Who would have been the best candidate?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 18, 2024, 11:34:16 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  Who would have been the best candidate?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: Which Democrat would have had the best chance to beat Bush in 2004?
#1
John Kerry
 
#2
John Edwards
 
#3
Dick Gephardt
 
#4
Howard Dean
 
#5
Wesley Clark
 
#6
Joe Lieberman
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 52

Author Topic: Who would have been the best candidate?  (Read 13029 times)
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 09, 2005, 11:40:33 AM »

Vote
Logged
Moooooo
nickshepDEM
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,909


Political Matrix
E: -0.52, S: 3.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 09, 2005, 12:07:22 PM »
« Edited: October 09, 2005, 12:10:40 PM by nickshep democRAT »

Tough call.   I guess you could argue Bob Graham would be the best candidate.  He may have carried Florida, but I doubt it.  Out of those listed I would vote Edwards because I truly believe he would have shined a lot brighter at the top of the ticket.  I think he would have ran a more issues oriented campaign rather than that anybody but Bush nonsense. Bush would try to argue the lack of experience bit, but really Bush only had 6 years of elected experience when he won in 2000.

Bottom line, the Democratic field in 2004 was weak, real weak.
Logged
jokerman
Cosmo Kramer
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,808
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 09, 2005, 01:02:37 PM »

I'll rank them:

John Edwards
Wesley Clark
Dick Gephardt
Joe Lieberman
Howard Dean
John Kerry
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 09, 2005, 01:36:25 PM »

It's between Lieberman and Gephardt.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 09, 2005, 02:01:27 PM »

No question Dick Gephardt. I'd say Iowa and Ohio at least if he even ran a campaign like Kerry's. Put someone like Graham or Warner as VP as this ticket rocks.
Logged
ian
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,461


Political Matrix
E: -0.52, S: -1.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 09, 2005, 06:36:16 PM »

Gephardt
Logged
True Democrat
true democrat
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,368
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.10, S: -2.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 09, 2005, 10:21:58 PM »

I say Clark.  Gephardt would have been a great nominee in 2000, or even a great VP choice for 2004.  However, 2004 focused, at least I believe, on foreign policy, which Clark could have really trounced Bush on.
Logged
Max Power
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,182
Political Matrix
E: 1.84, S: -8.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 09, 2005, 10:45:54 PM »

John Kerry, although nobody would have beaten Bush.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 09, 2005, 10:46:44 PM »

Clark was an unsuccessful general who fought the wrong war. I hardly see that as any type of foreign policy credentials.
Logged
nini2287
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,616


Political Matrix
E: 2.77, S: -3.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 09, 2005, 10:54:40 PM »

I'm going to go out on a limb and say Howard Dean.  Certainly a major reason that Kerry lost was his inability to articulate a clear, consistent platform, while Dean was-albeit a very liberal one.  However, was Dean really that more liberal than Kerry?  Kerry's liberal voting record was exposed and instead of embracing his liberalism, he tried to run under the guise of being a 'moderate' and maybe this worked on a very small percentage of the populace, but that proportion is much smaller than the people who didn't want to vote for Bush, but did anyway because of his 'clear stands' on issues.  I think a large majority of this group would have gone for Dean.
Logged
Moooooo
nickshepDEM
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,909


Political Matrix
E: -0.52, S: 3.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 09, 2005, 10:55:00 PM »
« Edited: October 09, 2005, 11:06:18 PM by nickshep democRAT »

Clark was an unsuccessful general who fought the wrong war. I hardly see that as any type of foreign policy credentials.

Graduated first in his class at Westpoint.  Vietnam War Hero.  4 Star General.  Supreme Allied Commander of NATO.  Most decorated officer since Dwight Eisenhower.

I could go on, but that alone trumps Bush's cred so Ill stop there.




None of this makes him a good presidential candidate.  He would have lost because he has no grasp on domestic issues and he's gaffe prone.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,568


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 09, 2005, 11:02:48 PM »

Clark was an unsuccessful general who fought the wrong war. I hardly see that as any type of foreign policy credentials.

Graduated first in his class at Westpoint.  Vietnam War Hero.  4 Star General.  Supreme Allied Commander of NATO.  Most decorated officer since Dwight Eisenhower.

I could go on, but that alone trumps Bush's cred so Ill stop there.




None of this makes him a good presidential candidate.  He would have lost because he has no grasp on domestic issues.


I'm sure he had a better grasp than Bush.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 09, 2005, 11:36:55 PM »

None of that is foreign policy credentials. SACEUR is a political post that Clark was not very good at. Simply being in the military should not count as foreign policy credentials at all, nor does being a war hero 35 years earlier give you a good grasp of the issues.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 09, 2005, 11:38:20 PM »

My Ranking:

Dick Gephardt
Joe Lieberman
Howard Dean
John Kerry
Wesley Clark
John Edwards
Carol Mosley-Braun
Al Sharpton

It is almost a tie between Gephardt and Lieberman.   Both could have made the "It is war badly made" argument, convincingly.  Gephardt has advantage of being more moderate and appealing to the unions.

Dean could have used, "It's the wrong war, at the wrong time argument," which I doubt would have worked.

Clark suffers from no elective office, no domestic experience, and being relieved early from Kosovo.  That label of recklessness would haunt him.

John Edwards is Democratic version of Dan Quayle.  Mosley-Braun's ethical problems make DeLay look like a choirboy.   Sharpton lost any chance at elective office (outside of DC) when he had his hair permed.


Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,568


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 09, 2005, 11:41:27 PM »

Dean
Edwards
Clark
Graham
Kerry
Gephardt
Lieberman
Kucinich
Mosley-Braun
Sharpton

Logged
Speed of Sound
LiberalPA
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,166
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 10, 2005, 02:15:49 PM »

I'll rank them:

John Kerry
Howard Dean
Wesley Clark
John Edwards
Dick Gephardt
Joe Lieberman

Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 11, 2005, 06:46:23 AM »

I'll rank them:

John Kerry
Howard Dean
Wesley Clark
John Edwards
Dick Gephardt
Joe Lieberman


I'd rank em a tad differently, probably with Edwards on top, but Lieberman is definitely dead last. We wouldn't have seen much of a turnout increase with Lieberman. We wouldn't have seen all those Greens come back to the Dem fold with Lieberman. There really was no reason for anybody to vote for Lieberman when they could have voted for Bush instead.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 11, 2005, 02:28:58 PM »

I'll rank them:

John Kerry
Howard Dean
Wesley Clark
John Edwards
Dick Gephardt
Joe Lieberman


I'd rank em a tad differently, probably with Edwards on top, but Lieberman is definitely dead last. We wouldn't have seen much of a turnout increase with Lieberman. We wouldn't have seen all those Greens come back to the Dem fold with Lieberman. There really was no reason for anybody to vote for Lieberman when they could have voted for Bush instead.

Unless they were liberals of course.  For all of Lieberman's "hawkishness", his voting record proves him to be very liberal on domestic issues.

My rankings

Edwards
Gephardt
Clark
Lieberman
Kerry
Dean
Logged
Blerpiez
blerpiez
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,017


Political Matrix
E: -0.65, S: -7.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: October 11, 2005, 07:34:54 PM »

Gephardt would have been best.
Logged
Akno21
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,066
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: October 13, 2005, 07:26:39 AM »

Edwards could barely get re-elected in his southern state, and face it, he is a liberal, probabaly the most liberal state-wide elected offical from the South when he was in office. He would not have carried, or made a significant dent in the South. He was also very inexperienced, and he just didn't seem Presidential.

Gephardt on the other hand was actually moderate, from a state that the Democrats have a chance to win in, and very experienced. While he wasn't as charismatic as Edwards, he was much better than Kerry.

Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: October 13, 2005, 07:38:01 AM »

I'll rank them:

John Kerry
Howard Dean
Wesley Clark
John Edwards
Dick Gephardt
Joe Lieberman


I'd rank em a tad differently, probably with Edwards on top, but Lieberman is definitely dead last. We wouldn't have seen much of a turnout increase with Lieberman. We wouldn't have seen all those Greens come back to the Dem fold with Lieberman. There really was no reason for anybody to vote for Lieberman when they could have voted for Bush instead.

Unless they were liberals of course.  For all of Lieberman's "hawkishness", his voting record proves him to be very liberal on domestic issues.
Not really. It proves him a partisan hack. Smiley
But yeah, I was going by how he styled himself in the campaign - and the one before that - , not by where he came from.
Logged
MasterJedi
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,526
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2005, 10:18:26 AM »

Dick Gephardt
Logged
tarheel-leftist85
krustytheklown
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,274
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: October 15, 2005, 06:57:00 PM »

Edwards and/or Gephardt
Logged
MaC
Milk_and_cereal
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,791


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: October 16, 2005, 05:56:48 PM »

Edwards.  Edwards was likable.  He had much more of an appeal than Kerry, although his politics were about the same.  He looked younger, and was able to get a crowd much better-anyone who disagrees can watch the third and fourth days of the Democratic convention and tell me if the crowd went over more for Kerry or his VP.
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2005, 12:58:15 AM »

Edwards was a terrible candidate and he added nothing to the Kerry campaign. I liked him, personally, but the Dems have to face facts that the South is a lost cause (no pun intended) in presidential races, as the Reps ought to do regarding the Northeast and Pacific Coast states. What matters is the Southwest and "rustbelt" Midwest. Both parties would be wise to pick candidates from these regions.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.059 seconds with 14 queries.