Any Dem other than Hillary. I'll have a hard time voting for her. Both sides don't anyone worth a CRAP.
Oregon

I made this pick one year ago. I have now changed my mind. I do not want to see Barack Obama as the VP on a Clinton ticket.

I believe that a Clinton/Edwards team would be the best winning ticket.

Everyone complains about how many negitives that Hillary Clinton has. ANY candidate would have high negitives if they were the targets of the Fox noise and Republician Rove attack machine, spewing the propaganda for fourteen years. I just find it so hard to believe that so many on this board buy into that crap.
I didn't see Karl Rove on last Sundays MSM talk shows being critical of Obama or Edwards, it was Hillary Clinton that was the subject of his criticism.

John Edwards has always been my favorite candidate.........
I would also like to see Al Gore get into the race...but alas....he has already said he wasn't

I haven't warmed to any of the Top three (Clinton, Obama, Edwards) and it's looking more and more like the discussion will narrow to Clinton/Obama pretty soon. If so, I'll have some hard reckoning to do. The jury's still out with me.

I wouldn't mind seeing Gore step back into the fray, but I doubt he will. In many ways, I feel he can do more as an ex-Veep than a presidential candidate.

Put Obama in there instead of Edwards and you have my vote (only dont use the photograph that I use in my avatar )...
An experienced runningmate like Wesley Clark would pull the rug out from under alot of folks who are dissing Obama due to a lack of experience.

The only problem with Clark is that he has been a Republician for most of his life, as the vast majority of military generals are. He voted for Nixon twice, Reagan twice, Bush Sr. twice, Dole once, and Bush Jr. once. That's 34 years of being a republician, and 5 years of being a Democrat. But Clark does have a mountain of experience.

I agree! For my part, John Edwards looks better every day. May be a bit of nostalgia at work, here. I'd go for a Gore/Edwards ticket in a nanosecond, but I guess that's not going to happen. I looked to Hillary about a year ago, but not any more. We (Dems) need a candidate that has a possibility of winning!
Sallie

I have now changed my preference once again. I want Hillary Clinton/Tom Vilsack. As a Clinton supporter, after tonights debates I wouldn't give Obama or Edwards the time of day.

My pick is Obama.

My reasons for this are that he was RIGHT about the vote on Iraq and even more importantly he's Right about the vote on Iran. He has a record of bringing people together from his service in IL, which is what this country desperately needs right now. He's highly intelligent, personable and understands the importance of talking to our enemies. He wants to conviene a summit of Arab leaders to discuss the problems in the middle east... can you imagine how effective that would be at diffusing some of the hatred for our governments apparent lack of interest in knowing what anyone who actually lives in the middle east thinks???

I also believe he is very electable contrary to what the small minority on this board believe. His "inexperience" in DC is an asset not a liability... the last thing we need right now is years of "experience" in Washington. He is the best candidate in this race and I'm hoping he wins in Iowa and gets a big boost and runs away with it. I would love to see him in debates against the GOP candidate.

I will say that I would also support and vote for J. Edwards, J. Biden or Chris Dodd. I will vote against Hillary Clinton because I think she lacks clarity and judgement.... she's a professional politician and only concerned about getting elected. She has taken more money from special interests and lobbyists than any candidate from EITHER side. Her decision to designate the Iranian Rep. Guard as a terrorist Org. was a HUGE mistake and it should cost her the Nomination IMO.

Edwards!
I will vote for Hillary, but I don't trust her. She's too corporate and too calculating. Obama seemed stalled and pissed me off when his staff didn't vette the ex-gay guy. The rest don't seem electable.

why would you vote for someone that in your own words say you don't trust thats not very smart

I sure wouldn't. Could you explain your two votes for GW Bush?

GoU

Feingold would have been my first choice. Since he's not running, Edwards or Kucinich.

I have always supported John Edwards, and still do.......

At this point, Edwards looks like the best of the field, from the perspective of morality and common sense. He wants to hold corporations responsible for their actions, and he knows what working people really need.

But I would vote for a yellow dog over any of the neoclowns on the GOP ticket, and Ron Paul would just be an utter disaster for the country because he has no clue how to make a government work. (Plus he seems to have a lot of lunatic supporters who would gain enormous street cred, like Alex Jones.)

Disgusting.

One post you talk about Clark being a Republican his whole life and the next you write off two life long Democrats based apparently on one debate?

Why don't you just admit that you are are only here to throw mud at candidates who have a chance of beating Hillary? Oh wait. You ran away after I sunk your battleship in the Obama thread.

I'm gonna say it again~~ John Edwards~~ He's the one~!!!!!!

Another "openminded liberal"speaks.Ted Kennedy is a killer,Robt Byrd a Klansman,Pat Kennedy a drunk driver,yet I bet you support all of them.

And you are a lying sack of crap. So me the murder rap, you liar, or shut up about Ted Kennedy. Are you willing to sit here and call Laura Bush a killer, too?

You have no morals or ethics at all.

GoU

It would appear the only Democrat running that would do a decent job and is 100% trustwothy is.......drumroll please Barak Obama.Hillary has that Clinton stench about her,Edwards has the integrity of a TV Preacher.The rest appear to be running in order to sell more books,except Biden who just can't pass up a TV camera.

Could you please inform me what the "Clinton stench" is? I would never vote for Hillary because I don't trust her. And Bill certainly isn't my favorite President in history. But I have no idea what his "stench" is. I can think of SOME Presidents whose stench is so strong that nearly the entire population of Europe can smell it and wonders out loud to every American they meet how he ever could have been President twice.

I do find it interesting that Hillary is the candidate for the middle by nearly everyone's assesment. Yet the moderates and conservatives on this site who are anything but Democrats seem to like her least.

I must admit.....I am so torn now between John Edwards and Barak Obama....I love Edwards' passion and drive......and I love Obama's inspiration and the way he gets people together for the common good.........eek~!! what should I do.....I want them both....I would love and Obama/Edwards ticket...but I don't think Edwards would want the #2 spot again..........so Edwards/Obama?

I can't stand her, very well documented.

Barack has my vote if he gets nod. If not, I will probably vote for the Republican candidate.

I do like the way you think. I have been an Edwards fan for a long time and he has been my number one for many months. But I have always liked Obama. I would happily vote for either ticket you mention but think that the latter comes with the benefit of a VP Obama for 2016.

Most of the middle can't. It's like getting a moderate candidate without any of the benefits of them being a moderate, because the middle doesn't like her, the Republicans SURELY don't like her, and the left doesn't like her. She does have that 32% or so of the Democratic party who is TOTALLY in love though... Thats about half of the number of people who still support G.W. Bush.

I went to glassbooth.org and Kucinich scored the top. Edwards and Obama tied. Although the issues Edwards and I were the closest on were the issues Obama and I were not. That being said, Obama and I were very strongly vs. strongly apart. So, I could vote for either if it came down to it but I would prefer Edwards. An Edwards/Obama ticket would be just fine with me. Shillery and I had about 70% in common and those were not very close at that.

Kucinich is my closest-94%, of course, followed by Gravel-80%, Bill Richardson-80%, John Edwards 77%, Shillary-72%(too bad I don't believe a word she says), Obama-70%.

I hadn't seen that before. Thanks. I would have put them in about that order I think, although I probably would have put Hillary and Barack in a tie as far as political issues goes. Barack's way ahead in the race between those two though.

I'm 78% Edwards


some of these should not be coupled together

Medical Marijuana and Drug Policy mutually exclusive
Civil Liberties and Domestic Security
Crime and Punishment
Iraq and Foreign Policy M/E
Trade and Economics
Environment and Energy M/E
Gun Control
Immigration
Health Care
Social Security
Taxes and Budget
Education
Gay Rights
Abortion and Birth Control M/E

I agree. I am a moderate on abortion but very pro birth control. I thnk free comdoms, birth control, Plan B, etc. should be widely available to anyone who wants. I do not support Roe v Wade and I believe that the viability standards for fetuses are way too late. None of the Democratic candidates matched me on abortion...of course. It would be like a Reputlican presidential candidate supporting federally funded elections.

I agree with you by and large.

Anyone BUT Clinton.

She wins, we LOSE.

Yea, I guess that Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Bill O'Riley, Fox News and all of the rest of the rightie pundits were all right about the Clintons all along. How stupid could we all have been to not see the light about all those right wing pundits before.

Of those that have a chance:

Edwards

Here is why:
http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/

Kucinich will get my caucus vote today in nevada. He is the only candidate that has shown any resolve to impeach this administration and consistantly voted against war funding.

However Since it appears that only obama or Clinton can actually get the nomination I am hoping of those two it will be clinton.

I do not understand the vitriol some on the left have against clinton. Bill was one of the best presidents of the last century..Probably the best since Eisenhower. Hilary was intimately involed in her husbands career and has shown herself to be an excellent and popular Senator for New York. Her Ansers to questions on the debates are more detailed and better thought out than the rest of the candidates. Certainly where foreign policy is concerned.

I am not as impressed by Obama's vague feelgood generalities and charisma. Reminds me of Reagan too much. Popular but not effective. I think Bush2 has shown us what can happen when you vote based on personality.. Personality winners are often poor presidents. See Bush2 Reagan and Carter.

I plan to vote for Sen. Obama on Jan. 29...we need him now more than ever~~~!!!

Edwards in 2008. If he isn't nominated, I will vote Republican, as I have always done. Based on Bush wrecking Amercia economics & political status, Kucinich, Paul, and Edwards were natural contenders. Casting a vote for Obama or Clinton is nothing short of endorsing status quo in a different party.

Voted for Obama....but I really do like Edwards......when I heard he was going to cancel campaign stops out west...and go to to NOLA....I was suspicious something was definitely up with the campaign........

Wanted Kucinich vs. Paul, but I guess the dream is over.

I've said from the first that I was impressed with each and every dem candidate, that any of them would make a fine President, and we had an embarrassment of riches with the best lineup in years.

I have never made my mind up, because I would be voting late, well after Super Fat Tuesday. I've leaned Edwards from the beginning.

I still won't vote for a month, but surprise surprise, looks like my vote WILL count.

And I still haven't made my mind up, but at this time, I'm strongly leaning Obama, although I have reservations about his stance on labor. But Ted and Caroline Kennedy's endorsement, especially HOW they endorsed him, weigh heavily on me. My heroes have always been Kennedys.

But I would be proud to pull the lever for either candidate. We will win in November.

GoU

Obama. I don't buy the whole "experience" ploy because we have seen in the campaign season that experience doesn't matter. Oh I'll feed you baby birds... Hillary has experienced two successful national presidental campaigns in the 1990's. Despite that experience, what has happened? A campaign that began on the top of a mountain now dwells in a canyon. Clinton employs friends and loyalists to run the campaign rather than professionals. The message has changed with the wind. Emotion has seeped into strategy. There has been personnel turnover. The worst thing is that the campaign as a whole underestimated its opponent. Imagine if we change out the word "campaign" with the word "administration". Meanwhile, the Obama campaign has been consistent in message. He has the smartest people advising and managing the campaign. He has set goals and accomplished them. He has been unflappable and formidable, a key for our president. There are plenty of people with experience out there (McCain, Dick Cheney, Tom Delay), should we automatically vote for them? Of course not. Let the majority decide.

Hillary, experience.

Who is to say the ballots on the primary are not being fixed?

What is factually evident, is in the caucus states when you have to stand and deliver ...Obama is victorious and by huge numbers!

Due to Barack Obama's expertise in community organizing.....and if the way he runs his campaign is any indication of the sort of president he would be....we are very fortunate to have him~!!

Hillary Clinton! She is smart, experienced & has the best health care plan to reach universal hc...I would be so proud to show my 2 little girls that they really could do anything...what a great role model for half of the world's population! I hope she wins...she deserves it...Clinton/Obama would be good too! Clinton has the edge in my opinion on electability & experience...a combined ticket with Clinton on top would be perfect...8 years of Clinton...and then 8 with Obama!

Well, I hope everyone has a good sense of humor because I found a candidate in the an unlikely location, Jeff Dunham's suitcase. Give it up for the next President of the United States, Walter!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8--lrON9yzs...com/walter2.php

http://jeffdunham.com/walter.php?poll=1

Regardless of how old he LOOKS, Walter is not 35.
He's also not a person.


Mac

True. But then all these presidents have been someone's puppet. What's the difference anymore?

Who's puppets were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln?


Mac

Too bad Walter didn't mount a serious campaign in the Republican Party...he'd probably be the nominee right now...McCain would have been a good running mate for him...both angry and full of it.