Here's our choices when it comes to a POTUS nomination:

1. Someone who will APPEASE the "special interests" (corporate oligarchy).

2. Someone who will COMPROMISE with the "special interests."

3. Someone who will FIGHT the "special interests."


Me? I'm voting for a FIGHTER.

Biden, IMO, is a fighter. I didn't say which fighter I was voting for. I'm simply not voting for an appeaser or a compromiser (when it comes to the corporate oligarchy).

:rofl:

I like Biden as a diplomat. Would be a great Sec of State, but for the Oval? Way too much cooperation with mega corporations, particularly in financial industries.

the one who

- won't nominate more Scalitos to the bench
- won't erode the church-state separation
- won't wiretap Americans without a court order
- won't undermine findings of the scientific community with religious toadies
- won't pander to religious fundamentalism

Since that excludes the entire field of Republicans, I think the choice will be fairly clear come November.

--won't pander to the corporate oligarchy?

while I prefer to deal in actualities, thanks.

The truth is the truth (actuality) whether it's found on a bumper sticker or in a campaign speech, or in a corporate donation to a campaign.

ON EDIT: And, what makes the additional criteria I gave any more of a "bumper sticker" argument than the criteria you gave?

1. Someone who will LOSE

2. Someone who MIGHT WIN

Me? I'm voting for someone who MIGHT WIN

But everybody is free to vote as they like.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

it will likely be decided.

That's why I'm hoping that either they all stay in the race till the last primary, or that all but two drop out after Iowa and New Hampshire.

Dodd (who proved that he's a fighter on the Senate floor the other day), Edwards, Biden, and Kucinich.

Clinton and Obama have been scratched off the list.

Dodd actually moved up in my mind with his stand on the Senate Floor- I hadn't given him much thought at all before that. Kucinich is a genius in my opinion. The man looks funny and comes off as a nutcase sometimes though and of course he would be vilified by the Republicans and that is the political end of why he isn't my first choice. Its the old electability thing. If I honestly believe that no matter how good a certain candidate is on policy that he or she can never be elected then I have to abandon them. My vote has to count, I can't throw it away. I have to put it where I think I can get the most bang for my buck so to speak.

I like John Edwards a lot. The major thing that puts me off about him is that he is - and please excuse the term - a one trick pony. His domestic agenda is his only agenda. I agree that there are two Americas and that we need to do more, much more. Unfortunately there are also two worlds, and we are failing to the detriment of our own security to deal with that more important fact.

I have another complaint about each of the top three, Clinton, Edwards, Obama. They will not discuss policy in public, they rely on emotion. It drives me nuts. Obama leads the pack here.

So that brings us around to Biden and Dodd. Honest, well experienced, mature, strong Democrats each of them. I just happen to think that overall Senator Biden's position stances most reflect my own but more importantly I prefer his through explanation of issues and how he came to his position. Not saying a single thing bad about Dodd - don't get me wrong about that.

it's good to see.

Biden wasn't "the Senator from MBNA" for nothing.