what candidate best represents

YOUR personal die-hard Democratic stance and what is your age? Just curious to see how time changes your opinions.

For me, EACH candidate has at least one quality that I feel makes a die-hard Democratic stance. My biggie used to be that the candidate HAD to be pro-choice, which still applies, but now with a few years latched on to my belt and children in the picture that isn't my #1 thing anymore (although don't be mistaken, it is still important). But if you were only allowed to choose ONE stance that the party supports to be the deciding factor for choosing your candidate, WHAT would it be?

For me, while hard to narrow it down, would be making sure that medicare and social security are safe. Not just for me, but for my kids now.

Being 17, the job market isn't affecting me this second, but it will very soon.

That's why Dennis is at the top of my list.

the main concern is protecting the constitution, and the essential foundations of our Democratic society.

Not trying to become a colonial empire is also high on my list.

I feel like some of my older concerns are on the backburner right now as I feel that democracy itself is at risk.

Edited to add-age 40. And you can probably tell from my sig which candidate I feel best represents my current concerns.

So much crap that 'mattered' to me before Dec. 12th, 2000, doesn't any more. It's that basic, for me.

ABB! :dem:

coming from and I agree with you on wanting to keep our rights, but in order to keep our rights we have to focus on what it is we are fighting for. It's easier to fight the good fight when we know what "grounds" us, rather than fighting on emotion.

I think this administration has done a lot of "governing" by emotions, which has left us blowing in the wind-so to speak, which is right where they want us.

I'm guilty of letting this administration get the best of my emotions which has lingered since 2000 and so far this election is proving to do the same, only worse I think (if that's possible). I envy those who can stay "grounded," 'cause I am one who lets emotions take precedence over logic sometimes, but I think in order to keep my sanity this year, I'm gonna have to work really hard at changing this.

time doesn't change my opinions, it just colors in the grey areas.

Its not so much opinions, its principles. They have no business changing.

kudos to you !

everybody has one, but principles, ahh, that's another thing. I think principles are something that are rooted deep and don't change at the drop of a hat. At 42 I can honestly say that I've had lots of opinions, but my principles have stayed and they have one main premise--truth and fairness--something this administration is severely lacking.

I'm 56.

Regarding stances it is some type of split between Edwards and Kucinich if I primarilly look at domestic issues, though I like both of those men internationally as well. I find Kucinich to be maybe 5% to 10% too leftist for me internationally. Specifically I don't think we can get out of Iraq in 90 days with the U.N. fully willing and able to handle the mess we created. I just don't see it happening, quite that way or quite that soon, and I have a little of MB's "we broke it, we have to fix it" (within reason) in me.

I am a populist at heart and I suppose basic economic security, a functioning safety net, for both average and disadvantaged Americans is my core concern. Internationally I want a President who is enough of a realist to skillfully confront terrorist type threats to America while working to defuse and reverse as much of the underlying causes of that nihlism as is realistically possible. I want a President who will be respected for his fair minded wisdom more so than for strength, but respected for both, both by world leaders and by average citizens on their streets. I lean to Clark on that score.

Unspoken in the above are personal qualities that increasingly I have elevated in importance, over the specifics of a perfect policy stance in many instances. I pick Clark on that score. I am impressed by his intellectual awareness, his incredible dedication to mission, his committment to serve, his courage in the face of danger, and his inherent honesty and integrity. It is funny to recognize that my view of Wesley Clark is so fundamentally reversed from the one extressed on DU by the minority who seem to loath him, but such it is. I'm 54. While I don't pick Clark first domestically, he is far closer to my prioirities there than I intially realized.

some excellent qualities and I think he would make a good President. I actually took a "liking" to him in the beginning. I think he speaks eloquently and debates well. He reminds me some of the way Clinton approaches the people. (guess it's the lawyer in them)

Then as I begin to hear Dean, I liked his "heated passion" for winning back the Democratic party and I think he would make for an interesting debate with Bush. But I don't agree with his stance on repealing the entire tax cut. You try to take the few dollars away that Joe and Jane sixpack are getting in these dire times and they don't see it as "helpful" only as the government, once again, taking all their money. This isn't going to do well against Bush.

I like Clark and Kerry both for their military experience. Both are very viable candidates to me.

Dennis Kucinich has some great ideas but they aren't really plausible in this day and time. Maybe at a different time. He's alittle too far left for me too.

I'm just ready to settle on one guy and get all this "in-fighting" over with. It's wasting a lot of valuable time that we don't have.

we were foolish to stretch this campaign out for all these extra months. All it did is to provide opportunities to screw up and its done that very well.

This in-fighting is terribly necessary as we cannot ignore the flaws that a candidate would be bringing with them into the big fight.

I really love Edwards as he has built his campaign on principle, has been able to stick right with it for that very reason and has remained above the fray with political skill and statesmanship.

All this make me know that we'll see him still standing when its time to take the fight to Bush.

in-fighting doesn't polarize the party and Independants against supporting who the nominee is, then I can live with SOME, but I think it is terribly destructive the way I've seen it go on on this board.

The Dem party is too conservative for me. And no, I do not mean the DLC wing, I mean even the left wing of the Dem party. Yes, even, Kucinich. Had I my druthers to create a nation at my will, it would be a socialist democracy run by the poepl. No wealth. No property. No such thing as a "corporation." The entire concept of possessions and money would be erased.

So I vote for who I think is going to make it easiest for me to get by in an imperfect world I did not make.

Opps, forgot to add my age....33, be 34 in one month.

checks and balances and also a docile press during a time such as this. I worry about a domestic and foreign policy devoid of our founding principles. I support Clark and I'm 47.