H
ShamMol said:Gov. Richardson doesn't have the political capital to run. He is viewed as weak by many of the top Democrats in the nation.
That is why he doesn't have much support within the higher echolon (sp?) of the Democratic Party. It will look very weak especially in the face of the fact that Richardson have wavered on a few, what they consider to be key issues.vauge said:I am not a lib or a democrat, but I bet Richardson will come out of the woodwork. His biggest issue is that New Mexico didn't go blue last election. He has a clean Washington record and will use his Korean ambassador experience to show that they are a bigger threat than they actually are and we are doing nothing about them.
I would not doubt if it came down to a Richardson v Cornyn (Texas Senator) run.
Allen is a nice guy who I would probably go drinking with, but I don't believe he would make a good candidate. I know his campaigning skills have been questioned and that lynching legislation will be a huge mark against him, especially with the minority population of the United Sates. I think one of the problems is that he comes off as too conservative, at least your first impression of him. With George Bush, you go the impression that he could be moderate on some things, but you don't get the same feeling with Allen.Stherngntlmn said:Senator George Allen R-Va
Former governor...
Son of former Redskins coach...
Born in Ca, raised in Va. He's usually held stedfast to true conservative principles, and has headed post 9-11 committees on terrorist threats. He's really a force to be reckoned with come election time. My support for him wavered when he brought an apology resolution for lynching legislation delay to the senate floor... but overall I think he's a real conservative, while still being "moderate" enough to pull the undecided vote.
*Side note: it'd be totally cool to have a completely Virginia based election between Warner and Allen.
btw... some more background.ShamMol said:My pick for the Democrats is a sleeper candidate, one basically nobody considers (kinda like Kerry was). Gov. Warner of Virginia-he is smart, he handles himself well in debate, he is a Democrat in a red state, he has popular support, and he did work on taxes which is a big no in Virginia. He was able to do many things in the Democratic platform, yet still be able to garner such high support from Republicans in his state. He has that...moral thing that the Democrats have been looking for and he is very connected to his faith. I think he has the most potential to be a President. But in the end, he is only as strong as his campaign.
SixStringHero said:John McCain would be a good choice and so would Joe Lieberman (whose absent from your list) Also don't count out Richardson yet, he might be interested in running.
Personally, If McCain and Lieberman left their party's and started a party called the "Moderates" I would probably jump on board.
Not to mention that he's fiscally responsible too. It'd be rather foolish if he wanted to run and he was blocked again by the party.rudy0908 said:I know a bunch of people who would do the same, including myself. McCain would be the best option if we are going to try to reunite our extremely divided nation.
shuamort said:Not to mention that he's fiscally responsible too. It'd be rather foolish if he wanted to run and he was blocked again by the party.
He lost the primaries in South Carolina for two reasons. Another vietnam vet started attacking McCain's war history and then a rumor campaing presumably started by GOP that told voters that McCain had an illegitimate black child. (The McCains adopted their daughter from Bangladesh.)rudy0908 said:Plus he's served in the military and is generally a moderate. Does anyone know why he lost to Bush in '00?
MoreFinally, there's the granddaddy of them all: Bush's gutter job on Sen. John McCain in the South Carolina primary of 2000. Bush lost to McCain in New Hampshire and wasn't going to allow it to happen again. So the Bush team resorted to what are called "push polls." They're designed to plant seeds of doubt about candidates. In South Carolina, callers asked those they were polling questions like: Would you be more or less likely to vote for McCain if you knew he'd fathered a black child out of wedlock? Some had him fathering the child with a prostitute. Others inquired whether voters knew that McCain's wife was a drug addict. And did they know he had abandoned his crippled first wife? It was nasty, nasty stuff, and it caused McCain to lose his composure in public, which didn't help his cause at all.
McCain's wife indeed became addicted to painkillers at one time, in much the same way that radio mouth Rush Limbaugh did. Moreover, McCain and his wife had adopted a little girl from an orphanage in Bangladesh, so the "black child" story seemed confirmed to some.
As for the Waterloo of South Carolina, most of the facts are well-known, and among this group of Republicans, what happened has taken on the air of an unsolved crime, a cold case, with Karl Rove being the prime suspect. Bush loyalists, maybe working for the campaign, maybe just representing its interests, claimed in parking-lot handouts and telephone "push polls" and whisper campaigns that McCain’s wife, Cindy, was a drug addict, that McCain might be mentally unstable from his captivity in Vietnam, and that the senator had fathered a black child with a prostitute. Callers push-polled members of a South Carolina right-to-life organization and other groups, asking if the black baby might influence their vote. Now here’s the twist, the part that drives McCain admirers insane to this very day: That last rumor took seed because the McCains had done an especially admirable thing. Years back they’d adopted a baby from a Mother Teresa orphanage in Bangladesh. Bridget, now eleven years old, waved along with the rest of the McCain brood from stages across the state, a dark-skinned child inadvertently providing a photo op for slander. The attacks were of a level and vitriol that even McCain, who was regularly beaten in captivity, could not ignore. He began to answer the slights, strayed off message about how he would lead the nation if he got the chance, and lost the war for South Carolina. Bush emerged from the showdown upright and victorious . . . and onward he marched.
What issues do you believe McCain was indecisive on? From what I've seen, he seems to toe the old party line, fiscal responsibility, sane defense, against abortion, amd pro-small government.Stherngntlmn said:McCain lost because he has trouble deciding on an ideology.. unlike the democrats.. most republicans get aggitated at moderates because of their seemingly indecisiveness...
HegemonLocke said:John McCain
Barbra Boxer
John Edwards
Hillary Clinton
Whestly Clark
anybody have thoughts on my preliminary list? As a unfaithful/unaffiliated political party voter I'm having a tough time coming up with real GOP possibilities who I would actually vote for but I think McCain is the front runner in my head. But I think the Dems on my list are pretty good too but I fear that Hillary would face too much opposition in the Congress and Edwards would be meak, timide and unexperinced. I think anyone saying Obama should relaize the "kennedy" effect shouldn't be relied on for an election as important as a this one. Lets face is Kerry, no one really wanted in '04 he was just the most powerful/recognizable/"legitimate" Dem out there. The Dems could use some powerful party figures and I think that Barbra Boxer is one an excellent example of one. Whestly Clark - to the best of my knowledge hasn't ever been elected to anything - but is that always a bad thing?
Ok I;ve thrown enough thought out there. I strongly support all Dem's to look into Barba Boxer - her record(esp. Iraq she voted NO to give the power to the president to go to war) and the Rep's to look at John McCain as a hope for strong, honorable, powerful leader with integrity to lead them to recovery from the neo-con take over.
He's co-sponsored gun control bills with lieberman, wavered on several aspects of abortion several times, voted against tax cuts, advocates federalizing healthcare, voted in favor of affirmative action, voted to divert millions in defense spending to federal education. All of this... before 2001.. not even counting his odd flip-flops in the 2004 election.shuamort said:What issues do you believe McCain was indecisive on? From what I've seen, he seems to toe the old party line, fiscal responsibility, sane defense, against abortion, amd pro-small government.
He isn't a strict conservative and anyone who follows politics knows that. He is a moderate conservative. Basically, he can think for himself and not follow strict idealogy.Stherngntlmn said:He's co-sponsored gun control bills with lieberman, wavered on several aspects of abortion several times, voted against tax cuts, advocates federalizing healthcare, voted in favor of affirmative action, voted to divert millions in defense spending to federal education. All of this... before 2001.. not even counting his odd flip-flops in the 2004 election.
I'm not trying to say that McCain is a liberal... but he's definately had trouble with consistancy in any view of conservative ideology.
Ban cheap guns; require safety locks; for gun show checks. (Aug 1999)Stherngntlmn said:He's co-sponsored gun control bills with lieberman,.
Prosecute abortion doctors, not women who get them. (Jan 2000)Stherngntlmn said:wavered on several aspects of abortion several times,
Use veto power to reduce government spending. (Jan 2000)Stherngntlmn said:voted against tax cuts,
Higher taxes on cigarettes. (Jan 2000)Stherngntlmn said:advocates federalizing healthcare,
Affirmative action OK for specific programs, but no quotas. (Jul 1998)Stherngntlmn said:voted in favor of affirmative action,
We must provide our children a strong, better country. (Aug 2004)Stherngntlmn said:voted to divert millions in defense spending to federal education.
nope too many democrats disdain her very existance and she has absolutely 0 possibility of carrying any state in the southCanadianGuy said:I voted for who I thought was gonna win and that is hialry clinton. There is no doubt in my mind she will be the Democrates leader and probably will win the election
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?