Please Make Your Case Why Your Candidate Has The Best Chance To Beat His Or Her Republican Opponent

[DemocratSinceBirth]

I am guided by one principle. In order to govern you must seize power. Since we live in a democratic republic that is done by winning elections.

I have no dog in this fight other than wanting to see a Democrat emerge from the primaries that has the best chance of beating the Republican.

This election is the most important in a generation. I shudder for this nation if a Republican is elected in 2008.

Please make your case why your candidate has the best chance to win. Please use logic, history, and data. Please don't say your candidate can win because you think he or she can. Please prove it.

Also, let's see if this can be done in a civil matter.

Thank you in advance

DSB

[CCfromNY]

1. My pragmatic choice is John Edwards,

although I also think Biden (my first choice) could win under this scenario.

When Edwards ran with Kerry, they lost by one state, Ohio. I strongly believe Edwards can hold every state he and Kerry won in 04, AND pick up Ohio. I think he's the candidate most able to win via this 'hold 04 and add Ohio' strategy.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

29. I think Biden may be the most electable in the general, but it's tough getting there!

[saracat]

2. I say John Edwards as the latest Rass and Survey America polls show him

to be beating the GOP candidates Guliani , Romney and Thompson by between 9 and 11 points.He beats the GOP by a larger percentage point than any of our other candidates.I do not want a "close" election.We tend to lose those.I want to WIN, and by a margin that can't be challanged.Those are the figures announced by those polls today.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. Thank You.

It would be nice to see this thread grow.

[saracat]

4. You are welcome.It would indeed be nice to see this thread grow.

[dmallind]

5. I'll give it a shot.

Bill Richardson can win because it will be very difficult to paint him as an extremist, inexperienced or ineffective.

The "gun grabber" boogeyman of the NRA is gone for a start - he supports individual RKBA. The "weak on foreign policy" is going to be tough to sell given his experience and success. He has the lowest negatives of any Dem candidate with over 50% total opinion (only Gravel is lower - by 2% - but 20% fewer people even have an opinion to give!)

He can supply success stories from NM which although it is still not an economic powerhouse has improved greatly under his administration.

As we all know governors tend to do better than sitting Congresspeople - no pesky voting record on recent hot-button items to distort, and a whole range of data from state success on one thing or another to tout. Look at Bill Clinton - the governor of a state that ranked pretty darn low on most objective measures of socioeconomic success - but who could point to those metrics where AR HAD improved and ride that wave. Optimism and success always sells better than the "yeah but..." pessimistic rejoinders about negative data from the same states.

His policies will be nigh impossible to paint as the all-encompassing pejorative "Hollywood Liberal" as he is a fiscal hawk and a pragmatist.

DU hates hearing this truth, but a large and all important segment of the population will not go for policies that stray too far from teh center. That's why it IS the center. 35% or so will never vote for a Dem. 35% or so will never vote for a Rep. We win by getting more of the remaining 30% than the other guys. It's that simple. He can do it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. Thank You.

I like Bill Richardson. He looks like the type of guy I could have a beer with.

[dmallind]

7. That too

It's sad but again true that a lot of people go on the "likeability" factor. Again - the difference between Clinton and Kerry and even Gore was in a lot of ways based on this subjective appeal. Now of course Bill R is no Bill C when it comes to charisma etc - Obama is the closest we have there but even then in a different and lower league - but he is not a distancing and seemingly aloof person either.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. Did You Know His Father Was A Banker.

I believe his mother, who is Mexican, was pregnant with him and living in Mexico... Mr. Richardson made sure his wife came to America to have the baby so he would be a citizen. I think he was born in Los Angeles...

[dmallind]

15. I did not know the details

but knew his parentage involved a Mexican mother. Of course that is certainly the way I would have approached it too in that situation were I the father.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. The Media Hasn't Been Kind To Him...

Tim Russert was especially unkind on "Meet The Press."

[dmallind]

22. Well in all honesty

he IS running a horseshit campaign. He should be staking out the experienced moderate electability position much more clearly, and has made several gaffes. However I still like his policies and CV better than the others at this point. He's a long shot candidate of course, but far less so than Kucinich or Gravel etc.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. Where Are The Clinton And Obama Supporters?

[Froward69]

12. Play nice now, If you have 20 min...

this should explain.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhCJ6h_p0GA

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. I Promise To Watch It In The Morning

I am about to log off soon.

Thank you.

DSB

[JeffR]

10. My candidate probably doesn't

But I'm backing him anyway. Come the General, I expect whoever the nominee is can beat the rep candidate, whoever that is.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. It's Cool To Support Who You Want To Support

Of course there are certain candidates I think are surer things than others but I'm not here to rain on anybody's parade...

I have the utmost respect for idealists...

[JeffR]

18. Nicely said

Thanks!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. Your Welcome

I have a hunch who you are supporting...

Go fer it...

It's still a free country....


As long as you don't vote (R)...

[sampsonblk]

13. Two answers

1. Hillary Clinton. She is a proven winner, like her husband. She is far ahead now, and is running an exceptional campaign. Only a calamity could derail her bid to win the nomination and general election.

2. This is not the most important election in a generation. That was 2004. That was the one we had to win. Bush's second term solidified his as a legitimate president, and essentially gave public approval to what he did in Iraq.

[illinoisprogressive]

16. Obama naturally attracks people from everywhere. the most unlikely people

I have heard some republicans say they are backing obama. They know he is a progressive but, they just like the guy.
he also is not polarizing for others let alone his own party. he has attracted many whites that could surprise people. he doesn't get the venom and alot of admiration from others.
Alot of people see him as a healer for the nation and with our reputation abroad. they also like his background that they feel give him a unique understanding of the world.
He also represents much wanted change of ideas and new ways without polarizing people. they are more apt to listen to his ideas and arguments and can get more done and laws passed from his agenda.
I could go into his policies but, people do not vote for the most part on that. They vote according to gut and likability and trustworthiness. Obama has that in huge amounts.

[illinoisprogressive]

17. I forgot...

Illinois is like 2 states. In the south it is the south. The same as in the 'south' and he had alot of support from there and the rural vote in the 04 democratic primary. And a huge amount of whites as well as a late break to him by african americans. he was running behind most of the race until the last 2 weeks and won in historic numbers against 8 other contenders.
this is important because outside Chicago, Illinois is very rural and like i said about the southern part.
We are the midwest. And we are alot like Iowa. But, alot of indies too.
He also enjoyed alot of republicans switching to support him as well.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

27. good points.

I know the general was not a representative race, with Keyes and all, but how did Obama do in rural IL in that race?

[rucky]

21. Biden just got his Iraq plan through the Senate w/ 75 votes.

Iraq is the most immediate issue facing us, and he's taken the lead on it. This is his plan and reached wide acceptance without much grandstanding and partisan conflict.

It's not perfect, but it's a plan that is sensible and a decisive change of course that appeals to the Republicans and Swing Voters who are soured on Iraq. His speaking style and simple messages are also appealing to a wide base of voters. He can be blunt, give straight answers, yet still show his deep knowledge of the issues.

He's hard to label, and that's a good thing, as he somehow manages to keep the respect of those on the Left and the Right of him, and remain respectful to his opponents.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

28. And he has that thin edge of psycho-anger, like Jimmy Stewart. (I am being serious)

I think he would be a very good general election candidate, partially because he seems kind but ruthlessly tough... like the kind of tough where he'd strangle someone to protect your kids.

That little edginess is what made Jimmy Stewart such a great actor. He could play good guys or bad guys. A complex personality.

People like that.

[PatSeg]

30. Very interesting comparison

I have actually been thinking of Jimmy Stewart lately when I think of Joe Biden, but I couldn't express it. You just did and did it well.

[PatSeg]

31. "He's hard to label"

As such he comes across as uniquely American, something we rarely see in politicians these days. He has a broad appeal that is difficult to achieve and you can tell when people are faking it.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

23. Not "my" candidate, but I think HRC is the most electable because

when the wind is at your back (as it is for Dems in 2008) you need, above all else, to not self-destruct. (The wind was at our backs in 1988, but we got to ambitious. D'oh!)

I like Obama very much as a person, but he doesn't have the record in tough races. Hillary doesn't have a tough race record herself, but Obama practically fell into the Senate, running de facto unopposed in a blue state. He makes subtle errors that could snowball. Also, stating the obvious, America is still a deeply racist nation. Obama would need to poll 7% ahead of the republican just to be even in the privacy of the voting booth. The Doug Wilder effect. I don't doubt that Hillary would energize the Republican base, but who the heck do people think the Republican base is? It's inveterate racists. And not all southerners. Lots of joe-lunchpails in Penn. and NJ and Ohio too. White voters in urban areas in swing states would be the danger there.

Edwards runs ahead in heads-up polling because he's a handsome white male, but he wears worse than any politician I've ever seen. In 2004 reporters who saw him once thought he was jesus, then when they saw him again they trashed him because it was all jive... just the same old heart-rending tent show. I don't give a shit who republicans like or dislike, but if the m,edia utterly despises a candidate that's bad for electability. And I have never seen the media hate anyone the way they hate Edwards. It's even wors than Al Gore. Media-hate may be a badge of honor, but we are talking about electibility, and the media picks our presidents. On the other hand, the media has a grudging admiration of Clinton, which is better than the alternative.

I thought Kerry all but conceded the day he knuckled under and picked Edwards as VP, but I never once said a negative thing about the VP pick on DU because it couldn't help Dems any. (I have 10s of thousands of posts on DU, but I like Kurt_and_Hunter better. Both of those men were alive back then, both are dead today, so it's a tribute)

Clinton has what I am looking for, which is the discipline to brazen out the tough spots even if it makes her look silly. She is shameless. I trust that she and Bill will devise a winning game plan and that she will execute it. Being icy cuts two ways.

An example of the Clintons outsmarting almost all pundits:

Bill told her to never apologize for the IWR vote and she never has. It is politically brilliant, because she's saying to the average American "I supported the war just like you did, then I decided it sucked, just like you did, but I am worried about getting out too fast, just like you are. And I don't feel like apologizing for anything." I would never have seen that... but Bill did. Americans don't want to be called to account for allowing the Iraq War... they know they fucked up. If she apologizes, then they ought to apologize too, and they're not in the mood. Beiing fooled by Bush is a kind of Huey Long thing... I'm just like you. That's why Obama's excellent war speech doesn't count for more... many Americans hear it as "I am smarter than you... better than you." And Edwards apology has zero appeal to anyone who did not oppose the war before it started. It makes no sense to apologize to people who would have cast the same vote.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. How Do You Deal With The Assertion That Hillary Is Too Polarizing To Win?

eom

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

26. Silly RW agit-prop from Rove, and quite ironic because Rove understands

better than anyone that it only takes 50% plus one.

It "rat-fucking". Just lame psy-ops.

Oh no, Hillary might only get 53%!

Reagan didn't get all that much more than 53% in 1984. Neither Bush nor Gore got 50% in 2000. (Or so I recall?) Bill Clinton never got 50% in either race.

Plus, her "Never vote for" number is down to 41%, which is amazing for a 100% name recognition partisan figure in a 50-50 nation.

Obama is really likeable. It is possible that Obama could get 55%, but it is also possible he would get 45%. Too risky.

Clinton will get 51%, and that's a winner.

[IndianaGreen]

24. Any Democrat can beat any Republican in 2008

This is why the issue is which of them will make the better President in terms of our class interests.