|...And then there were four. Who to vote for on Feb. 3?||Dale Brigham|
Jan 23, 2004 11:46 AM
|For the first time in my life, I get to vote in a Dumocratic primary election that isn't already a "done deal." Unless the body-mass-index-challenged soprano starts screeching in New Hampshire on Wednesday morning (and no, I don't mean Howad Dean), my vote will still count for something the following Tuesday here in Missouri.
So, who to vote for? The remaining four suitors all have some traits that I like, but each also has baggage that I fear will doom him to a butt-kicking administered by Karl Rove. Dean's got guts, but is way over the top; Clark's got the Commander-in-Chief act down pat, but has no campaign or elected governing experience; Edwards has great campaign smarts and Southern charm, but little proven record or substance; Kerry looks Presidential, but speaks nothing but cliches.
What's a brutha' to do? Any and all advice greatly appreciated!
|Wait till NH is in.||OldEdScott|
Jan 23, 2004 12:24 PM
|Dean should be finished Wednesday morning, as should Lieberman. At that point you have a decision to make: Do you want Kerry or not Kerry? If the answer is not-Kerry, you then have to decide who's most likely to beat him.
It will be either Clark or Edwards. If either one beats expectations in NH, he sets up well for Feb. 3. But in terms of the expectations game, Clark has the most to lose. So it's setting up nicely for young John. He's been terrifically impressive as a campaigner, too.
My gut tells me we're heading for a Kerry-Edwards showdown.
|Thanks, Ed. I'm leaning toward Edwards, but...||Dale Brigham|
Jan 23, 2004 12:46 PM
|...does he have the gravitas and cash to pull it off? Of course, the money will flow in if he has a good showing in NH (I still have my $100 to give). As to the experience thing, how can a guy who has been in an elected position less than 6 years dare to run for President? Well, I guess if your last name is Bush, it's OK.
I'm thinking not-Kerry. I don't see him dragging any red states over to the blue side; I don't see him winning most of the states up for grabs (like MO). No matter how good a campaigner he might be (and I don't think he's really very good at it at all), he won't play well here in Muleskinnerland. I swear, the pols have more severely affected Suth-ron accents here in Mizzery than they do in Texas, my home state. Edwards has a chance here in the general election; Kerry does not.
As always, I appreciate you sharing your insights, Ed!
|My hope is||OldEdScott|
Jan 23, 2004 3:04 PM
|Clark finds a strong campaign style, gets some better shirts and ties, does VERY well in NH, and steamrolls out to whip Kerry nine ways from Sunday on Feb.3, and takes Edwards as his VP.
My gut tells me it ain't gonna happen, that Clark's a dud, and that Edwards has found the right tone & message to be the not-Kerry, and could well pull it off. I'd be happy with him. He's really impressed me as a campaigner. And I like his sunny populism.
|Edwards - the dark horse?||gtx|
Jan 23, 2004 2:14 PM
|I'm getting this weird feeling it's gonna be Edwards now. Or at the very least he's probably an easy pick for the VP slot if Kerry or Clark get the nomination. Besides lack of money and actual experience, anything to be worried about with this guy? He was a personal-injury lawyer, right? Seems cheesy, but maybe that's a good thing...
I'm not totally ready to count Dean out, though...
|personal injury lawyer spin is....||dr hoo|
Jan 23, 2004 3:22 PM
|... he did battle with the big corporate interests helping the little guy. He was just a simple country lawyer fighting all the corporate fat cats in Armani suits, trying to right the wrongs those rich people did.
It's not what you did, it's how you explain what you did. He REALLY hits his stride when he talks about his lawyering days. Remember, it's part of his "son of a millworker, and everyone told me I could not do it, but I did it because this is AMERICA" story.
The more I see of him the more I understand why there was so much talk about him as one of Gore's short list for VP in 2000.
|Were you for Gephardt?||dr hoo|
Jan 23, 2004 12:35 PM
|From what I have heard, Clark has scooped up a lot of Gephardt's top people for his campaign. He seemed to be prepared to swoop in as soon as the tears dried, and that shows good strategic thinking. I like Clark, but I like him a lot more as VP. Edwards/Clark would be a nice ticket in a lot of ways. Kerry I am a bit cold on, but he seems to be picking up some energy that was missing due to cancer recovery.
Clark has good money. Kerry has no restrictions on money raising. Edwards needs to get money fast or he will falter. Money matters a lot.
I say wait and see what happens. On the issues they are not all that different. Take a bit of time and look at their positions via webpages. Then vote on principle, or vote for who you think will win. Things are VERY fluid now, and a couple of days can change things in big ways.
|Was not looking to Gephardt||Dale Brigham|
Jan 23, 2004 1:05 PM
|Gep was the favored son in the upcoming primary here, but I had no ties to him (I'm too new to MO for that). If Clark can flip all of Gep's people and support here over to his side, Clark will likely do well in MO.
Funny thing is, that with just over 10 days to go until our primary, I have seen zero TV ads for any of the candidates, and had only one house visit. A very courteous and cold (I invited him inside, but he said he had many doors to knock on) young Dean backer with the mandatory skull cap and beard dropped off a Dean flyer that had a classic Soviet-style social-realism rendition of Howie. I guess everybody is saving their powder, if they have any left, for the post-NH world.
Thanks for the advice, Doctor H!
|You will see ads, I am sure.||dr hoo|
Jan 23, 2004 1:17 PM
|I've been seeing a lot of clark ads in WI (including one RIGHT before the SOTU). My guess is that no one signed up to air ads in MO, writing the state off, but they are coming. If they are holding off, they will be blanketing the place next week.
|Socialist realism! LOLLOLLOL! Perfect!||OldEdScott|
Jan 23, 2004 3:09 PM
|I've seen that flyer, and that's exactly IT! LOL LOL!|
|I hope it's either Kerry or Clark||MR_GRUMPY|
Jan 23, 2004 2:08 PM
|I would just love to see a debate where either of them asks: " So george, tell us about your Air National Guard scam."
I can just see it now. george starts yelling " WMD!, WMD!, FLAG!, FLAG!, gotta' go now, gotta' go now."
Jan 23, 2004 2:26 PM
|The Bush team will just revert to a "what have you done to protect your country lately?" stance on national security, painting either Kerry or Clark as having lost the will to fight in the countries darkest hour.
If people don't care about Bush's slippery Vietnam record, I wouldn't put it past them to deem Kerry and Clark's as "ancient history". The heart wants what the heart wants.
Just look at what happened to Max Cleland.
|4, 8, 1052, I don't want to see any of them||No_sprint|
Jan 23, 2004 2:36 PM
|in the white house. I don't know anyone else who really, really wants to see any of them in either.|
|re: ...And then there were four. Who to vote for on Feb. 3?||jrm|
Jan 23, 2004 2:51 PM
|I like clark. Although he has no experience as you mention he does know his junk from a academic background in econ and a military background in the NSA. Lets just say two fronts of which the current adminstration is vulnerable.
I'd really like to see a clark..someone ticket. maybe kerry or dean. But im not sur this will happen because of the all the division in Iowa, which IMO hurt the prospects to some degree.
Well its time to roll.