Reply #16: Well the guy's a Rhodes Scholar with an IQ of about 160+

[ddeclue]

who would still make more sense after 10 drinks than Bush does stone cold sober..

I love Clinton because he's one of the few politicians I've ever seen that can:

1) Speak off the cuff about any topic without notes.
2) Do so extremely convincingly and with a command of the facts.
3) Speak in a manner that doesn't suggest programmed "talking points" but rather a real intellect at work that is willing to speak with you as a human being - not a campaign exercise.


We need more candidates that don't need a flashlight and a teleprompter and can do what Clinton does.

They are the key to winning elections because they make US look credible and competent and the other guys look like a bad joke.

At the national level:

Gore is probably the best eligible Presidential candidate in pure speaking qualities. He's not as good as Clinton but pretty darned close these days. I saw his movie and apparently he's found his sense of humor since 2000 and is a much less wooden speaker than he was then. I hope he can run.

Kerry is better than most candidates but tends to get too absorbed in minutiae that Clinton does not (although Clinton understands the details.)

Edwards is a better speaker with more natural charisma than Kerry (although I was a Kerry guy during the primaries anyways). I got to see him speak at the 2005 FDP convention and was very impressed.

Obama is an excellent speaker also with a lot of natural charisma. Also saw him speak at the 2005 FDP convention and was very impressed.

Beyond these guys, the rest of the potential 2008 candidates are definitely second string: Dean, Clark, Biden, Hillary, et. al.

I would like to see a team composed of and two of Gore, Kerry, Edwards, or Obama in the next election unless a miracle occurs and someone new comes along that's better.

Doug D.
Orlando, FL