Condensed Poll: Hillary, Kerry, Gore, Clark,Biden, Unknown.

[KoKo]

Just checking DU'ers leanings at this point in time.

[dogman]

1. Did you see Biden saying on The Daily Show that he would like a unity

ticket with McCain. What a dick!

[KoKo]

3. yeah....really KOOL wasn't it...

:puke: But, I'm trying to be fair here. Some DU'ers DO like him. Even Lieberman has some supporters. Who knows why...but I'm trying to be fair. :shrug:

[liberalpragmatist]

4. Yeah. but to be fair, we would win

Though I have MANY disagreements with McCain and would not vote for him for president, I STILL wish he had taken up John Kerry's offer as running mate. The ticket would have been unbeatable. Polls showed such a ticket leading Bush by 15 points!

And frankly, I'd take Kerry/McCain over Bush/Cheney in a heartbeat.

[MODemocrat]

25. Yes, Biden lost me when he said he'd like to run with McCain

I will never vote for anyone who is a republican, or has one on the same ticket. That really turned me off completely, and I've never been too in love with Biden anyway. So he's the one who wanted John Kerry to select him as his running mate, I've been wondering how that got out.

[Placebo]

2. CLINTON '08

[KoKo]

8. I've put McCain's name in three times in DU Polls...he doesn't poll well

here. I've put him with Dem Candidates and he doesn't get numbers. :shrug: I don't think he would have done well with Kerry. I know I and other Dems wouldn't have pounded the streets for Kerry if McCain was his VP. But some here feel we need to "bring the enemy" into our fold to win. Some DU'ers have posted John McCain's voting record here many times. It isn't what most Dems would feel comfortable with. And, then there's that pix of McCain/Shrub kissy fest..even though Shrub accused McCain in SC of having a "GASP" BLACK BABY!

Still, after that, McCain huggied and kissyied Shrubby...like a long lost "brother." I couldn't have done that if Shrubby had treated me and my wife and adopted child like that. :shrug:

[FrenchieCat]

53. Did Hillary serve?

Why and whom is she saluting? The DLC crowd?

[Cha]

70. hillary saluting

from and reed.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[aspberger]

84. Isn't she a beautiful person?

ya gotta love her.

[election_2004]

5. If you're going to be fair about it....

You need to at least include Warner and Bayh, who've both dropped hints about running.

Not to mention at least half a dozen other Democrats omitted from your poll who would make strong contenders.

[KoKo]

10. I did include them over a month ago. I'm only doing "segmented" polls

right now. But, thanks. I know there are others polling on DU and you might not have seen the one I posted Bayh (this past Sunday) or the poll where Warner was a "write in."

DU's memory is "short term" because we are processing so much it's hard to keep it all straight. So, I'm only doing a few candidates at a time now. Maybe Warner will the the "Other." It's a lonnnnng time until '08, but it's good to get the "pulse" of DU.

I find it interesting, anyway. :-)'s

[election_2004]

52. I just meant....

Your poll seemed to be based mainly on Big Names, rather than who would necessarily make the best candidates.

[PresidentObama]

6. I voted for Kerry

Of course :)

[wakeme2008]

7. While I voted for Clarke

I am very much open to a new face. :)

[KoKo]

11. Maybe keeping an "open mind" right now is a good thing?

Not to copy "Martha" but what looks really good now, might not in another year or two. I keep posting polls just to keep in touch with where other DU'ers are going in their thinking.

thanks! :-)'s Maybe Clark is the one....maybe not...maybe his talents lie in a Dem Administration but not at the top. Or, maybe it IS as the top. It's so early. :shrug:

[wakeme2008]

14. I do know I do not want a Senator that has been in Congress long

Toooooo many votes over the years to Kerry him.

[LeftyElvis]

9. This is it for me in '08:

No progressive Democratic Party president, no old LeftyElvis in the US anymore.

[KoKo]

13. Not sure what you are saying...because don't see "Elvis" as Lefty...but

if you mean "generational." Well...the "Elvis Generation" seems to vote in higher numbers than the others. :shrug:

Here's hoping that changes for '08!

[Swamp Rat]

58. Elvis Costello, perhaps?

:D



Btw, I voted for Wes, but I also like Al Gore, Howard Dean, Bob Graham, Dennis Kucinich, Barak Obama... :)

[LeftyElvis]

64. I'm a Dean guy

..but I'd vote for Wes. I'd hold my nose and vote for Hillary; I just wish she'd stop the makeover and be herself.

[Swamp Rat]

80. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

Some say Hillary's makeover was extreme. Like, she was given a Pod while she slept. :scared:
:yoiks:


:D

[LeftyElvis]

96. LOL

Exactly; I like the "old" Hillary, not some DLC freeper clone.

[Swamp Rat]

107. kick

:D

[LeftyElvis]

63. My thing

is that I love Elvis but not his supposed politics, that's all. I named my Lab Elvis.

[hopein08]

12. I voted for Kerry in this poll......BUT...

I would much prefer Edwards, Feingold, or Bayh.

[KoKo]

15. It's early...and I like to keep my own "options open."

Just keep testing the "waters here." Just to see.

Who knows how it will all end up. There's plenty of time to vet all the candidates who didn't get vetted in 04. I still think someone else we don't know about will emerge..but that's just me. :D

[roguevalley]

16. chose clark. I expect to be wacked.

:)

RV, sighing over another thread altogether.

[KoKo]

20. I won't wack ya!

:D. Clark wins all the polls he's listed in. It's early yet, though. Who knows what will happen.

[Cha]

71. Why do you expect to be

"whacked"? I know you're an original Dean supporter, no?

But, Dean isn't going to run..he's too busy getting our Dem Party into revolutionary shape..so there has to be another person worthy of support.

I voted for Clark, too:)

[liberalpragmatist]

39. I'm increasingly leaning towards Edwards

I'm a big fan of Kerry and I still think he would make an oustanding President. And I'm not writing him off just because he lost last year. Still, I'm not sure I see how he would win a race. Perhaps against the right opponent - I don't know. As far as I can see, it would be difficult, given the caricature Republicans have built around him. But I'll give him a fair chance.

As for Edwards, he definitely has his own weaknesses. But he seems politically deftest and the most capable of uniting the party. Perhaps Edwards/Clark '08?

[Clark2008]

45. Again with the backwards ticket... geesch.

Why do you want the senator running the military and the general running the Senate?

[liberalpragmatist]

48. Well, I'm looking at Clark strongly for President too

Again, I admit that Edwards' primary weakness is his inexperience in foreign affairs, which is what makes Clark attractive. On the other hand, I find Edwards a more talented politician and more charismatic campaigner - you may disagree. Either Clark/Edwards or Edwards/Clark would be great IMO.

[ksclematis]

86. We've had enough politicians

who have been trying to run this country, and it can't be run on charisma alone. I don't see that winning 'any' political office is any requirement for national recognition. Edwards had one term in Senate, no foreign policy experience and no military experience. Clark has had enough political training and experience (Masters at Oxford and getting up to 4-star), and he has more charisma than most of the lot of so-called candidates. He's been a leader since high school, thru West Point,'Nam, Bosnia and more than any other potential candidate. He's still a leader of many organizations, security conferences and businesses.

I just can't see Edwards/Clark under any circumstances....it won't happen!!!....only Clark/Edwards if that is Clark's choice running mate.

[PresidentObama]

17. Does anyone think Hillary has a real chance?

Besides the media hyping her, saying shes a safe bet for the nomination in 2008, I have gotten mixed reactions from Democrats. A lot of Democrats think she is too polarizing, risky, and trys to cater to the right by moving to the middle. Even those who said there going to support her in 2008 are just supporting her mostly because she seems like the candidate to beat in 08'. I think she's all media hype if you ask me. With the Clintons getting closer to the Bushes, and Hillary moving to the middle, I don't know how well she'll fair in the liberal voting Democratic primaries.

I mean I'm for Kerry, and I'm sure Hillary supporters would say Kerry had no chance. But give me Kerry, Edwards, Clark, Biden, or anyone from the list over Hillary. Hillary is the last person I think our party needs. I would vote for her in the general election, but I'm standing my ground in the primaries for Kerry. I urge everyone to vote for their respective candidates in 2008, other then Hillary. I seriously am worried over her chances of winning in 2008. She's a good Senator, and I like her. Don't get me wrong...

[Kazak]

19. I've got a hunch...

that the Dems are flaunting Hillary out there intentionally to, misdirect the republicans efforts...I have no idea if this is true or not though. :shrug:

[MODemocrat]

28. That's what my husband and I think is going on

Hillary is a very savvy person, so we think she has something up her sleeve to trick the republicans.

[BlueIris]

33. Same here. Basically.

We might yet see a Clinton as VP, though.

[LandOLincoln]

72. Me, I think Hillary's

a stalking horse for Wes. :patriot:

[MODemocrat]

78. You know, sometimes I think that's a possibility

They've always been close-knit and I feel they were supporting him in the 2004 nomination, but he got too late of a start to make it.
:hi: :dem:

[rhett o rick]

65. Do you for a moment think that Hillary would go along with

this as a deception? She wants to be President.
Many have been duped into thinking this war is between the red and blue, or demo's and repub's, liberal and conservatives. Wrong. We are in a war of the rich versus the moderate middle class. Big Money has complete control of the Republican Party (easy because they are gullible and greedy). But the Big Money isn't stupid enough to stop there. To cover their bases, they also have a big hand in the Demo Party. Why do u think Hillary has so much early support? Not because she is being pushed by the grass roots demo's. So why is she one of the leading contenders? My bet is Big Money. Big Money is winning the war. They have complete control of this Country. We no longer have a democracy but a plutocracy. Wake up America.

[Kazak]

18. First choice Gore, second choice Clark.

:shrug:

[Lindacooks]

21. I'd like to see those effing chickenhawk coward Repukes attack

Clark. Just try, you weenies.

[PresidentObama]

22. I think Gore ruled out a run in 2008

Though, I'd like Al to run in 2008. Al Gore is a good fighter for our party. And even though it's obvious who I'm supporting in 2008, the more the merrier.

[iwantmycountryback]

23. Russ Feingold!

Al Gore isn't running, how can you even put him in the top 4 candidates? And Biden is in the bottom tier of candidates.

[MaggieSwanson]

30. Great picture, great quote

I followed your link to learn more about Russ. Thanks!

[ihelpu2see]

24. Clark needs to be some ones vp not the head of the ticket!!!

[Adelante]

35. Does that make sense?

To have a commander-in-chief presiding over the Senate? What a waste of talent and experience that would be.

[ihelpu2see]

85. I just dont think he is that good of a politician to get elected. But

I was pulling for Dean in 04 so what do I know.

[ksclematis]

87. Exactly!!!

n/t


My Edit: Response to #35....

[CarolNYC]

89. I agree...I never liked Clark for VP slot...

He may help some ticket or another to win but I do think it would be such a waste of his talents and experience...With the state the world is in, we can't afford to waste something like that....Of course, I'd love to see him as President...but he doesn't run or runs and doesn't get the nomination, I'd much rather see him in some position in a new Administration where he can do some good to help get us out of this mess....That's how I felt when Kerry was picking his VP also....

[bufffbison]

26. Pres: Bill Richardson VP: Hillary

I would welcome Hillary as President, but she isn't my prime choice to be president. Next to Bill, would be Wes Clark.

[election_2004]

51. How about Richardson/Clark ???

Much more electable.

[saracat]

56. Richardson has waaaay too much baggage. The tabloids would have a field

day with him! And besides, everyone who was with the Kerry Campaign in NM KNOWS that it was stolen and the asshat wouldn't allow a recount! Is that the kind of Dem you want at the top of the ticket? I hope not!

[election_2004]

68. Richardson is not necessarily a favorite of mine

You should try pointing out the baggage factor to all the Dems who think they have made backroom deals to put in a Clinton/Richardson ticket.

[saracat]

73. I don't like that version either!

[mikehiggins]

27. What I don't get is why so many people on DU are Clarkistas

Isn't this supposed to be the home of all them damn lib'rul commie pinko radicals?

How come a General from the south gets such consistent support whenever his name comes up?

I'm a big fan myself but this is really bizarre.

[Jersey Devil]

32. My thoughts exactly

WTF is it with this guy? Could it be that despite all the liberal rhetoric here people are anxious to support what they see as a "winner" and ready to jettison ideology for victory?

That is my theory, though I am also at a loss to figure out why they think Clark would fare any better than any other Democrat.

[kevsand]

36. Clark is extremely liberal and progressive.

When you look at his positions as a whole, he's actually closer (IMO) to Kucinich than say Kerry or Edwards. I'm not jettisoning any ideology to support him. I agree with him on almost every single issue.

[Clark2008]

38. Ah... now, see I can answer that.

You're, from your user name, in Jersey.

The South is a whole 'nother ball o' wax, my friend.

Clark is VERY liberal. VERY progressive, but, see, Southern sheeple will see the "General" attached to his name and think, "Ahhh... I could vote for him since the Republicans are all whacked out fundies now." And they would THINK they're voting for a conservative Democrat.

Now... couple this with the fact that they guy actually CARES about people and not corporations, actually CARES about this country, actually has INTELLIGENCE and LEADERSHIP abilities under his belt, well, that, is why he'd fare better.

We have to turn some red states and very few Dems could do it. Look at Paul Hackett. He nearly turned a solid red Republican district on its ear. Decent Republicans respect the military. Can you imagine what Clark would do to the purplish-red states? ;)

[karynnj]

42. the "decent" Republicans who respect the millitary

voted for the party that thought it was clever to wear cute little purple heart bandages to mock Kerry's purple hearts. They also allowed the party to label Cleland as unpatriotic.

Before you note that I am from NJ - I was born and raised in one of the reddest states in the union and stayed there through college.

[Clark2008]

43. See... that's why I said "decent'

Those people you described, aren't.

I do know lots of decent paelo-conservatives who've about had it up to HERE with the neo-cons. They would vote for Clark, but not for Kerry or Hillary.

It's the PERCEPTION that Northeastern folks are too "librul." You know?

And, hey, I don't fall into that category. I'm from red Tennessee and am madly in love with a man (former Army) from Boston.

Oh - and after living down here for a good number of years, he agrees with me on this point, even though he's NOT an ardent Wes supporter (loves him to pieces as a commanding officer, just isn't sure who he's going to support, yet, in 2008).

[LittleClarkie]

40. Why would this be sacrificing ideology for victory

Now if we were banking on Joementum or something, I could see your point. But Clark quacks like a liberal.

[Jersey Devil]

44. Well, you see, that's my problem with Clark

I really don't know him and have to find out more about him. From what I read in this string he is very liberal. To be honest, he got in the race in 2004 so late I paid little attention to him and stuck with Kerry (my original choice was Dean).

I am not saying I am against him or couldn't support him. I am saying that he is not well known even among party loyalists like myself so I still see him as a longshot.

[CarolNYC]

82. Hey Jersey Devil....

I love your post...because it gives me the opportunity to again tout this most wonderful thread I started a while back for those seriously interested in Wes Clark :) Just in case you do actually want to learn more about Gen Clark, here's the link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=235x6296
(The boston.com link in that post is broken and I can't edit the post now so here's the fixed link:
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/clark/articles/2003/11/16/boy_from_little_rock_chooses_military_path/)

Also, some pieces I found that I like about him being a real Democrat or having Dem values or whatever that might give you a better sense of him....and I hope I'm not overwhelming you with all of these links:

"There were those who, concerned more with party credentials than the public interest, challenged Clark's right to run as a Democrat. At candidate debates he was asked to justify his recent decision to be a party member. But what defined Clark as a Democrat was not longevity of membership but fidelity of principle. There was a time when tax fairness virtually defined the Democratic Party. It no longer does. The party is so wired into corporate corruption that it is a betrayal of everything for which it once stood. If a Democrat steps out of line long enough to support the poor and middle class, she or he is likely to be attacked by "leaders" like Joe Lieberman, who last year attacked Al Gore for Gore's halfhearted economic populism.

Clark tried to reverse that. Where other candidates tinkered with tax "reform" (every screwing of the public in the last 40 years has been done in the name of tax reform) he proposed a bold stroke to "restore progressivity to the tax system." A family of four with an income of up to $50,000 a year would have been exempted from the income tax altogether. A single parent with one child making up to $28,000 a year would also have been exempted (with a sliding scale to cover other circumstances)."
(snip)
"The tax code is shot through with these kinds of loopholes, thanks to the Democratic Party, which in the war on the poor has gone over to the other side, rejecting the view that money made by money should be taxed at the same rate as money made by workers.

Remember that this fall when we see the imitation Democrats chasing after corporate campaign "contributions" while trying hard to forget Wesley Clark, who made the mistake of reminding them of what a real Democrat represents."

http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2004/02/18/opinion/myers.html

........

"There were a lot of Democrats who wouldn't accept Clark as a "true Democrat." One of the worst things you can do to a Democrat is to call him or her a Republican, and this is something that Clark's opponents (and their supporters) often did. I don't think there is anything Clark could have done to prove his Democratic credentials to the people who shouted "But he voted for Nixon and Reagan! He spoke at a Republican Party dinner!" Perhaps many of these people find it difficult to understand why a career military man would have voted for Presidents who were strong on national defense issues during the Cold War...nor did they want to accept that Clark also attended the Democratic Party's dinner a few weeks after the Republican's, campaigned for Dems in '02 Congressional races, and voted Dem since 1992. The above does not matter to them, and those facts were not really instrumental in convincing me that Clark was a "true Democrat." If there was one thing that convinced me that Clark was a champion of Democratic values, it was his vocal support for humanitarian intervention to stop genocide in Rwanda and the Balkans. The fact remains that several Democratic leaders - the current standard bearers of our party - shirked from their duty of defending human rights and honoring multilateral agreements because it was not politically popular at the time. Clark, on the other hand, advocated intervention to stop the genocide in Rwanda and the ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. Well, those credentials are Democratic enough for me."

http://www.lindsayfincher.com/archives/2004_02.html

..........

"He talked about jobs and why we are are losing so many. I asked him to talk about his comment in Monday's debate about software jobs going to India. He said that the US can't and won't stop these jobs from going to India, and for that matter, Russia, Eastern Europe, and possibly China. He said that anyone with a computer, an Internet connection, and a talent for writing great code can become an employee of a software company these days. He's right. And further, I am impressed that he understands that. So many of our candidates don't.

He talked about getting our troops out of Iraq. He wants to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis right now. He wants to bring Bremer home. He wants to bring the airborne and armor and all the traditional forces home. He wants to send in 20,000 troops who have been trained in policing. Teach them Arabic. Set them up all over the country in police stations alongside Iraqis. He wants to create a multi-national authority, not NATO, but something like NATO with Arab nations included. He wants that multi-national authority to oversee the transition. He wants to take our troops out of the impossible position they are in of being liqhtning rods for the Iraqi's frustration and sitting ducks for their guns and bombs. That sounds like a good plan to me."

http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2003/11/wes_clark.html

......

"And finally, there are those who say Wesley Clark is not a real Democrat; he voted for Nixon and Reagan and is a johnny-come-lately to the Democratic party. I spent a lot of time last fall helping to write a statement of principles for the local Democratic parties. I have followed Clark's campaign carefully and everything he says, every policy proposal he makes, is as if he had read and internalized those Democratic principles. And he says these things with true compassion and conviction. Listen and watch him on CSPAN or wherever those who control our airwaves allow you hear him. He is truly dedicated to helping all Americans achieve a better future, and to working with other nations to build international trust and security."

http://www.loper.org/~george/archives/2004/Jan/913.html

.........

From Barbara Lawton's "Why I'm For Clark" piece in The Nation:

"I wanted to hear his vision for domestic governance. Because his candor in early interviews drew sharp questions about his legitimacy as a Democrat, I was checking for an internal consistency to his views. I came away impressed by his firm grasp of the issues we face, and by his commitment to strengthen this country from within. Clark, for example, doesn't talk about national security without talking about jobs.

There was an important subtext to my examination. I do not intend to contribute to the election of one more defensive, arrogant male. When I challenged and provoked and interrupted Clark, I closely watched the former general. His reaction was uniformly one of intellectual curiosity. The man is "scary" smart. And gracious, and respectful.

Clark comes to this contest unburdened by partisan baggage. But he stands firm on issues of importance to Democrats. He's pro-choice and pro-affirmative action; he believes in investing in public education and job creation. He'll enforce and strengthen our environmental laws. Clark is an intuitive Democrat.

Now, as we hurtle into the primary season and voters across the country sequentially suffer the cacophony of political ads and intraparty sniping, note that Clark is hoisting large ideas as the banner under which we may gather. Take two issues: healthcare and tax reform. His healthcare plan will extend insurance to 31.8 million more Americans and cover every child in America. He'll do all this by cutting costs, emphasizing preventive care and taking back the tax cuts Bush gave to taxpayers making more than $200,000 a year. And Clark's Families First Tax Reform plan eliminates federal income taxes for families of four earning $50,000 or less. His plan gives a $2,250 tax credit per child to every family earning under $100,000. It pays for tax cuts by closing corporate loopholes and raising the marginal rate on income over $1 million a year. It's about time someone stood up for the hardest pressed."

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040202&s=lawton

.........

"My support for Clark has not come naturally. I'm a partisan and liberal Democrat, no great lover of old Clinton staffers and smug New Democrats. I'm prone to value experience in democratic politics over the hierarchical values of military service. And when I heard that Clark had voted for Reagan, praised Bush, spoken at a Lincoln Day dinner, and said that he'd have been a Republican had Karl Rove returned his calls (no, I don't believe that he was joking -- though he may have been trying for sarcasm), I judged him an amoral opportunist and borderline con artist. In angry e-mails to a pro-Clark friend, I called the general an "ambipartisan" and summarized the Lincoln Day revelation as "Game Over."

But I figured I owed the largely unknown candidate a chance. Being a professor, I decided to read his book, Winning Modern Wars."
(snip)
"His summary of "American virtues" is "tolerance, freedom, and fairness" -- about as good a slogan for the Democratic Party as I can think of. His book exudes a welcome politics of "live and let live" rather than "endorse my pain." This is the kind of liberalism that could actually be popular.

Dubya is planning to make gay marriage a wedge issue in the campaign. If Clark is the candidate, "bring it on." I can already imagine what Clark would say about gays in the military: "What soldiers do in their personal lives is not my concern. And we should stop the disgraceful practice of persecuting people to unearth their private relationships. If a soldier impedes combat readiness by trying to pick up a man in his unit in a war zone, I'll sign his dishonorable discharge myself -- and smile as I do it.""
(snip)
"The Army has people with low incomes, but ensures basic living standards and adequate opportunities for all. Clark's book convincingly articulates a case for making the rest of the country like that."

http://www.ospolitics.org/usa/archives/2003/11/26/how_i_beca.php

.......

And then there's this piece about a speech he gave in SC during the primaries from a much longer article in Intervention Magazine ...the link doesn't work anymore....

"“The education you get,” Clark says, “depends on where you live.” He explains that in our country the quality of the education one receives is determined by the tax base of the town one lives in, meaning poorer children get a worse education than children in more wealthy neighborhoods. “This country cannot afford to leave students behind,” Clark emphasizes, “education is the key to the American Dream!”

The speech is delivered with strength and with passion; the general gives the impression that what he says is what he believes."
(snip)
"“We are in this together,” a theme Clark would return to several times, as he attacks Bush’s tax cut. “I’m going to put our children at the top of the list. They are going to be my first priority.”

What education is really about is money, funding education programs, funding teachers, funding the repair of school buildings. Clark is not discussing tax cuts for individuals, not the American Dream as a new SUV. For him all Americans must sacrifice for the good of this country, a good that cannot happen without our sacrifice.

“There is plenty of money; it’s just not in the right places. The wealthy need to be patriotic and to give some money back!”

For Wesley Clark, then, redistribution of income is not a dirty idea, not unpatriotic as it is for George Bush, and even for some of the skittish other Democratic candidates. For Clark it is the essence of patriotism.

Although Clark’s speech was on education in rural areas, it was also about his overall views. The candidate kept returning to the venerable liberal theme that we are a community of people and as a community all of us must contribute to the solution of our problems. The military is not an individualist institution, regardless of the "Army of One" ads, nor one that emphasizes materialism. Clark’s three decades in this institution does not have him today singing the glories of individualism and the dream of financial enrichment, he is more comfortable with sacrifice for the common good.

While the national media carries the Republican message that Howard Dean is a liberal, Wesley Clark, under the media’s radar screen, speaks like a Kennedy-Johnson -- dare I say the word? -- liberal. Dean, being slammed hard, would never talk straightforward about taxing the rich to pay for programs for the poor. Wesley Clark is doing exactly that.

It took a Cold War politician, Richard Nixon, to go to communist China. Will it take a retired military general to rehabilitate liberalism?"

[ksclematis]

90. Clark's a REAL Democrat....

He speaks the truth and tells it like it is.....he's no-nonsense! No baggage, real war hero -- more than once.

We Clarkies come here to let people know who he is and what he stands for, and since the MSM won't let anyone know him, not even mention his name, we think it is up to us to do that for the General.

[LittleClarkie]

29. Go Kerry! Best of the rest, baby!

On DU, I always look at who's doing the best AFTER Clark.

We're Clark-heavy, doncha know. Tends to skew things.

So I'm always happy when my sweet babboo is coming in second.

[greendog]

31. 1. Unknown / 2. Gore / 3. Clark.....

...and the rest of those listed can forget about it.

Gore and Clark are only marginally tolerable but they'd probably keep me from voting Green.

[KoKo]

34. "Unknown" is going up in the polls since I started this.

I've done maybe five of these polls in the last month. Unknown only got a couple of replies in the first one. It's gone up with each poll. Tonight is the highest votes for "Unknown." Maybe it's just those who are here tonight. It's hard to keep DU polls kicked for more than half a day to get a broader group.

[greendog]

77. I think I know why...

We're starting to see guys like Hackett and Schweitzer go from "unknown" and unlikely to "well known" and winners.

Remember, Schweitzer's first campaign (US Senate) surprised everyone by coming within a couple points of unseating a Republican incumbent in a very red state. Now, he's Governor and both houses of the legislature are under Democratic control.

Hackett probably has a good future in the Democratic Party.

Dean started out as a dark horse candidate for the Democratic nomination and did well till the DLC and the corporate media went "all out" to stop him. Now he controls the DNC.

None of these guys were "likely suspects" when they started out. What they have in common is that they're not afraid to say what everyone is thinking.

I think more of us are willing to consider candidates outside of the "professional consultant" and "poll driven" mainstream. Especially since we haven't been doing very well with the "safe bets".

[PresidentObama]

37. Interesting

The past two Democratic Presidential nominees, Al Gore and John Kerry, are tied for second. Along with unknown. Hillary is doing poorly. And Clark is ahead. DU seems to be very anti-Hillary, Pro-Clark, and the place seems mixed on other candidates like Kerry and Gore.

I think this notion that failed Presidential nominees can't run again and win is wrong. I know Gore won't run in 2008, but if he did. Great! Tell Al to go for it. The more in 2008, the better. Kerry deserves a fair chance during the primaries. And I think he'll get a fair chance.

[wiley]

41. Hilary is running for Senate

She is also doing a great service to Dems and the country by taking the media and haters' heat about 08. Hilary will not run in 08.

[election_2004]

50. Could have fooled me....

Because everyone's acting like conventional wisdom.

[nickshepDEM]

46. Governor Warner (VA)... His stock is steadily rising.

He has the record, he has the money, he has the base, he has the proven ability to win.

[ksclematis]

91. Warner has no POTUS credentials....

No foreign policy/experience, no military experience.....He's only got $$$$$$. That did it for Bush & Co, but we can't stand another un-talented and one term Gov. He's doing some learnin' by travelling around the country. That "ain't" gonna give him the experience to do a good job in the WH. I just don't know what gets people excited about him.

[nickshepDEM]

92. What gets you excited...

About a guy that has never won an election in his entire life?

[Jai4WKC08]

108. If Clark can win the 08 primaries

Then he'll have won a lot more elections than any one-term governor.

If you think he can't win the primaries, then what's the point of worrying about it?

But it does lead me to wonder... is the only thing that "excites" you about Warner that he won an election? Even in a red state, it's still just a single election. In a single state. Where he had a lot of money going in.

What are his qualifications for the office? What courage or character has he shown? Where has he stood up to fight for what's needed in this nation? Those are the things that should "excite" someone for a particular candidate. Electability is important too, I'll admit. I happen to think Clark has it in spades. YMMV. But it sure as hell ain't what "excites" me about him.

[against all enemies]

47. Can the favorite candidate of DU'ers win a national election?

Not trying to be an ass, but trying to be a realist. While the best candidate may be the DU favorite, the candidate with the best chance of winning may be the third or fourth choice. Dennis may have been the DU favorite last time but I don't think he would have had the best chance.

[FrenchieCat]

54. I think that Clark could win it....if he got the support.....

The media made sure he didn't get much coverage other than smears during the last primaries....or didn't you know?

Clark is the favorite here, at KOS and at Mydd...because he's got netroot support. He listens to his grassroots, which is more than I can say of most other potentials.

Sure, he doesn't poll well in the "scientific" polls...you know those polls that measure name recognition created by the Idiot Pundit heads and who they discuss night and day...which would be Hillary.

The media decides, and most follow.

We can make a difference in 2008.....

So the real question is, will we? :shrug:

[Warren DeMontague]

49. Al Gore.

As long as he keeps kicking ass and not backing down. If he starts asking pollsters what color pants to wear, I'm gone.

[rfkrfk]

55. I voted for 'unknown'

we don't want to nominate a proven leader
with executive experience, such as Wes Clark.

we need a fresh face
perhaps a raffle

[VOX]

57. Edwards. Although he's hardly unknown.

IMO, he still has the gift, and would be a formidable candidate.

[Apollo11]

59. Rootin' for Gore ...

Some people here are saying that Gore has ruled out running again. In fact his statements on this question have been more nuanced, and many of us believe (hope!) that he is keeping his options open.

In any case - it is way to early for Al Gore to be making public statements about running for the Presidency. My guess is that he will keep his options open until he has to make a decision (early in 2007).

Gore has a lot going for him:

- intelligent (regularly accused of being "too smart")
- experienced (nobody has more relevant experience)
- understands the issues (international affairs, environment, budget deficit, etc.)
- served in Vietnam
- 8 years as VP in a succesful administration
- undisputed winner of the popular vote in 2000
- consistent opponent of Bush Administration
- endorsed Howard Dean (now DNC Chair) in 2004
- spoke out early against Gulf War 2
- spoke out against PATRIOT act
- defender of the Constitution
- speaks out for human rights at home and abroad
- wide network of political and business contacts
- national/global name recognition
- stable family background (Go Tipper!)
- Christian (important to many voters)
- younger than some other possible contenders

www.algore-08.com
http://algore2008.net /

:)

[imenja]

60. Boxer

[second edition]

61. I voted for Kerry !!!

I still think he would make the best President.As time goes by, much of what he said, suggested or predicted has come to pass. The guy knows his stuff. Its a real shame he couldn't overcome his passion for truth and fairness and above the belt politics in order to compete with the republican scum machine. Its also a shame so many people were conned by this poor excuse for a president and his PR people.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

62. Clark and Gore are the ONLY ones who can win. They were and

are against the war. We need that moral clarity. Unfortunately, neither one could probably win their own states. Clark is more likely to win Arkansas than Gore with Tennessee. Run Clark with someone from Ohio or Florida.

[election_2004]

67. How about Clark/Tubbs-Jones

Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-OH) as Clark's running mate.

[Catchawave]

66. Mark Warner

He's got an approval rating in the 70's as Va's gov right now.

[Texas_Kat]

69. ... and he could certainly help the Democrats by running for Senate

In Virginia.

We could really use him there.

[Raiden]

74. Wes Clark is the best candidate I can think of...

Edwards and Warner also look good

[WCGreen]

75. Clarks the Guy.....

He should think about grabbing one of the women senators as his running mate......

I would prefer ML from LA, but I know she may ne too conservative for most people here.....

Just think. Two good looking, god fearing liberals from the south...

Can I get an Amen.......

[KoKo]

79. All the Rest...are sort of beating Clark at this point. So, it says that

equal amounts of DU'ers so far...are for "all the rest." :shrug:

It's nice to see the strong showing for Clark. It does show unity there and maybe he can get a great message across that can swing the DNC/DLC/DCC to listen to him. Maybe Clark can get a great Platform out there and MAKE our Dem Establishment listen to him.

Still..there's half of us who are keeping our "powder dry." Clark has to convince us...we are waiting or hoping for other candidates.

[snowbear]

81. Except that.. Clark won DailyKOS poll big-time also...

And a LOoOoOot of people voted on it. So it's not just here at DU.. :patriot:

[KoKo]

83. I understand that, and Clark WON hands down my Comprehensive Poll

that I posted last Sunday which is off to archives. But, if one does "selective polls" the numbers change. That's why polls vary according to the questions asked and the candidates. I'm still trying to do a mix when I post a poll because I don't have a candidate for '08 yet.

If Clark's supporters come up with a strong platform that I and other Progressives can agree with then I will definitely think thats a good thing. As will many of the rest of us who are NOT committed at this point. Whatever moves the status quo and breaks out..is good for our party. But, it's still very early. So much can change between now and then. As we learned with "9/11." :shrug:

[CarolNYC]

88. Oh, come on, my friend, Koko,

come clean. You only start these polls with Clark in them to get those people who get upset to see so many Clark threads or to see Clark win these polls all pissed off at Clark and his supporters...you see how well it works.

Corey...see this poll started not by a Clark supporter, OK??

[KoKo]

97. kick.....................

[DemBones DemBones]

93. We need someone other than those listed.

I'll support Dennis Kucinich if he runs again. He was the only real anti-war candidate and he has continued to work to end the war. He's also working on universal health care and he's very strong on labor issues. In other words, Kucinich is a real Democrat.

[fujiyama]

94. Is there a need to even include Clark in these polls?

When was the last time he didn't win one of these? He's ALWAYS going to win them here on DU simply because of the grassroots support he's built up. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I'd vote for him too in the primaries.

[FrenchieCat]

95. But just remember that maybe one day....

We'll really have to vote. This is good practice.

And there are those who may be making up their minds as time goes on.

[leesa]

98. Why would we want to recycle all these people again.

Clark and Gore had the courage to say this war was wrong. The rest are DLC wimps, who will betray their country in a heartbeat if it gets the vote.

[windbreeze]

101. Clark/Gore?

just thinking out loud...I want Clark period, I don't see him running for second place(that's why I didn't switch it around)...but maybe the two together could upset all the applecarts? Would Gore take second place again, if it were offered? Personally, I never got the impression that he wanted to be president, the last time..and hasn't he said something to the effect that he was a "recovering politician"...Let's face it, in the end, IF Clark comes out strong, and gets the nomination, he WILL have his own ideas about who he wants as a running mate...before you know it, this will all be upon us...but in the meantime, anything could happen...I'de like to see someone in our party address voting irregularities, prior to the next election...
windbreeze

[politicasista]

99. 2006, 2006, 2006

[goodhue]

100. Kucinich, Feingold, Edwards

Are candidates I would lean towards.
Only one on poll who I like is Gore.

[FrenchieCat]

102. Interesting choices!

Kucinich and Feingold both voted against and Gore spoke out strongly against the Iraqi invasion.

Edwards voted for the IWR.

[Zero Division]

103. Feingold

followed by Clark and Kerry, at the moment.

[LWolf]

104. None of the above.

Kucinich.

[catabryna]

105. I agree...

since there is no mention of whether this would be during the primaries or general election, I'd always vote for Kucinich in the primaries so long as he continues to run.

[AtomicKitten]

106. It is Karmic Justice that Gore Run and Win

I remain devastated over 2000. Gore was robbed. He would have made a great president, much more left-leaning that Clinton so I hope he would appeal to the far-lefties. He deserves the opportunity to run again and I would support him above all others if he chose to do so.

[UrbScotty]

109. This Deaniac screams for Clark!

YEARGH!

A year and a half ago, who would have guessed that I'd say that? :D

[NebraskaDem]

110. What about Evan Bayh?

I chose Wes Clark from the list but out of curiousity does anyone like the Senator from Indiana?

[Clark2008]

112. If I wanted to vote for a Republican, I'd pick John McCain

That's what I think of Evan Bye-Bayh.

:)

111. kucinich

I like kucinich, he speaks openly about universal healthcare, and kerry talks about healthcare for children. I agree that Hillary puts on a facade and that is not the real hillary. Too bad she can't just be herself.

I am trying to get a pic loaded, but may not work.

[erpowers]

113. Feingold

I like Russ Feingold.

[KoKo]

114. Right Now at 54% of this poll for ABFC, Clark is losing. ABBC is Winning.

If one counts up the votes for alternative candidates it seems that Clark has some work to do. So many of us aren't sure and others support other candidates. Seems 54 % doesn't prefer Clark.

I don't see this as a clear win for Clark, but do understand that he has a huge following coming into the 2006 Midterm Elections. He does have a good margin on DU for "Single Candidate Voters." :shrug:

[RandomUser]

117. Now add up the numbers for ABBH, ABBK, ABBG, ABBU

Comparing them to each other, would seem ABBC is NOT winning. And it would hardly say that they are "Anybody But Canddiate X" -- just because they don't choose Clark as a first choice doesn't mean that they are "anybody but Clark." Ditto for the other candidates.

Faulty logic, and unnecessarily inflamatory, on your part, I fear.

[mvd]

115. Kucinich first choice

Favorite of those: Gore.

[VADem11]

116. Go gore!

He won last time and he can win again. He's the most qualified candidate. I like Gore/Clark 2008.