My change of alliances

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

So, as you can see, Clark would be in my mind the worst possible outcome of the dem primary. e has a chance of winning if Bush maes mistakes, and he would be a terrible president.

Not after today.  

[MAS117]

My loyalty in this one has been all over the board.  Fortunately the PA primary is a long way off.

I started off looking purely at resumes and supported Kerry.  Then I attended a Dean meetup and switched to him.  After watching several debates I found myself moving towards Edwards.  The other night I attended a John Kerry rally and heard Chris Heinz speak (impressive guy) and now I'm torn somewhere between Kerry & Edwards.

In a perfect world I would get Edwards with Kerry's resume.

Thats great I vote defiantly vote for a Edwards with kERyys resume

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

I have changed my alliance from Dean to edwards, but will support Dean if Edwards falters in Iowa.

I like Edwards too. I will vote for Clark in Michigan's Primary, but my second choice would be Edwards. Thinking of it, Edwards reminds me of Kennedy, of course, but also of Dan Quale in a way, since Quale was a young Senator too, and Edwards is young and a junior Senator.

[MAS117]

its obvious that edwards wont win the nomination... so then why is he not seeking reelection to the senate or a possible vp nom?

[jravnsbo]

Because his senate reelection would be VERY tough.  He is running vs a Popular Rep in Richard Burr that raised 5 million dollars and has been campaigning a year already.

VP, who knows , I think that is his best bet and keeps him alive in 2008.

its obvious that edwards wont win the nomination... so then why is he not seeking reelection to the senate or a possible vp nom?

[mossy]

its obvious that edwards wont win the nomination... so then why is he not seeking reelection to the senate or a possible vp nom?

Never have I seen such a good line-up of Pres. hopefuls....was looking at a list the other day, with their qualifications, and I realized that every one could do a good job, whether as elected or in an emergency.  All presented  as well-grounded, and brought genuine experience.  No wonder people have a hard time choosing--they're good.  Al Sharpton was good, too, sharp as a tack (couldn't resist) and this is the first chance I've had to hear him speak.  I doubt we'll ever see such a broad, qualified field like this again.   Bush must have brought out even the most reluctant......

BTW, I'm started reading O'Neill's book, and Bush doesn't sound very affable at all, and would be impossible to like on even a personal level.--a spoiled jerk, that doesn't seem to track.......in fact, he gives people nicknames so he can put them down.   But I'm biased.

[Gustaf]

I have changed my alliance from Dean to edwards, but will support Dean if Edwards falters in Iowa.

I like Edwards too. I will vote for Clark in Michigan's Primary, but my second choice would be Edwards. Thinking of it, Edwards reminds me of Kennedy, of course, but also of Dan Quale in a way, since Quale was a young Senator too, and Edwards is young and a junior Senator.

Have you read about Clark's flip-flops on Iraq? And also, what's this I hear about his abortion stands, they seemed a little extreme, but I haven't understood it all yet.

[© tweed]

I thought that you're left liberal Miamiu? Doesn't Edwards be too conservative for you?

Is he to the right of me?  Yes he is.  But all of the major candidates are to the right of me, so that matters very little.

He isn't so conservative that I can't identify with his beliefs.

[NHPolitico]

I have changed my alliance from Dean to edwards, but will support Dean if Edwards falters in Iowa.

They say Edwards is everyone's second choice. It's interesting how that could play out with undecideds.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Excellent point. Edwards is a "dark horse" candidate, ie; his % of the vote could go sharply up when the votes are counted.

I support Edwards because:

a) He is the closest ideological match to me of the candidates (ie; economic populist)
b) He seems like a nice guy

[© tweed]

Shut up with the "nice guy" crap.  Who cares if they are nice guys?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Swing voters do.
Seriously... it's an advantage for him
People like people that appear to be people that would like them.
Look at Lorne Calvert for example.

[© tweed]

Who is Lorne Calvert?

[Gustaf]

Who is Lorne Calvert?

Yeah, who is that? Good point, btw, Al, the nice guy image is a valuable asset and is one of the things that pushed me towards Edwards.

[Wakie]

Shut up with the "nice guy" crap.  Who cares if they are nice guys?

I think it is another way of saying he's got charisma.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The Premier of Saskatchwan (NDP) .
He was re-elected last year, despite trailing the Saskatchwan Party by 7% at the start of the election.
One reason for this was that he was seen as "a nice guy", while his opponent was seen as a slippery political operative.

[Gustaf]

The Premier of Saskatchwan (NDP) .
He was re-elected last year, despite trailing the Saskatchwan Party by 7% at the start of the election.
One reason for this was that he was seen as "a nice guy", while his opponent was seen as a slippery political operative.

Yes, looking professional is always bad. That's what happened in Sweden in the greatest political upset in our history last year.

Btw, RP, don't assume that we know all these obscure politicians that you know about...coz we don't!

[MAS117]

i care if hes a ncie guy. i want my president to have a good personality.Thats something that people like Gephardt lack, Edwards seems genuine.

[Gustaf]

i care if hes a ncie guy. i want my president to have a good personality.Thats something that people like Gephardt lack, Edwards seems genuine.

That's right! What about Kerry then?

[© tweed]

i care if hes a ncie guy. i want my president to have a good personality.Thats something that people like Gephardt lack, Edwards seems genuine.

That's right! What about Kerry then?

If you want a likeable candidate, Kerry ain't your guy.

[Gustaf]

i care if hes a ncie guy. i want my president to have a good personality.Thats something that people like Gephardt lack, Edwards seems genuine.

That's right! What about Kerry then?

If you want a likeable candidate, Kerry ain't your guy.

He has a big Kerry poster on his posts, so I thought it was reasonable to ask...

[MAS117]

there is others things that i look for in a candidate besides just that, i feel that Kerry is the best qualified,  he might not have the best personality but it suits me good enough... hes the most electable...to the personality if its extreme loser like gephardt well then defiantly not

[Gustaf]

there is others things that i look for in a candidate besides just that, i feel that Kerry is the best qualified,  he might not have the best personality but it suits me good enough... hes the most electable...to the personality if its extreme loser like gephardt well then defiantly not

OK, then. Is Kerry really the most electable? I thought Edwards would definitely hold that position.

[MAS117]

im sorry gustaf i meant to me... yes edwards is very electable probably more then kerry in general... but i dont understand y edwards isnt seeking reelection for senate or a poss VP run...

[Gustaf]

im sorry gustaf i meant to me... yes edwards is very electable probably more then kerry in general... but i dont understand y edwards isnt seeking reelection for senate or a poss VP run...

Ah, I get it. That's another way of looking at it, I suppose. What I hear of Edwards is that he wouldn't win reelection, so that wasn't an option, and he can't say he wants to be VP, his chances for that might actually improve if he manages a good campaign now.