Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Democrats, in retrospect, do you think Kerry was the best candidate?

  1. Kerry

    30.0%
  2. Edwards

    10.0%
  3. Dean

    30.0%
  4. Clark

    20.0%
  5. Gephardt

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  6. Leiberman

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  7. Kucinic

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  8. Sharpton

    10.0%
  9. Mosley Braun

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  10. Graham

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Sep 15, 2004 #1
    Just curious how many Democrats, at this point, think Kerry was the best chioce that was out there. I personally wanted Dean to win, and still think he'd have done a better job then Kerry, though think Kerry isn't too shabby, they're just really different. Dean wouldn't have taken all the crap Kerry has, and he would have conveyed much better to America the failings of Bush without the stuffy politician stuff, been much more energizing etc.

    Republicans talked alot about how Dean was unelectable, about how he was too far left, too angry, too this, not enough that etc. But for all the talk they did about how poor a candidate he was, they sure as hell focused the vast majority of their efforts into making sure as hell he didn't get the nomination. It would seem if someone was as poor a candidate as Republicans would have you believe Dean was, that they wouldn't do a thing to stop him from being their opponent. I think that they were really just scared someone as genuine and fearless as Howard Dean would come along and totally sink them.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 15, 2004 #2

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I didn’t vote but Kerrey not Kerry would have been the best candidate.
     
  4. Sep 15, 2004 #3
    I don't think Kerry is the best choice as a candidate. I was rooting for Clark in the beginning. But he was also skirting on issues.

    Dean certainly have the drive but it got to the point where he seemed out of control. It annoyed me and most people.
     
  5. Sep 16, 2004 #4
    At first I was for Kerry, but now I'm against him. (Couldn't resist. And no, I didn't take the poll.)
     
  6. Sep 16, 2004 #5
    I see Dean people
     
  7. Sep 16, 2004 #6
    Bob Kerrey, the 9/11 commission guy? I don't know much about him, care to expound his virtues?

    Yeah, we're everywhere.

    What originally made you support him, and why'd you change your mind? Was it just that during the primaries he seemed like a great candidate when you didn't know alot about him, and stuff which has come out/he said since has changed your mind about him?
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2004
  8. Sep 16, 2004 #7

    BobG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I voted Kerry as the best Democrat running, but I would have been more enthusiastic about Bob Kerrey, had he run. I would have considered voting for him in a general election, even against a good Republican candidate.
     
  9. Sep 16, 2004 #8

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I like Bob Kerrey, Jay Rockefeller, and Dean over Kerry.

    I like Clark for Veep.
     
  10. Sep 16, 2004 #9
    waste, think sarcasm.

    But in a sense my statement is somewhat true. At first I couldn't care less if Kerry won, as long as Cruella DeVille had to wait eight more years to run for office. But as the campaign wears on, I am beginning to see Kerry's and (especially) Edwards' ugly sides, and I am more strongly pulling for Bush. In essence, Kerry comes off as an elitist prick and Edwards.... well, he's just a total jerk.

    At least you didn't choose Carolyn Moseley Braun.

    Why couldn't you Democrats have offered Liebermann as a candidate? He's a reasonable man. In fact, I kinda' like him. He would probably be in the lead right now. But noooooo, you had to prop up an Leftist, arrogant, sherry-sippin' Biff and an an ambulance-chasing lawywer for candidates.

    "Did I ever tell you kids about the time I won three purple hearts in Vietnam?"

    "Yes, about a million freakin' times!"

    "Well, it was Christmas Eve, and I was patrolling in Cambodia..."
     
  11. Sep 16, 2004 #10
    Because way too much of the country still harbors anti-semetic feelings, on the outside or the inside. Besides him being an orthodox Jew, he's also just a boring senator, nothing exciting about him. Hell, we haven't even had a Catholic president since JFK, and he's widely regarded as one of the best presidents ever, do you honestly think a Jew would have a chance in hell, especially against Bush? I mean, McCain's a war hero, was in a prison camp for 2 years, a great man in general, and Bush's dirty tricks department labeled him as a deserter, co-conspirator with the VC, bashed him for having a Bangladeshi daughter, called his wife a drug addict etc. How easy do you think it would be for Bush to slander a Jew, honestly? And these 527's, oy vey "I went to synagogue with Joeseph Leiberman, he's not the mensch he wants you to think, he made it with a shicksa on the motzi."



    Maybe that's the problem with Kerry, he's like 1/4 Jewish or something like that...
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2004
  12. Sep 17, 2004 #11

    BobG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Braun flip-flops too often:

    Actually, it was the 1992 race - she won, but lost the 1998 race. She didn't retire, she didn't practice law (she became ambassador to New Zealand), and I'm not even sure she wore bright leather pants.

    I like Lieberman, as well. He was the only one of the Pres/VP candidates that escaped the 2000 election with a little dignity. Wasteof2 may have hit on his real problem "just a boring senator. Nothing exciting about him." Nothing wrong with that - Jerry Ford was "just a boring congressman. Nothing exciting about him." The inability to inspire any passion makes for an ineffective leader, though.
     
  13. Sep 17, 2004 #12

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    I liked Lieberman in 2000 but not this year. A lot of water has flown under the bridge since then, and Lieberman didn't seem to realize it. It was sad to see.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?