Well being a big fan of the Presidents since i have met him and seen he is a genuine mana nd leader he has my vote.
However, I think Edwards would make the best foe (for the democrats) vs Bush, but I don't see him getting the nomination. I have said over and over he should have waited until 2008, but he would have had a tough senate fight.
He looks young, is energetic, been running a positive campaign, can play to the Southa nd at least understand them and evenif can't win, would be able to help down ticket as he could relate to him int he South at least. PLus if he wanted he could use his wealth if he needed.
I WANT the dems to nominate Dean though. If the dems do it, he will lose and for sure cost the Dem seats in the South with his rhetoric.
Lieberman would make a good prez, but dems will never nom him. Same with Al and Kucinich--no chance.
Gephardt could be a formidable foe but so establishment and everyone knows him as a failure inthe House on delivering.
Clark-- As a fellow army officer, this guy is a joke. How did he make general. I do believe he stepped on others to get to the top as I always heard in army circles. Plus he is Mr Conspiracy Theory and never can back it up and that further hurts his credibility which is already in question by 2 well respected generals.
Kerry-- Well he has blown it I think. Could make it, but the guy just always looks tired and worn out. Then I have looked at his political record and tried hard to find meaningful accomplishments and there are few for 19 years int eh senate. I do like his military record, but not that he then came home and protested.
Nader- may run or not, depends on nominee. I am more Green than some republicans therefore i do like some of his ideas on environment, but not all. (Did all dems thought I might as well do this one too)
one of the only reasons (besides supporting John Kerry) that I watch the debates is to hear the good reverand speek. jravnsbro who do your support for president in the dem primaries?
