Democratic Primary?

[PVVikeFan]

I would rather vote for one of Slick Willy's girl friends.

[burton2019]

Don't worry, when Hillary runs...you'll get your chance.

[imported_biggamesjames]

[ QUOTE ]
you can bet if and when barack obama runs he'll have a huge following

[/ QUOTE ]

He'll have a huge following but it takes more than just a huge following to become President...Hillary has a huge following but she will have an uphill battle ahead of her to win the White House. Obama will be one to watch in about 8 to 12 years from now when he has some experience under his belt and sees that he will have to run as a moderate and maybe even conservative democrat to have any chance at all. The people have spoken time and time again...they don't want liberals in the White House...Ted Kennedy found that out, Michael Dukakis found that out, Jesse Jackson found that out, and Howard Dean and John Kerry found that out. I don't think Obama is as liberal as any of those mentioned.

Its important to remember the geographical factor.

More than likely, either party wouldnt have a Prez/VP combo from the same region. If Edwards, say, was Dem Prez candidate, someone from the north would probably be his running mate.

Also, the Party's would probably not run two candidates for president from the same region, much less the state. so i see something like Warner vs. Allen as unlikely.

The Reps, should appeal to the moderates with someone like McCain, and solidify the southern religous base with maybe Allen as VP.

The Dems, on the otherhand, will have to rely on more than just saying how bad things are; they need reasons and alternatives. Simply saying, "things are bad with the Reps" wont work, it sure didnt in 2004. Hilary would be suicide (too many mid-class men AND women resent her). Perhaps a Biden/Edwards ticket may be a good one (covers the north and south geographically).

Regardless, things are definitly not the best they have ever been, tho important to remember not the worst. As Double-D said, if the democrats cant beat a party that has caused a few problems over the last 6 yrs, they need to do some serious re-evaluating.

I'm not sure i buy into the theory that some "terror-speak" or breakthru on the terror front will be used by the Reps near election time. They dont need to. They'll try to make the dems look weak on defense and should accent the fact there hasnt been at attack in the US since 9/11.

[R0cketer]

The thing to me is, what did Bush campaign on really? The main campaign was against Clinton and morals. That was over half of what he campaigned on. It wasn't a 'this is what we are going to do for you', it was a 'look how bad of a person he was'. It turned into an attack John Kerry and his military record. It was a not a campaign on what we can do, it was a campaign on look how bad the other is.

Now I'll agree, the Democratic party can't campaign on just inaccuracies/deceptions of the Republican party and need to say what they are going to do, changes they want to pursue, etc, but do we really think that most people pay attention to that anymore?

To me, the sad fact is, the GOP have been on a roll not by mentioning what they are going to do, but by attacking, something the Democratic party hasn't mastered as well.

Ahhh whatever way the Macaca flows I guess.

[img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[imported_biggamesjames]

The GOP has been on a roll because the Democratic Party and its leadership has moved too far to the left for the average American. Until the party can get some leadership that brings it back closer to the days of JFK and Roosevelt and more in touch with mainstream America then my prediction is the GOP will remain on a roll no matter what they do. I have voted for democrats in the past especially when I was younger but just like many other moderate dems I didn't leave the party...the party left me. I still share the democratic vision of the economy but they left me out in the cold with their stance on many many more issues. I have much more in common now with the GOP than I do the Democratic party and it didn't used to be that way...for me atleast.

[PVVikeFan]

They need to find somebody who is actually QUALIFIED for a change. That has been a major problem for years.

[gcdevil22]

a "mike brown type" of qualified...or maybe a "harriet myers type" of qualified

[imported_MoonlightGraham]

[ QUOTE ]
it takes more than just a huge following to become President

[/ QUOTE ] democrats learned in 2000.

what kind of qualifications do you need to be president then?
Since apparently there are no democrats that are worthy to be in office. Maybe if Kerry had gotten a DUI while at Yale or if his father had gotten him out of goin to war?

[imported_biggamesjames]

"Maybe if Kerry had gotten a DUI while at Yale or if his father had gotten him out of goin to war?"

Are you talking about Bubba Clinton? Oh no wait it was pot not beer and he just left the country to avoid going to war...my bad, I'm easily confused.