Are your top three choices set in stone?

[Lucinda]

My top three are pretty solidly in place, but I'm still watching to see who can best deal with the media and the personal attacks. All the position stuff, and my assessment of them individually matters to me, but I think the ability to handle the media, and their response to attacks swiftly and thoroughly are critical. I think that evaluation will be easier to do after a bit more time has passed.

[saracat]

1. Yes.

[Frances]

2. No

[Debi]

3. No,

If the caucuses were held today (and with the calendar mess they may be and I just didn't get the message) I'd be walking in undecided and really wanting to hear why my neighbors are supporting the candidate they are standing up for..:shrug:

[rosesaylavee]

4. Some days.

[LWolf]

5. No.

My bottom 3 are wearing concrete boots out in the bay, my top 1 is set in stone on Mount Rushmore, and the rest are flexible.

[Lucinda]

16. :)

:rofl:

[daninthemoon]

6. Absolutely not. Nothing is written in stone, and the fat lady hasn't

even started warming up yet. Out the gate, Richardson was my fav, but he hasn't been articulate enough. I like Biden and Kucinich, but they seem to be stuck in 2nd gear. I was beginning to accept Hilary, then she voted yes on the Iran deal. Obama didn't vote at all, which actually seems worse. I just hope that whoever gets the nod will incorporate things from the other candidates, cause I'm not head over heals with any of them at this point.

[AtomicKitten]

9. comparative outrage

Obama didn't vote at all, which actually seems worse.

I am having a hard time understanding how you could consider Obama's nonvote as bad or even worse than Hillary's YES vote.

The measure passed 76-22; Obama's vote would have made ZERO difference and his campaign released this statement regarding the amendment:

"Senator Obama clearly recognizes the serious threat posed by Iran. However, he does not agree with the President that the best way to counter that threat is to keep large numbers of troops in Iraq, and he does not think that now is the time for saber-rattling towards Iran. In fact, he thinks that our large troop presence in Iraq has served to strengthen Iran - not weaken it. He believes that diplomacy and economic pressure, such as the divestment bill that he has proposed, is the right way to pressure the Iranian regime. Accordingly, he would have opposed the Kyl-Lieberman amendment had he been able to vote today."

[Lucinda]

18. I can point at things I disagree with

with each of the candidates. I'm really pleased we have so many that I can support this time around.

Obama's non-voting also bothers me. Not just in this case, but overall. I like him, just not for POTUS.

Hillary's K/L vote didn't bother me. I agree with Wes Clark and the Ambassador - it's just good leverage and I don't see it as any indicator re:a desire for war with Iran.

I don't think Richardson translates well to the debate forum.

I like both Biden and Edwards a lot.

I am closer to Kucinich on the issues, but I really place a lot of value on the ability to cut through the REP crap machine that I expect the nominee to be facing. I think Clinton, Edwards and Biden would all deal fairly well with the onslaught. DK, not so much.

[daninthemoon]

20. Problem with the k/l vote being about leverage, is that's the same

thing she and others have said about the Iraq vote. I fear this will lead to something similar. Why give * any excuse/validation?

[Lucinda]

22. I don't think they can stop moving forward and not do their jobs

because of what * might try and do. K/L didn't give * anything.

I do understand the very real fear people are expressing. But I think that not calling out the factions that we know are trouble, publicly, would be more dangerous than doing nothing because of what the admin might try and do in the name of K/L.

I also think the country is war weary and a lot wiser this time. If the unthinkable happens, and * attacks Iran, he'll find a way to do it with as much public support as he can muster. I don't even like to think of what that would entail, but I don't think it would involve trying to retro-fit K/L as a permission slip. I think it would be much worse.

[TheDebbieDee]

7. No......I really like Sen. Clinton, but......

I know that Sen. Edwards, Sen. Biden and Gov. Richardson are also more than capable of stopping America's long slide downward that the neocons have started!

I like and respect Sen. Obama as well, but I'm afraid he'd be another President like Jimmy Carter - so ethical that he can't get anything accomplished.

[Stop Cornyn]

8. The line up of Kucinich, Edwards, Obama is set, but the order shifts from time to time.

[Nimrod2005]

10. No

[robcon]

11. Yes: Clinton, Obama, Edwards.

Three great people who would make great presidents.

[emilyg]

12. Yes.

Clinton, Edwards, third still up in air

[cobalt1999]

13. No, but they currently are Clinton, Obama, Edwards.

[gateley]

14. No. My number 1 is set in stone, I'm unsure about 2 and 3. nt

[Lucinda]

23. Thats a nice pic of JB in your avi.

I saw some great pics of him online when I was making my graphic. He seemed very comfortable in his skin in all of them. I think that's important.

[goodgd_yall]

15. No

Edwards is my first choice, but I'm wavering between Obama then Biden or Biden then Obama.

[elana i am]

17. no. my top one is

kucinich. then it's which ever candidates piss me off the least on any given day, and that seems to rotate between obama, edwards, biden and dodd with edwards the least offensive the most often.

gravel is too much of a lunatic for consideration, but even he is ahead of shillary.

[slick8790]

19. Same for me. n/t

[mmonk]

21. Top four.

[illinoisprogressive]

24. My top choice and my bottom, "no way in hell" choice, too

[Froward69]

25. #1 is so 2&3 are up for grabs

I like Obama for #2 HRC wouldn't take the offer, too arrogant.

[PatSeg]

26. Yep

Biden is my number one and has been for a while now. I've looked at the others, but as time passes they continue to disappoint me. Someone mentioned Obama not voting on the Iran resolution and that really bothered me. It was an important day in the senate and they voted on the Iraq resolution as well. No other democrat was absent.

I've always liked Bill Richardson, but his performance in the debates has been dismal. Then he said he'd have all the troops out of Iraq in six months and for someone with so much foreign policy experience that wasn't credible.

Then there is Chris Dodd and I have to say, I really like him. He has a lot of experience and is strong on labor issues.

[jillan]

27. I have no idea who my #2 and #3 are.

Leaning towards Edwards as my second, but that is not set in stone.

I really like Dodd, he is definitely up there.

My #1 however is so set is stone that I begun to advertise my support for Biden.
(Bumpersticker and a button on my purse.)

[Forkboy]

28. Only one person is set in stone, and that's a vote against, not for.

[nickinSTL]

29. no. I will continue to listen and watch how things develop

Kucinich is my #1, but in certain situations, I might throw my primary vote to my #2 or #3, if I felt one of them had a strong chance to unseat the Clinton coronation, or if one of them were to manage to impress me sufficiently to unseat Kucinich (which wouldn't be easy).

#2 and 3 (the order is fluid) are Edwards and Biden.