidate that has called protectionism for what it is.
He was against impeaching Clinton, but he was also gutsy and honest enough to to set aside 30 years of personal ties and publicly say that the affair was wrong and immoral before most other dems would.
He doesn’t campaign on the Sabbath; some may not like the fact that he’s religious, but at least with him it’s no act.
He was a leader in creating the successful welfare reforms of the 90s
Lieberman’s has a good chance of having a productive relationship with a GOP Congress. At the same time, a split government would inhibit truly massive spending – not that he’s a big spender anyway.
He’s made all the obvious criticisms about Iraq, but he knows we can’t cut and run now.
And the #1 reason to vote for Joe Lieberman …
Because it’s not every day you get a chance to piss off the idiots at Stormfront AND the Democratic Underground with one swift stroke!
The PresidentMatch site gave me 100% on Kucinich too. It must be relative, because I think I disagreed on some issues, and I know I weakly agreed on some. But Kerry wasn’t far behind, and there’s no way I’m supporting Kucinich either - I wish him well personally but have been hoping he’d quit for some time.