Who SHOULD win the Dem nomination...even though they probably won't!

[Wakie]

This is an interesting question.  A case can be made that MANY of the candidates SHOULD get the nom.

If you just look at the candidates resumes then by all rights John Kerry should easily be the candidate (15 years in the Senate, war hero, a moderate who has domestic and international experience, carries the endorsement of International Assoc of Firefighters, etc).  But he ran a very poor early campaign and has received much bad press for his endorsement of military action in Iraq.

John Edwards would almost certainly get the nom if he had more experience.  He's from the South, comes from a humble background, is bright and eloquent, and carries a great deal of charisma.  Most Democrats I know consider him their 2nd favorite candidate (no matter who their favorite is).  Should the Democrats lose in 2004 and should he remain in the spotlight he'll be a contender in 2008.

I think most Democrats expected Al Gore to return for a rematch with Bush in 2004 or for Hillary Clinton to step up to the plate.  Of course neither happened.

[Wakie]

Cussing didn't seem to hurt George Bush in 2000 ... I don't see why it should be an issue for Kerry in 2004.

[Wakie]

jrav, could you hook me up with a link to that one?  Thanks.

[Wakie]

Very interesting .... especially after watching the debate yesterday.  The Edwards, Leiberman, Clark, Gephardt, & Kerry superdelegates seem more likely to line up together behind one of them than with Dean.  That would gave said candidate a commanding 168 Superdelegate total.  Their supporters would also likely fall into line.  Dean's nomination is far from certain.

[Wakie]

Actually, aren't the Republicans using superdelegates for the first time this year?  I'm pretty sure they aren't calling them superdelegates but members of the Republican National Committee are going to be automatic delegates in '04.  They have no accountability to any primary, caucus or convention.

The Democrats have been doing the same thing for a while now.  Each superdelegate (for both Dems and Repubs) has a vote equal to that of a regular delegate.

I am unaware of any election though where the superdelegates changed the results.