I like all the Democratic candidates

[Quixote1818]

Sure I like some more than others and some have done some things that irritate me, but all in all they would all make great presidents!

Here is how I would grade them:

Obama A+
Kucinich A+
Edwards A-
Richardson A-
Dodd A-
Clinton A-
Vilsak B+
Biden B

If they decide to run:

Clark A+
Gore A+
Dean A+

Here is how I rate the Republican Candidates:

Almost everyone gets an F accept Ron Paul (if he runs) who I hear is actually very good but I don't know much about him.
I give Romney a D and Hagel a D.

[JI7]

1. Romney is one of the worst

ask anyone in Massachusettes. talk about flip flop.. and bashing the people of your state in order to get the nomination. not just bashing in terms of words but denying help during disasters.

[Quixote1818]

2. I don't know much about him. I just figured if he could get elected in MA

he would have to be a moderate. I also heard that he has given money to Democratic candidates in the past.

[DonkeyInChinaShop]

3. What's your grading scale?

Could you give one example of why each candidate deserves the grade they got? I actually agree with your scale 100% (except for Edwards, I would give him a C+ for poor community performance before he became elected and something bothers me about the fact that he has been running for President for five years now). I'm just curious though as to your justification for each candidate.

Ron Paul is not actually very good. He's a former Republican congressman who is anti-war but he would vote with the Republicans 90% of the time probably.

[sandnsea]

4. Excuse me?

What do you mean by Edwards and poor community performance?

[DonkeyInChinaShop]

9. I could go on and on

But I'll summarize in a couple of lines.

Find me a legislation that deals with the poor that Edwards worked on while he was in the Senate. Actually, don't waste your time, he didn't but that's what he campaigns most on.

Find a pro bono case that the successful multi-millonare attorney worked on. Actually, don't waste your time, you won't find one.

It's one thing to work for the poor and then run for office because you think you can help people the most that way. It's another thing to work for yourself until you enter politics and then once you start running for President start caring about the poor.

Prove me wrong, I would love to think that I could fully get behind all of the Democratic candidates if they got elected. I would vote for Edwards if he won, but I wouldn't be fully behind.

[sandnsea]

10. Luckily I wasted my time

In his first year in the Senate he introduced legislation to provide emergency relief after Hurricane Dennis and Floyd; to develop housing in rural America; to provide sprinklers to public colleges and dorms; to expand the missing children's act to 22; to change the tax code for troops; and research on a disease called "Fragile X".

That's with a very quick search on Thomas.

In addition, you would need to include parks, schools, libraries and other charitable efforts the Edwards have participated in during their lives.

I'm not that wild about the Edwards, but I do think they have attempted to practice what they preach to some extent.

[DonkeyInChinaShop]

12. Research a disease called Fragile X?

Sprinklers in college dorms? Expand missing children to age 22? These are addressing poverty? You are oging to have to do much better than that.

Please tell me when the Edwards started these charitable efforts with parks, etc.

[sandnsea]

13. Housing in rural America?

And yes, public school, medicine, missing kids are community issues thst the poor care about too.

[Quixote1818]

6. It would take several paragraphs to explain

I just went by a culmination of impressions of each candidate over time. I have very little problem with Obama, Kucinich, Clark, Gore and Dean. Edwards, Dodd, Clinton, Richardson, Biden are all insiders and have made some votes or have taken positions that were bad enough they stuck out in my brain. Biden, Edwards and Clinton were a little too hawkish for me, for one thing. I think Clinton and Biden are too connected with special interest and the Washington power brokers and tend to be too calculated rather than sticking to their convictions. I know it would have been difficult for Clinton to vote against the War for fear of looking weak but I actually think she would have looked stronger if she had taken a stand and been one of the few who had the guts to vote against the War. Still, I don't hold that against her too much even though it irritates me a little bit. I have similar concerns about Edwards as you do. I think Edwards is very smart but sometimes I question why he is in the race to begin with. At least Clark devoted himself to the Democratic party and worked his ass off for dozens of candidates and helped them win. Like you said, Edwards seemed to be working more for himself than for the good of the party. Those are just gut feelings and I don't really hold them against him too much. No one is perfect and I still think he would make an excellent president. Most of them would.

[autorank]

5. How about we only settle for A PLUS!!!!! (or higher)

If they decide to run:

Clark A+
Gore A++++
Dean A+

[Quixote1818]

7. You got that right!

Gore would get an A++++. He is that good! Clark and Dean are too.

[autorank]

8. We could have a triumverate like days of old in a place far away...

They're all heavy hitters, the rest, nah. Not this year.

[Breeze54]

11. None of them are candidates yet. n/t