Have You Ever Actually Heard A Candidate Who Is Not "Your Candidate"

Last night while folding laundry I watched Howard Dean on CSpan talking about funding for education and about health care for children. He had great ideas, made lots of sense and was very committed to tackling these issues on a long term basis. I was impressed. It was one of the few times I heard Dean outside of the debates. I was glad I took the time to hear him, rather than just read a clipped sentence or two.

My point is this - lots of DU posts purport to share insight into a candidate's views (typically not their preferred candidate) by quoting a sentence or two from a speech, interview or a news article. The quote is posted as proof positive of a candidate's entire position on the issue. Unfortunately, the quote is often taken out of context, or is an incomplete statement of the candidate's views.

This selective quote approach does a disservice to the candidates and to other DU readers. I encourage DUers to take time to read the links behind the quotes - read the speech, or listen to the interview or read the transcript.

Watched Dennis Kucinich for the first time. I've always liked his views but seeing him made me more impressed with him.

the more I like them. I watched Edwards and Dean last night, too. Both impressed me, Dean on early education funding and Edwards for his plan for rural areas.

and finally settled on Dean....afterall, I was making a decision. I started out tentatively supporting Graham, as he was my Senator while I was in Florida....but moved to Dean after exploring the field....seems like looking at all the candidates is the only proper thing to do....I am actually proud of all of them (or was until I saw what Joe did recently!!!).

After hearing one of Clark's speeches I dropped my objections to him. I felt he was very visionary and humanitarian. I am still a Deanie but would easily support Clark if nominated.

I've paid attention to all of them.

How else could I make an informed choice?

(except maybe Lieberman) has some exceptional qualities. As Dean himself has said, any one of them would be better than what we have now. To give a listen to them while they have time to discuss their views on the issues and their ideas is a good thing, and good can be found to say about all of them.

Julie

and not just because it's pro-Dean. The reasons you mention are why I like almost all of our candidates now. I'd still be pissed with a 100% pro-war ticket but I'm liking Gep, Kerry and Edwards quite a bit. I think we have a whole slew of good candidates.

First choice is a Not even likely - Susan Fey. Yes, she's an official candidate. No, you've never heard of her. She's fabulous, but is missing 2 of the three requirements. She's not ole, and she's not a boy. Here's her link: http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=MZZ71759

Started out a tentative Edwards supporter (for maiden name reasons, and because he's been my sister's senator while she's in SC.) because he has been working hard to make sure that the Soldiers' and Sailors' Act of 1974 is enforced for the duration. (This act says that while a member of the Armed forces is on active duty in a war zone, interest charges on all interest bearing accounts are frozen at 0% APR for the duration.... In other words, every payment is on principal.)

The Marine Credit Union at Camp LeJeune (Yes, the MCU... I'm so ashamed to admit this) refused to comply with the act. Edwards looked into it (and did something) and now they're being a good Marince Credit Union.

Would still support Edwards, but have to be practical. My dream team is Dean - POTUS, Edwards VP, Braun Sec State, Clark Defense, Kucinich in the top Economics position. Gephardt at EPA or Interior. Lieberman can host the prayer breakfasts. Kerry who is a lawyer in AG, Sharpton, wherever he will serve.

But I believe in the Big Pond theory of government. All work together now - run as a team. They all have strengths and should work together.

Politicat (who is probably too idealistic and expects behavior that is far too good out of her candidates.)

I've seen Edwards in person and I make a point to watch all the candidates when on television.

I have and will continue to listen to all the candidates with an open mind, although I must admit that I'm pretty jaded on one particular candidate that it's hard to listen to him without throwing something at the TV.

But your point is WELL taken. Really, none of these people are the devil incarnate as the few but prolific habitual candidate bashers on DU would have us believe. One cannot possibly make an informed decision about any candidate without first doing comprehensive research on each.

I was a Deaner from the start, but I've liked a lot of what I've heard from other candidates. I don't think there is one answer to each issue, and other candidates have some real interesting and creative solutions as well.

I'm kinda down on Kerry and Lieberman, but would obviously vote for them against Bush.

I've really liked the ideas of this group. There's a lot of talent in this campaign, and I think any candidate strong enough to come out on top in the primaries can take Bush. (Unfortunately I have to exempt Sharpton and Braun from that statement. As much as it saddens me, I think there are too many subconscious racists out there. The kind of folks who are friendly with the black family next door, but still wouldn't ask them to water the plants while on vacation. But now I'm way off topic.)