I love all of our candidates, but only 3 have a chance of winning

[jenk]

Edwards- He's got "the look" down pat. Most people don't like his vote for the war but you have to get past it! He's hammered Bush on lack of vision and leadership after the war. He has a very thorough plan for education and improving the economy. His "message" is strong (even if you think it's corny, it resonates) He's winning South Carolina and slowly.....and I'll admit, VERY slowly starting to creep up. His fundraising has been great. The GOP can't brand him a loony northeast liberal like Kerry or Dean. He has a great personality, very folksy and likeable, great family man who has overcome tragedy and worked hard his entire life.

Gephardt- He's come on recently. An experienced veteran with union backing and a very solid base of support in the midwest states. Doing a great job pushing the healthcare issue, and makes it very clear that the democrats are the party of peace and economic prosperity. He's very passionate in front of the mic. Also can't be branded a loony northeast liberal, they can't make a McGovern or Dukakis out of him. The Dems in Iowa are getting serious now as Gephardt pulls ahead.

Al Gore- the president in exile, too bad his heart is not in it.........yet.

Let's face it, Dean is no Clinton. He's already been buried by the media unfortunately(and I really like the guy too). The Repugs are just ready to feast on him. Same with Kerry whose slipping and in turmoil. Clark has been to wishy-washy, but I still have some faith in him.

Kucinich supporters need to pick a candidate soon, same with the Mosely Braun and Sharpton people. Let's stop messing around here....

it's time to get serious, get organized, and get ready to win this thing!

looking at geographics and what the American people go for these days in a candidate, Edwards or Gephardt (or an Edwards/Gephardt ticket) would be perfect for our party.

[mlawson]

1. I agree about one of them.

Edwards could win, and also Clark and Dean. Those are the three I think could win. But I doubt any of the three will get the nomination.

[_Wayne_]

2. jenk, I'm assuming you're probably a young Dem, which is great

But this opinion is based on nothing. No facts. No polls. No trends. The three candidates you mentioned will most assuredly NOT win the nomination, under any circumstances. I'd bet $10,000 that Kerry, Dean, and Clark will be the final three candidates.

[jenk]

6. not entirely true

Gep and Edwards have both been trending up. Edwards fundraising has been good. Gephardt leads in Iowa, Edwards leads in SC and will probably finish 3rd in NH.

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

18. Another take

Edwards has had nowhere to go but up. Gep is doing well in Iowa because he's putting almost all of his resources there, but he's been neglecting the rest of the country.

Personally, I think the race is still tight between Dean, Gep, Clark, Edwards, and Kerry. There's time enough for just about anything surprising to happen between now and when the nominee is chosen.

[Tom Rinaldo]

21. Clark leads in S. Carolina

At least he did in the latest poll when I left town on a business trip on Wed. Just got back. Any new polls out?

[newyawker99]

29. Hi Tom Rinaldo!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[alexwcovington]

9. ASS U ME

Not every bad opinion comes from young people.

I'm sick and tired of these discriminatory attitudes that pervade our society.

[Zynx]

23. Gephardt and Gore would get buried.

Gore has nowhere near the advantages that he had back in 2000 and that's important to understand. Gephardt, I won't even comment and I don't think I need to.

Clark, Dean, and to some extent Kerry have the best shot at winning.

[Walt Starr]

3. I disagree completely

Edwards and Gephardt stand no chance whatsoever. In fact, I believe Al Sharpton would stand a better chance in the general election than either of those pink tutus.

al gore ain't running. It's time to forget about that possibility because it will not happen.

Dean and Clark are the only hope I see for a Democratic victory.

[MIMStigator]

4. Clark is the only one I see winning.

n/t

[searchingforlight]

5. I actually liked Edwards until the last debate.

I do think Dean made a clumsy statement but I felt that Edwards was grandstanding in his response and that it didn't take into account that we are all going to have to come together in the end AND we are going to have to be able to overcome the rhetoric of the primaries.

If Edwards wins, that may not be a problem but should Dean win the nomination, I would assume that Edwards would want to help win the South and I think he blew any chance of that happening by his response.

I would love to see Al Gore step forward but don't think that is a possibility.

Gephardt is just too dated.

[jenk]

8. I think it'll be forgotten by then

I mean, should Dean win it then it will be ancient history. Edwards is probably the #1 or #2 vp choice of whoever wins the nomination.

[HFishbine]

7. Edwards

I think you may be a little shy on facts regarding Edwards, who I like, BTW. But, where is Edwards starting to "creep up?" And as far as fund-raising, haven't his totals been declining each quarter?

As noted above, you offer no sources. Can you provide anything other than your impressions, especially since they seem to contradict the facts?

[SeveneightyWhoa]

10. I'm confused.

How the hell does Gephardt have a better chance of winning than Wes Clark?

[NicoleM]

11. Get over it?

Most people don't like his vote for the war but you have to get past it!

No, I don't and I can't. If somebody who voted for or supported IWR wins the nomination I will support them. But I cannot just "get past it" in the primary stage. They had a responsibility to the voters and the military to offer up at least a little resistance to the Bush War Machine, and instead they rolled over like compliant puppies. They are not as complicit for all the death and destruction as *, but they aren't absolved of all responsiblity for it just because they have a "D" behind their names.

I can't just get past it because you think I should.

[HFishbine]

19. "Get Over It"

If that were a valid appeal, one could put together a whole string of "get over its" to make a case for supporting Bush.

[jenk]

12. another thing you have to remember with Gephardt

a lot of Lieberman supporters are also Gephardt supporters, and Lieberman's departure in Iowa helped Gephardt a great deal. Should Lieberman drop out on the national level, it'll give Gephardt a huge boost.

[JohnKleeb]

13. Why would Lieberman supporters go to Gep?

I thought Lieberman was a pro business type Dem and we know how Gep is and thats one of the things I like most about Gep.

[AP]

20. I think Lieberman supporters like him for reasons other than corp-friendly

policies. I think they see hime as Gore's VP, and a decent, avuncular guy. It's just a hunch.

[JohnKleeb]

26. ok

Just wondering.

[HFishbine]

22. Jenk

Dude. Friend. See that thing in front of you? It's called in Internet. It's an amzing tool. All sorts of sources can be consulted and facts discovered. You can make all the claims you want, but they won't be taken seriously when they contradict facts.

Gephardt's recent gains in Iowa have not come at the expense of Lieberman. Consult some polling data and you'll see that his Sept. to Oct. rise of 5 points actually appears to have come from Dean, Kerry Graham and previously undecided voters.

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=748

[alexwcovington]

14. Gore? Gephardt?

Gore is so washed up ROTFLMAO. So's Gephardt! Sure, I'd love to see them win something... anything... but they're past their prime.

Edwards could win but he lacks support for the primaries.

Clark could win but his campaign seems to have lost its steam.

Dean could win. He's got the support and the steam, but everyone else loves to backstab the Dem's best shot.

[childslibrarian]

15. Clark, Dean, Kerry

are the final two. Hopefully they will run as a team. Edwards is too inexperienced. The majority of the others are Washington insiders and apologists for Bush.

[childslibrarian]

16. Sorry, Hard day at work with the kiddies

I meant Dean, Clark

[charlie]

17. Hey childslibrarian

The subject line and message are editable for up to an hour after you post :hi:

[childslibrarian]

27. Thanks

I didn't know that

[keopeli]

24. While Clark may not be the favorite among Democrats...

...he is the most likely candidate to get the vote of Republicans who hate Bush*, which is currently 10% of their constituency (Newsweek poll this week). If the situation in Iraq doesn't get better, and the economy doesn't get worse, then Iraq will be the key issue in the campaign, I believe.

Democrats need to nominate someone that will get Republican votes, I believe. Clark can get the most. Dean, unfortunately, will have an extremely difficult time getting Repub votes.

I expect many of you feel that swing votes, or independents, are the votes to attract. However, it's very difficult to predict what the turnout will be like demographically in the General Election. I believe the Repubs will turn out en masse, especially fundamentalists. They would probably turn out in even higher numbers if Dean is the nominee.

I like Dean a lot. It seems to me that, from an electability perspective, Clark is the better choice right now.

[0rganism]

31. I agree with you, but you omitted other potentially key swing issues

Erosion of civil liberties, for one. Al Gore nailed it yesterday, the current administration is vulnerable to accusations of everything from base hypocrisy to gross abuse of power with respect to Aschkroft's gestapo laws. A related issue which will score points -- perhaps not fatal ones, but points nonetheless -- is transparency of government. The bushites put a lot of hard work into their stonewall, so we can't really see a lot of the slime going on directly, but then the wall itself becomes an issue. And, to borrow a page from the republican playbook, if they don't know what's going on, the voters can always be persuaded to believe the worst.

Any of the Democratic candidates is in a position to score on these topics.

What Clark brings to the table "in spades" is the stark contrast between a brilliant 4-star general and a mediocre deserter fratboy. Only a dipshit with no common sense would vote for the latter, and that describes no more than 42% of the voting population.

As for Dean, I'm not quite sure what the Dean campaign is about now. Until he starts going after the southern vote in earnest, I think he runs at a disadvantage.

Speaking of southern vote, I just don't see Edwards winning it any more than other candidates. He'd be better off keeping his senate seat, if possible, and building up some legislative experience. Southerners have shown that they're more than willing to pick a carpetbagger over a native son when it comes to governors and presidents; securing Ohio, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin ought to take precedence over longshot bids like North/South Carolina, the Virginias, and Louisiana. Florida and Georgia are as out of reach as Texas, at this point.

[rucky]

37. Republican votes count double:

One for our guy and one away from *.

[Padraig18]

25. I don't agree.

I think Clark, Dean and Gephart will be the last 3 candidates left standing.

[progressiverealist]

28. every PUG I know wants to face Howard Dean

and I know quite a few Pugs. I'm not slamming Dean- I may still vote for him, depending on what I read and hear before our primary- it's just an observation.

The only guys I've heard them say they fear are Clark and (surprisingly, to me at least) Gep.

Again, not slamming Dean- he's probably my third favorite at this point, but I'd support him wholeheartedly if he gets the nod.

[quaker bill]

33. Aren't these the same guys who said

Iraq would be a cakewalk? Weren't the joyful natives to be greeting us with kisses and hugs by now??

Aren't we saving the forests by cutting down the trees?

Aren't we clearing the skies by discharging more pollutants?

Won't giving the rich lots more money create more jobs?

Yes, the gang that can't shoot straight wants to run against Dean. I suspect that they do not know what they are talking about. (again)

[Toucano]

30. Edwards is not even an option for me.

I admire is accomplishments, but I don't trust him.

[Karenina]

32. NO DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE

has a snowball's chance in hell of "beating" * on GOP controlled voting machines. Get REAL, kids.

[Exultant Democracy]

34. They need a close race if they are going to cheat

A Dean/Clark, Clark/Dean, Clark/Edwards ticket would leave the GOP out in the cold.

[Carolina]

35. totally disagree

Gephardt couldn't even retain his leadership position among House Democrats. He's too much of an insider and despite his repeated labelling of Bush as an utter failure, his photo-op in the Rose Garden shoulder to shoulder (almost) with Bush supporting IWR won't go away. Iowa notwithstanding, he's a loser.

Gore, OMG. Could any us really bear Gore v Bush AGAIN. His campaign was ever changing and poor; he ran away from Clinton because he believed the medias lies about Clinton fatigue and hobbled himself by choosing Holy Joe whose claim to fame was lambasting Clinton on the Senate floor. He couldn't disavow Clinton and claim credit for the Clinton record, that fed into all those 'inconsistencies.' He had no rapid response team to fight all the assaults, lies and distortions hurled his way (once again wouldn't listen to Clinton's advice, see Jeffrey Toobin's book). Much as I liked and supported him (hell, I even supported him in his primary bid in 1988), he IS stiff.

Edwards, not yet ready for prime time ... in his first Senate term, no foreign policy experience. Good for number 2 spot but I don't even think he'll win his native state of SC. Here, Clark is ahead and he appeals to disaffected repugs, veterans who helped Bush beat McCain in that dastardly dirty 2000 SC primary but who are now pissed and betrayed, and many of the military folks at Fort Jackson (huge training base).

[kerry-is-my-prez]

36. I'd add Clark and Kerry to that list

n/t

[incapsulated]

38. It will come down to...

Clark and Dean. Gephardt and Kerry should be doing a whole lot better by now if they had a chance. Edwards, maybe in the future.

I like Kerry very much, but his campaign doesn't seem to be picking up enough enthusiasm. Gephardt may take Iowa, but I don't see much else in the cards for him.

[OneBlueSky]

39. couldn't disagree more . . .

Edwards just comes across as too young and inexperienced, and as attempting a bad Clinton impression . . . Gephart's time passed long ago, and a Gephart candidacy would likely generate a strong third party effort on the left based on his stong support of some of Bush's worst policies . . . Gore could win, but a draft is a thorough long shot, and his early withdrawel says a lot about his desire for the office . . . the only other candidate's I see as possibly viable are Clark and Kerry -- and Kerry better get his act together pronto to remain so . . . Dean would get creamed, and all of the others are already toast . . . jmho, of course . . .

[Renew Deal]

40. I consider myself a moderate but...

Where are all these centrists coming from. I almost never here anyone pushing Gep on here. Today it has happened more than once. Oh well, big tent. I like it that way. Maybe I am just too used to DU.

[FrenchieCat]

41. You know

That I will say what all expect. I only see Clark winning this race. He keeps his cool and just sais what has to be said. Caught him today on MSnbc calling out the PNACers.....He said straight out, yes, the Perle is PNAC and using our soldiers as pawns on their Geopolitical chess board.
The RW are very, very, very scared of Clark........That's why the Mediawhores are having all of the Generals trotting out saying he said that you said that she said that you said that they said.....about Clark.

[pruner]

42. you're living in the past

His fundraising has been great.

he may have been at the top in Q1, but he's been at or near the bottom (among the "top-tier" candidates) since then.

and he has the highest percantage of donors who've maxed out among the Dems.