If the choice was Kerry, Gore or Feingol who would you choose?

Just trying to figure out where Kerry and Gore stand in this...

in that case I might take Kerry over Feingold.

especially if he's his own man and takes a page out of Brian Schweitzer's campaign book.

As for Kerry, I'd like to see him as AG, Gore as Interior. Not sure about Feingold, I think he may be best where he is, trying to get REAL campaign finance reform passed and tackling the health care mess.

Because I respect all three, and think any of them would make an excellent leader. That's why I think a combined ticket of two of these guys would be fantastic. Hmmm...if I HAD to choose one,.....um...I'd have to go with Feingold.

In that order.

Edwards for 3.

But in order of preference, I'd go, Feingold, Gore, Kerry.

Because I'm an anti-corruption, open government Democrat.

:spank:"Take that Chimpco." :-)

Then Feingold and then Kerry.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

I heard he's better than Kerry, and Feingold can't seem to keep his wives satisfied. :evilgrin:

idea about the "satisfaction" factor.

I've voted for Kerry since he ran for Lieutenant Governor here in this Commonwealth. (1984). He betrayed us all in 2004....I won't vote for him again. Not even for Senator.

Could we have a Gore/Feingold ticket? I would vote for either one in a heartbeat, but if it's head to head, I'd have to go with Big Al.

In the end...he "gets it", and already has 8 years experience as VP and could step right in like he hasn't been out of Washington a day.

ANYONE says - he didn't have to concede. He could have cited irregularities, held out and demanded a full state recount or revote.

Also, his ambiguity about the war !

I love all three, but in the end, it's Kerry.

Why?

Gore is great, but he is either not running or would have to ramp up a lot to be seen as more than an environmental leader. Kerry is very strong environmentally. Let's just say I was for Bradley when he ran... Again, I like Al a lot, but he's not my first choice. I'm not a big fan of Tipper...

As for Russ, he's great. But I think that the electorate will not be ready for a twice-divorced Jewish single man. I don't agree with that perception, but it will be painted on him. Also, I don't think he has the support of the Democratic Party big wigs, as was evident in his fantastic censure resolution (which Kerry supports). It will be hard for him to get the support of the main players in the party, and actually that is a shame.

Kerry (besides being who I support) has a lot of people who support him and a lot of fundraising going on for '06 races, which will transmigrate into the '08 race.

Iraqi War vote) -- but what he seems to lack, IMHO, is the gut - you know what you are saying is right - conviction -- ala Murtha or Kennedy. Maybe Kerry is not capable on a personal level to exude this - maybe he truly does feel it -- but can't communicate it. Whatever, he's got to have it for us to win. I also feel totally betrayed by him over the election fraud -- his giving up. Hell, maybe he knew it was futile, legally, but raise some big time hell -- fight until the bitter end ! If every day he just called a news conference and reported all the problems and simply said, I will not concede until these irregularities have been investigated or a revote takes place...we all would have respected him so much more.

I agree with you on Russ - the Party unfortunately wouldn't get behind him the way we need them to.

So, I say, pragmatically, who can we put up that doesn't start with huge negatives?

What are the issues that they ALWAYS label us as espousing?? A Gore/Clark team could counteract every one:

Higher Spending -- Gore led the government program to streamline and cut costs. He also helped Clinton achieve a balanced budget surplus.

THINK ABOUT IT, WHAT REPIG, AT THIS TIME COULD POSSIBLY FAULT THE CLINTON/GORE SUCCESS WITH THE DEFICIT WE HAVE NOW?

Weak on Defense -- Clark led in Kosovo and not a single US life was lost. He has a brilliant military mind and actually has a plan to get us out of George Bush's mess in Iraq. People want us out of Iraq

WHO BETTER, REPIG OR DEM, COULD SPEAK SO ARTICULATELY ABOUT MILITARY ISSUES? CLARK HAS GRAVITAS. HIS INTELLIGENCE IS HARD TO MATCH

Environment Nuts -- Gore was truly ahead of his time on GW. It's kind of like he got vindicated and I think it would be hard for them to label him an environmental nut. People actually care about this issue now.

WHO BETTER, REPIG OR DEM, COULD SPEAK SO ARTICULATELY ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES?

Gore won already -- The icing on the cake - he has proven that he can win the popular vote.

I just don't see any down side......

when it comes right down to brass tacks - He's the only one I KNOW for certain will open the books on BushInc. Gore has never shown an interest in holding BushInc accountable for their crimes. He showed no interest as a senator, and he didn't show any interest as VP.

Had he and Clinton shown an interest in real justice being served at the time they HAD power, we would never have seen a more muscled BushInc in 2000 or known the horrors of a 9-11 and Iraq war.

And has the actual congressional record to prove it. Talk is cheap.

but I adore all three

But I'm from Wisconsin.

and I love this guy.

but I would love to see Feingold/Clark, but I would just like to get to November 2006 right now.

He would be the most likely man chosen to balance a Gore or Kerry ticket. And after 8 years of Gore or Kerry as President, we'll get Feingold as President for 8 after that.

Gore, Sorry but I'd rather Kerry not even be my third choice and Hilary doesn't make my top 100.

On stephnopolous this sunday the suggestion was made that Gore may be waiting until he is "begged" to run before he enters the race.

If that's the case then all I have to say is "PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE run Mr. Gore."

As a nation we desperately need the the calm, reasoned, thoughtful and STABILE leadership a Gore admin could provide.

And if you want to help draft him, go check out the $5 Primary:

http://www.draftgore2008.org/

In that order.

nt

x

If have a feeling it will be someone we're not even mentioning now, though.

Feingold provides the needed leadership that the country needs now to fix what has been screwed up in this country (the Iraq war, civil liberties abuses, campaign finance reform). Al Gore does provide the leadership on the issue that we need to tackle once those problems have been stopped in their tracks (the environment and global warming). Kerry lost me when he didn't stick up for our votes what appears to have been a stolen election. Al Gore tried some to fight the good fight. Both Al Gore and John Kerry have more ties to the DLC than I'd like, but Al Gore has departed from them for a lot longer and I think works harder now against their anti-Democratic agenda. Kerry is certainly not as bad as folks like Liebermann, Clinton, or Biden.

played fair we would have a winning ticket...

Feingold

.
.
.
.
.

way way way way down - Kerry

I want someone who came out of the gate ready to be very honest and brave - right from THE START. They all took their time in their irritating diplomacy and compulsive restraint to speak out. Most have been afraid of their shadow - the shadow being their interpretation of the polls and what they thought their voters wanted (maybe), but probably their restraint was lack of backbone - they should be seeing more than we can. They fear being called a nutjob. I still can't support anyone who voted for the war and clung to it until Feingold broke the mold on speaking and after everything was super-transparent. A person has to draw the line somewhere.

I can't support anyone who 'saw' less than I did - a mere citizen who paid attention.
I also look at their votes. Voting for the bankruptcy bill and an entire list of other resolutions sealed it.

Gore has always been the best by far (on most issues) and Feingold finally got moving fast and steady.

Others who have been strong from the beginning are Kucinich, Boxer, Conyers.

Hooray for the brave ones!

Presently I say NEVER to Clinton, Bayh, Biden, and never, never to Feinstein, Leiberman, Landrieau, the Nelsons and all those Republican voters and all those with big pockets (or those who have a husband with deep pockets) - in case they start thinking about running.

The team (either way) has EVERYTHING and is a brilliant choice.

They can not say anything about spending - Gore led the streamlining of government and helped balance the budget

They can not say anything about foreign affairs or security - Clark led a war without a single US casuality and has a plan for getting out of Iraq - He has a brilliant military mind.

Plus Gore already proved he can win an election

Gore was ahead of the curve with global warming.

Could pick up AR and TN

Most important -- Gore was and is against the war!

He's my man.

When the Swiftboating and other attacks on the Democrat's candidates begin, these are the only two men or women with a chance of winning who I have complete faith in. They will not be intimidated. You might say they are the two I trust and would follow into battle...

Kerry is close, but I can't think of any one else right now. And I trust Clinton as much as I trust Lieberman!

Feingold voted for some of Bush's appointments that I think were totally wrong.

Gore has voted too conservatively in the past and the censorship thing was never something I could get behind. I don't like that he supports the death penalty. Just my POV.

They are all good men, but when I add up the score on the issues that I care most about, I find that I usually go for the more liberal candidate. That's why I pick Kerry. He's consistent on more issues that matter to me and he doesn't cave in to political pressure from the right.

1.Gore
2.Feingold
3.Kerry

Maybe someone could make this question a poll thread?

.

I was disappointed that, after such fraud in 2000, Gore didn't stay active in the party, and lead the way against election fraud. He proved he didn't care about my future vote, only the vote that affected his own ambitions.

Kerry, on the other hand, didn't resign from the Senate. He could have, but he decided to stay and fight for the future of our election system, for the future of our country.


You see how that can go both ways?

I would like to see a Kerry/Clark ticket.

But, I will support any democrat who gets the nomination, including Gore, even tho he turned his back on us for 5 years.

asking.

Wish Gore would run, and am hoping Feingold will....

But I still want to get through 2006. 2008n will still be there.

He's proven his mettle. Feingold would make an excellent VP.

Keep up the good work.

,after that it's a close call.

This thread could go on for miles.

Oh...Ok Gore/Clark

No doubt about it.

Joe

and anyone other than Kerry.

important right now.

(Gore is second).

EDWARDS & GORE! I LOVE Feingold, really have tremendous respect for him, but America just isn't ready for him! It will be McGovern or Dukakis all over! And that makes me terribly terribly sad!

But he's one hell of a guy! We can't even catch outright corruption and prosecute it, it would be impossible for us to elect Feingold!

.... Feingold, Kerry.

Gore would be nice too, but I suspect our democracy needs Feingold right now.

J

All three of these gentlemen are acceptable to me. I would vote, donate to and work for any of them. My main qualifications are

1. Experience: It's an almost insurmountable job, cleaning up after Bush and his gang of war criminals. I want our new president to be able to hit the ground running.

2. Judgement and political savvy: I want someone who can cut through the bullshit. In particular I want someone who had the good judgement to oppose the Iraq war from the gitgo.

3. Willingness to get down and fight: It's going to get ugly. If our guy is going to go down I want him to go out in a blaze of glory, all guns blazine.

And so my three:

Gore: Big Al gets top nod because of experience and because he's managed to be ahead of the curve on so many important issues. Moreover, since getting out of politics, he's become both an entrepeneur an activist and an educator. Can he fight? I think so.

Feingold: Russ is right on so many levels and is a true warrior for the Constitution. My main concern about him is whether he's capable of forming the alliances that make things work in DCland. The one thing we know about him. Feingold's a fighter.

Kerry: Kerry knows the issues. Hopefully he learned a lot from his campeign. He's atoned for his pro-war vote. The big question about Kerry is whether he's willing to get down in the gutter and fight?

I would go with Kerry, but is that an embarrassment of riches or what.

Feingold would make a good VP choice.