All we need to turn the tide is one good, fairly unknown candidate with

[efhmc]

a thick skin, a good grin, an intellect and a plan, and no or few skeletons in the closet. I think the majority of people are looking for an intellectual down home type. This person will win no matter what the repukes throw our way. I am convinced the average american voter is disgusted with the repuke destruction of liberty and is longing for a person who fulfills the qualities of a "good american" without the sexual or evil family empire baggage of the last two presidents. (Yes, I love Bill, but this is about the future.)What is your opinion and if you agree, where can we find this person?

[LittleClarkie]

1. Talk to Disney

Maybe they can work something up in the animitronic section.

[efhmc]

2. Well, that is helpful.

[LittleClarkie]

6. Sorry, it's late, I'm pms-ing

and the sugar from an entire box of Iced Berry Pinata Girl Scout cookies is coursing through my veins.

My first reaction was that this candidate sounds so good we're going to have to build the guy ourselves, like a Franken-candidate.

What do you think about Feingold?

[efhmc]

9. Sometimes our first reactions are the most honest and the best.

I am sorry to say that except for the info here on DU, I know nothing about Feingold. I do like what I have heard here, a lot.

[rockymountaindem]

3. John Kerry, Wes Clark and John Edwards all fit that description.

I won't speak about anyone else because I don't know the subtleties of a Russ Feingold or a Mark Warner. But being able to name three off the top of my head, they aren't as hard to find as you think. The problem is that this seems to be all for naught when too many people are driven by fear, or when the other side gets people to believe that you are something you're not.

[efhmc]

7. But, thinking of Bill Clinton, who had so much baggage but never let

others define him and was clever enough and tough enough to weather it all and whose worth as a leader shown through no matter what was thrown at him. Even a person with half those skills and little or none of that baggage would do. I like Clark a lot.

[FloridaPat]

4. Bushco is so bad that they ever had a trial, it would be the end of

the republican party. Just about any Democrat should beat these slime balls. We need a real opposition party with the actual guts to oppose loudly these incompetents. We need some impeachments here.

[DesEtoiles]

5. You got it. It's just that simple. Evan Bayh and/or John Edwards

[efhmc]

8. I am sure that I am showing my ignorance here but who is Evan Bayh?

[tritsofme]

10. Current Senator/ Fmr Governor of Indiana

Reelected in 2004 with 60% of the vote in a state where Bush got 60% of the vote.

[efhmc]

11. I think people who run as governors always have an easier time than

those on the national scene. Please tell me more.

[sarahlee]

12. Gee... sounds like

Kucinich....

[eridani]

13. Indeed

Despite our best efforts, we did not succeed in getting him well-known.

[Awsi Dooger]

14. I don't think it's that simple anymore, post 9/11

As much as I supported John Edwards in 2004 and think he had a better chance than Kerry or any other Democrat, at this point I think he would have lost, albeit by half the margin Kerry did. We are still underestimating how beneficial that 9/11 attack was to the GOP politically, specifically in federal races beginning in 2002 and foreseeable. Essentially, it slowed or completely derailed many of the basics of that "emerging Democratic majority" thesis.

We have held our own in governor's races post 9/11, and actually picked up seats at the state levels in 2004. But when you start losing matchups like Kerry/Bush, Carson/Coburn, Tannenbaum/DeMint, Knowles/Murkowski, etc. despite having the undeniably superior candidate it's obvious something major and beyond the radar is influencing the results. Granted, those are red state senate losses but only Murkowski was a (semi) incumbent and the margins are too dramatic to ignore.

I have posted this link regarding party affiliation change post 9/11 on DU several times, but not recently. I think it is well worth reading and studying, all the way through. This is from Pew Research and was printed online early last year, in fact before the primary process. It eerily forecast many of our problems on November 2, notably significant loss of Hispanic support: http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=750

I notice the election fraud theorists completely ignore reports like this, when assessing 2002 and 2004.

[Leilani]

21. That is a really terrific report!

You should keep posting it, because I think many people here would be surprised at the results.

There was a thread running recently about problems for the Dems, & most posters disagreed & pooh poohed the opinion that anything was structurally wrong.

And I agree that many have convinced themselves that Kerry really won.
I have not seen evidence to support this, & I believe these reactions show people are in denial.

I found the results on patriotism & military to be very interesting, & also the huge differences among the races on various beliefs.

The country was changed greatly by 9/11, & people fail to recognize it. During the campaign, I posted the info that Kerry was not carrying enough females according to the polls. I was flamed, which I find happens quite often here if you dare to tell the truth.

Unless Dems recognize the problems, they will not fix the problems, & they will continue to lose.

[Avalux]

15. All we need is a fair election

we could have Jesus himself as a candidate but until election reform occurs, we're screwed.

[bklyncowgirl]

16. I wish it were that easy.

The simple truth is that the left has been out organized by the right.

Yes, the right candidate might win with alot of luck. But let's face it, Bill Clinton himself, the greatest campeigner ever, might be known primarily known today as the former governor of Arkansas and failed presidential candidate (Maybe even doing TV ads like Bob Dole--picture THOSE viagra ads kiddies) had it not been for a guy named Ross Perot.

It's going to take imagination, money, discipline and energy to turn this thing around.

[demwing]

17. Is that all we need?

"thick skin, a good grin, an intellect and a plan, and no or few skeletons in the closet"

How about a progressive agenda, or do you include that in "a plan"?

And what about great oratorical skills, with a plain-spoken naturalness?

It seems like a simple list, but if you find such a person, you'll have found the near perfect candidate.

[CWebster]

18. The problem is

Will the Democrats allow that figure to emerge?

[K-W]

19. You have to be kidding me. This is bigger than one election.

Stop focusing on personalities and start looking behind the scene. If we want to win we have to build up grassroots organizations to convince our fellow Americans that our ideas are the best for them, because most Americans dont hear our voice or hear it weakly and discredited. We need to compete with the credibility and resources of the established powers. It took movements to create the left, its going to take movements to rearm us in washington.

Sorry, but we arent just gonna get pulled out of this by some super candidate.

[Discord]

20. I agree that it's not really about

that perfect candidate. I think its a very valid point when someone questions whether we'd be able to win EVEN IF we found that perfect person to run. There is widespread election corruption, and what I'd consider to be mass brainwashing of the general public to believe that the Democratic Party is immoral and evil. Sorry to say, but to the more moderate right, the fundies, and any god-faring citizen who is not already a tolerant Dem, will find images of gays and gay marraiges quite powerful in how they will view the Democratic Party. Is it misleading? Of course it is. But to the generally uninformed public. That will leave a larger impression than anything real political issue being discussed. Sad... but true. Its not about the candidate so much anymore as it is about our image in the public eye.