Pretend you're voting in a Democratic primary...
Who would you pick? Assume this is an open primary where members of any party may vote. I want to see whom Democrats consider strong and good candidates to beat Dubya in 2004 and what Republicans consider weak candidates that have a chance of winning the primary but not the election (at least on AppleInsider).
I personally picked Al Sharpton as I see him as a strong candidate with a clear vision of what I want. With the ability to mobilize the minority vote like no other candidate, I think Bush has no chance against him in both the North and South.
I personally picked Al Sharpton as I see him as a strong candidate with a clear vision of what I want. With the ability to mobilize the minority vote like no other candidate, I think Bush has no chance against him in both the North and South.
Comments
I've never heard of them.
I wouldn't vote for any of them.
Lieberman?
Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce
Lieberman?
Lieberman?
I. Was. Kidding.
I've heard of most of them. But I still wouldn't vote for them.
Originally posted by job
I. Was. Kidding.
I've heard of most of them. But I still wouldn't vote for them.
Conservative by heart, or even more liberal?
Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce
Conservative by heart, or even more liberal?
Wouldn't you like to know.
Originally posted by alcimedes
i'd vote for John, 'cause he can talk to dead people.
Maybe he can get some of them to vote for him.
"I see trial lawyers." [/creepy kid's voice]
I don't care if he's dead, at least I knew where he stood.
that's all we need. John channeling Paul claiming to be honest.
So being the good Republican that I am, Sharpton is my man. That footage of him smoking, counting money and talking about a drug deal is sure to win over the soccer moms.
Nick
If JFK were alive today and running I would vote for him. He was a democrat I could admire.
Fellowship
Originally posted by tonton
So... you've studied all of their platforms, followed the debates and interviews, and you don't like their ideas...
...or you're partisan.
Typical.
Well, judging from your all-knowing, all-seeing sense of how much I actually know each candidate, why don't you tell everyone then instead of being a jackass about it. How in the blue blazes do you know how much I know about these candidates? Hell, I could be Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or Rastifarian Socialist so don't even try to pigeon hole me as a "partisan." The end result is you don't know jack about me. Don't even try to assume why I wouldn't vote for these candidates.
http://www.c-span.org/videoarchives....Code=Vote_2004
It's quite interesting to see key differences between the candidates on issues from the war to universal health care.
IMHO, Sharpton was heads and shoulders above everyone else.
Originally posted by trick fall
If Leiberman is the Democratic candidate I'll be voting third party again.
NO! Even if Lieberman is the Democratic candidate, do you still want Bush in office?
My god man, think before you speak!
NO! Even if Lieberman is the Democratic candidate, do you still want Bush in office?
My god man, think before you speak!
look who's talking. that's the stupidest thing anyone in this country can possibly say.
vote for who you think the best canidate is. don't vote against another canidate.
if you want to ensure that there will only be two viable parties in this country forever, keep it up with that mindset. we'll be stuck with two parties trying to mirror eachother forever, with no real progress being made.
Maybe someone can find some better comparison pictures, but in that debate it definitely looked like John Edwards was trying to look exactly like Robert Kennedy...