What Candidate Do You Prefer For 2008?


Hillary Clinton
5% (18 votes)
John Edwards
19% (64 votes)
John McCain
1% (4 votes)
Wesley Clark
19% (64 votes)
Barak Obama
10% (35 votes)
Mitt Romney
0% (1 vote)
Rudy Giuliani
1% (2 votes)
Al Gore
36% (122 votes)
Chuck Hagel
3% (10 votes)
Bill Richardson
6% (19 votes)
Dennis Kucinich
0% (1 vote)
Total votes: 340

Sean Paul Kelley January 25, 2007 - 3:01pm

Richardson to be a candidate?

http://mauberly.blogspot.com/

mauberly January 25, 2007 - 4:16pm

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance. This principle is, contempt prior to examination."

Sean Paul Kelley January 25, 2007 - 4:20pm

Can I vote for none of the above?

NateTG January 25, 2007 - 4:32pm

Could've gone with Edwards too. They're the only two that I feel ok voting for. Actually, I'm pretty positive on both of them. Unfortunately, Gore's been savaged in the press for most of the last decade, so I doubt that he'd have much of a chance. They'd all pile on again if he ran.

Bolo January 25, 2007 - 4:40pm

I agree that as in '04, Gore is making a big mistake passing up the '08 election. Along with Hillary/Obama/Edwards, he's the only other Democrat who could get competitive in this race.
In Gore's absence, it would be of benefit to Edwards to take up the environmental issues. He's already got the southerner and populist thing down.

Nominay January 25, 2007 - 5:10pm

I put down Gore. In Gore's absence, still Edwards, though I wasn't pleased with what Stoller characterizes as his "insane" comments on Iran.

I wasn't a fan of Gore in 2000 - he was the better man for the job, but he had a lot of weaknesses. Unlike most, the loss has made him stronger.

Ian Welsh January 25, 2007 - 5:18pm

Take a look at the forum entries too

quiet Bill January 25, 2007 - 5:28pm

might well tap into a very potent unconscious urge for a "do over" in the American public.

Escher Sketch January 25, 2007 - 8:28pm

having actually won once only to have the Supremes negate it is an advantage. People would take it to the streets if it happened again.

Mark January 25, 2007 - 10:41pm

...likely that others will announce their candidacy at a MUCH later date? It seems as though the recent onslaught of exploratory committees are really getting a head start on the election. What if there are a few sleeper candidates waiting to see what happens and then jump in at the last minute after this current crop have savaged each other for months on end?

Silent Autumn January 25, 2007 - 9:42pm

I voted Edwards. Edwards/Obama, or Edwards/Clinton would be fine tickets. Having said that, I'll vote for the primary victor. :P

ww January 25, 2007 - 10:22pm

An Edwards/Obama ticket would be dogged as the most inexperienced ticket in US history (not true but perception is everything). An Edwards/Clinton ticket would get a lot of popular votes but wouldn't help, and if anything, hurt in the electoral college. Edwards/Bayh, Edwards/Richardson, or Edwards/Clark is the ticket!

Nominay January 26, 2007 - 3:52am

choice. Go to draftgore.com and sign the petition.

Mark January 25, 2007 - 10:28pm

Except for Al Gore, more experience than all of them, in more areas. The Yeah-Buts about Richardson make me feel like he knows how to drive everything from a sportscar to a schoolbus to a jeep to a semi, and he's had a couple of accidents, while Obama just got his license... Hillary watched a lot of driving and now does quite well in one kind of vehicle. Edwards has as much government experience as, oh, Obama.

Richardson has actually been a diplomat in North Korea, and the Sudan, served in the House, in two Cabinet positions, and been a very popular governor, of a border state! All this, and he's Hispanic, too.

"Yeah, he'd be a good vice-presidential candidate." To someone less experienced? Why?!

trob January 26, 2007 - 2:12am

Because that's the way it works!

Nominay January 26, 2007 - 3:55am

1. Can't believe Kucinich isn't included on the list. I think, however, that that's sufficient indication of his chances;

2. I couldn't in good conscience vote for any of these clowns.

ddjango January 26, 2007 - 10:43am

forgot him. Just slipped my mind. My bad.

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance. This principle is, contempt prior to examination."

Sean Paul Kelley January 26, 2007 - 1:00pm

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.