....LMB: "Electable"....

Well the only reason W is in office is because he was:

1) Not Bill Clinton.
and
2) Not Bill Clinton's VP

So I'd say Dean is comparably electable. He's the only one that isn't a fruit (or I should say, perceived as a fruit) that hasn't spent the last 3 years rolling over for W's legislative agenda. I can't really comment on why a Liberal would support him, But I can understand why a Democrat would.

1) He's not George W. Bush.
2) A SC Justice's spot will be filled in the next term
3) He's an asshole willing to be aggressive. Not a panty-waist whiney crybaby. He speaks a language people can understand.
4) His policies are mainstream enough to win a general election.

Until the pendulum swings so far back to the left that Dennis would have snowball's chance, Dean looks to be the class of a weak field.

As Nader voters discovered, it's not always the best idea to vote for the guy that best represents you. Sometimes you need to support whomever can beat the guy that is most antagonistic towards you.

I am (tenatively) very interested in the (possible) candidacy of Gen. Wesley Clark. I saw him on Russert's show a coupla weeks back and was pretty impressed. If he gives up the waffling and decides to run against Bush, I think he could eat him for lunch. But I thought that about Gore, too, so what the fuck do I know? Maybe most Americans really DO want the "second coming" to hurry up. Happy Armageddon!

Once Americans decide to vote their conscience, then Liberals won't be hampered by the "lesser of two evils" argument. As long as corporate campaign contributions corrupt so many candidates, I'm going to vote for those who are the least tainted: Kucinich, McKinney, Nader ....

It is encumbent upon Progressives to remind Democrats and Republicans that neither party really stands for their purported ideals. A vote for the "mainstream" candidates in either party is a a vote for Monsanto, Citigroup, ADM, Occidental Oil (in other words a vote for war, and corporate rights superceding civil and human rights).

Howard Dean is popular because he is an executive officer. Governors are CEOs, who lead with vision, whereas Senators are advisors, who debate for consensus. People want leaders for their president, not philosophers. (This is similar to the #3 point posted at the top of the page.)

Most people underestimate the importance of leadership in forging a candidate's public perception, and how leadership is a SEPARATE CATEGORY from the person's actual views, the consideration being that a leader will always lead in a positive direction, regardless of personal beliefs. This is because people think leaders will ultimately prove themselves to be pragmatic when placed in a difficult situation. True or not, this is how people think.

People also do not appreciate the difference between the executive office of the governor and the legislative office of the Senator, which is why people never understand why legislators always do so abyssmally poorly in presidential races.

I believe Howard Dean is popular because he is an executive officer. Governors are CEOs, who lead with vision, whereas Senators are advisors, who debate for consensus. People want leaders for their president, not philosophers. (This is similar to the #3 point posted at the top of the page.)

Most people underestimate the importance of leadership in forging a candidate's public perception, and how leadership is a SEPARATE CATEGORY from the person's actual views, the consideration being that a leader will always lead in a positive direction, regardless of personal beliefs. This is because people think leaders will ultimately prove themselves to be pragmatic when placed in a difficult situation. True or not, this is how people think.

People also do not appreciate the difference between the executive office of the governor and the legislative office of the Senator, which is why people never understand why legislators always do so abyssmally poorly in presidential races.

"It is encumbent upon Progressives to remind Democrats and Republicans that neither party really stands for their purported ideals. A vote for the "mainstream" candidates in either party is a a vote for Monsanto, Citigroup, ADM, Occidental Oil (in other words a vote for war, and corporate rights superceding civil and human rights.)"

yes yes... that's very nice. but perhaps Bush wouldn't be in office right now if the Nader crowd had thrown in their lot with Gore. sometimes choosing the lesser of two evils is the best you can do in the real world. what would be nice is a system where you can vote for whatever candidate you like, but then cast a second vote that will be counted if your first choice receives less than a certain percentage of the total vote. that way you could still show your support for whichever candidate is really your favorite withouth throwing your vote away entirely. which is what the Nader voters did, no matter how they justify it.

Dean is popular precisely because he is willing to look like an asshole. He's a fighter, while everyone else in the field is calibrating their responses so as not to draw too much fire from the VRWC, Dean is refusing to let fear them dictate his actions.

A candidate free from fear is very appealing. The perception that Democrats are weak on defense comes directly from the observation that none of the Dem leaders are willing to stand up and call Bush on all of his lies. If they won't fight HIM, how can they be expected to fight the countries real enemies?

Ultimately, the perception that Bush is strong on defense comes not from his defense policy (which actually sucks), but from the awareness that his is a fighter and people cross him at their peril.

We need the same perception of the Democratic candidate. THAT is what will neutralize the 'weak on defense' issue and turn the election into a refferendum on Bushs (failed) economic policies.

Dean is popular precisely because he is willing to look like an asshole. He's a fighter, while everyone else in the field is calibrating their responses so as not to draw too much fire from the VRWC, Dean is refusing to let fear them dictate his actions.

A candidate free from fear is very appealing. The perception that Democrats are weak on defense comes directly from the observation that none of the Dem leaders are willing to stand up and call Bush on all of his lies. If they won't fight HIM, how can they be expected to fight the countries real enemies?

Ultimately, the perception that Bush is strong on defense comes not from his defense policy (which actually sucks), but from the awareness that his is a fighter and people cross him at their peril.

We need the same perception of the Democratic candidate. THAT is what will neutralize the 'weak on defense' issue and turn the election into a refferendum on Bushs (failed) economic policies.

Dean is popular precisely because he is willing to look like an asshole. He's a fighter, while everyone else in the field is calibrating their responses so as not to draw too much fire from the VRWC, Dean is refusing to let fear them dictate his actions.

A candidate free from fear is very appealing. The perception that Democrats are weak on defense comes directly from the observation that none of the Dem leaders are willing to stand up and call Bush on all of his lies. If they won't fight HIM, how can they be expected to fight the countries real enemies?

Ultimately, the perception that Bush is strong on defense comes not from his defense policy (which actually sucks), but from the awareness that his is a fighter and people cross him at their peril.

We need the same perception of the Democratic candidate. THAT is what will neutralize the 'weak on defense' issue and turn the election into a refferendum on Bushs (failed) economic policies.

I'm not a supporter of the Green Party, but the Democrats did themselves in. Instead of bitching and whining how Nader ruined things, the Dems should get their heads out of their own asses. Sorry, it has to be said. I'm just a bit irritated by the ineffectual liberal opposition to the right wing. From where I stand, the Democrats and liberals are defenders of the status quo as the Republicans and conservatives are.

I apologize...I'm in a surly mood today.

Am i the only one that thinks we need to start over?
fuck electing any of "their" people
right now we need to work to build a new society

Here is my take on Dean, he's not as liberal as I'd personally like, but he's pro-choice and for universal health care. A little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

Here is my take on Dean, he's not as liberal as I'd personally like, but he's pro-choice and for universal health care. A little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

Here is my take on Dean, he's not as liberal as I'd personally like, but he's pro-choice and for universal health care. A little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

Here is my take on Dean, he's not as liberal as I'd personally like, but he's pro-choice and for universal health care. A little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

Here is my take on Dean, he's not as liberal as I'd personally like, but he's pro-choice and for universal health care. A little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

yeah... i'd love to start over. i think the whole 2 party system is crap. but in the meantime, i think we all need to throw our support behind whoever offers us the greatest chance of getting Bush out of office. like Shawn pointed out, 4 years of a little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

You are definitely missing something. It boggles my mind that people can be stridently anti-Bush and yet settle for Lieberman or Gephardt.

Dean may or may not be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but he is definitely the first Democratic candidate who is willing to speak the truth about the larger realities of America. Even Kerry, who slowly but surely is starting to call Bush out on his extremist agenda, seems so focus-group driven. He may decry Bush's court appointments but he doesn't appear to taake it personallly the way Dean does.

Listen, I do not want to live in a country in which cronyism runs rampant, environmental and health protections are ignored, civil rights are stripped away, the history of Jim Crow is rewritten by Southern revisionists to have been a fantasy created by politically correct liberals, etc. If it takes an asshole to prevent that then so be it.

I agree that a fighter is what we need. I cannot blame the timid democrats who hope to get elected AGAIN running scared, just look at the media bias, and note the story in today's Salon from Eric Boelhert on "Goofus Al and Gallant George".

All of the people who don't understand that this is a dirty, no good, political fight from the GOP who are not playing by the rules are just kidding themselves.

So yes, I like Dean. I think he can win, and I will donate money, time and effort to help him. otherwise, America as we know it is over.

jamie ghsfd gslfhvgb

"he is definitely the first Democratic candidate who is willing to speak the truth about the larger realities of America"

who are you kidding?

Besides even if sometimes Dean "speaks" the truth he has nothing in his platform to back up those words. His so called "Universal" healthcare plan ISN'T Universal. His so called stance against the war ISN'T one that shows any actual deads to that effect and DOESN't show any plans for the future in that regard. Carl Rove has publicly stated that the Republicans would "love" to run against Dean..... why's that...

Republicans aren't stupid enough to think they have a shot in hell of actually WINNING the election; regardless of who they are runnng against (unless stealing works again). They want to make sure the new president is one who will NOT CHANGE MUCH so when they get back in there the infrastructure of fascism is still firmly in place. Republicans love Dean and smear boldface lies on Kucinich at every turn because he's the only one they're really afraid off. He's the only one with a track record of standing up to them.

I've often heard people say that Kucinich is just promising the world and can't deliver on those promises like a "typical" politician.... What these people don't understand is that with Dennis they aren't just promises.... He's ALREADY working on these "promises". He's ALREADY got viable plans to achieve his "promises" and he's ALREADY DOING it, making them happen.

They will only become unfulfilled promises if the people of our once great country settle for the Republican choice for the Democratic Nominee.

"he is definitely the first Democratic candidate who is willing to speak the truth about the larger realities of America"

who are you kidding?

Besides even if sometimes Dean "speaks" the truth he has nothing in his platform to back up those words. His so called "Universal" healthcare plan ISN'T Universal. His so called stance against the war ISN'T one that shows any actual deads to that effect and DOESN't show any plans for the future in that regard. Carl Rove has publicly stated that the Republicans would "love" to run against Dean..... why's that...

Republicans aren't stupid enough to think they have a shot in hell of actually WINNING the election; regardless of who they are runnng against (unless stealing works again). They want to make sure the new president is one who will NOT CHANGE MUCH so when they get back in there the infrastructure of fascism is still firmly in place. Republicans love Dean and smear boldface lies on Kucinich at every turn because he's the only one they're really afraid off. He's the only one with a track record of standing up to them.

I've often heard people say that Kucinich is just promising the world and can't deliver on those promises like a "typical" politician.... What these people don't understand is that with Dennis they aren't just promises.... He's ALREADY working on these "promises". He's ALREADY got viable plans to achieve his "promises" and he's ALREADY DOING it, making them happen.

They will only become unfulfilled promises if the people of our once great country settle for the Republican choice for the Democratic Nominee.