A hypothetical question for you..

[and-justice-for-all]

Poll question: A hypothetical question for you..

Let's say that HRC gets the nomination to run in November, she then picks Obama to run as her Vice President, would you support that and vote for them or not vote at all?

I would be fine with a HRC/Edwards ticket in November myself.

[napi21]

1. I will vote for the Dem nominee no matter who it is. We CAN'T

survive another Pub in the WH!!!!!!

[Breeze54]

2. She won't pick Obama as a running mate.

I seriously doubt it.

Madeleine Albright comes to mind, though.

On edit: I didn't vote in your poll.

[MonkeyFunk]

10. Madeline Albright

is not eligible to be VP. She was born in Czechoslovakia.

[Breeze54]

19. Thanks and oops! But she was Sec. of State

:shrug:

[debbierlus]

28. You can bet she will pick a VERY strong male as a running mate

Edwards, Biden, Dodd....

I don't think she would pick Obama, I think she would view him as a liability in a GENERAL election.

[Warren DeMontague]

54. If I had to lay odds, I would bet it ends up being Biden. Or Richardson.

I'm not a big Biden fan, but he would make a solid #2 pick. Richardson too.

[0007]

67. Forget the fat toad!

[Warren DeMontague]

68. That's sort of uncalled for.

I mean, isn't it? :shrug:

[tedoll78]

3. Hmm.

Prediction: many of the folks around here would rather hand over the Supreme Court to the GOP for the next 30 years than vote for such a ticket. And then they'll whine about every single 5-4 decision for the indefinite future.. :eyes:

[Hoof Hearted]

4. I think she might pick Wesley Clark as her VP, or maybe Bill Richardson.

If she gets the nomination that is, it's not over tonight, by any means.

[Breeze54]

8. She'll pick a woman.

;)

[Hoof Hearted]

25. No, because strategically that would be a bad idea. Nominees chose VP's that

fill in their gaps, vote wise.

Gore felt he needed a moderate, "family values" guy and the fact that Lieberman was Jewish weighed in very, very heavily considering Florida's tight race, a strategy that worked, btw.

Bush needed a VP that would fill in his woeful lack of any meaningful policy experience, hence, the Lord of Darkness.

Kerry needed a VP that would make him appear less . . . . boring.


I would bet everything short of my life that there is no way in hell Hillary will pick a woman for VP. It would be nice, but it wouldn't be smart.

[debbierlus]

29. I completely agree

[Breeze54]

34. I not only think it would be smart but it's way over due!

;)

[Hoof Hearted]

37. Explain why you think it would be smart? Based on what?

Present a logical argument why you believe it to be smart.

[LisaL]

74. I agree.

I am sure she will go for someone who would be most beneficial to her, as would be a smart thing to do.

[Smarmie Doofus]

5. "Yay" is overstating it , but I will vote for that ticket.

I still haven't figured out what southern state this ticket will carry.

Can we win without carrying a single southern state? I doubt it. We'd have top make virtual clean sweep of the NE, MW and far west.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

6. To those who would not vote if their candidate isn't picked....

....

I'm for Edwards. If he doesn't get to be the nominee, I will still vote Democrat. WHY? Because old people in this country, and the working poor, and homeless kids CANNOT WITHSTAND ANOTHER 8 YEAR ADMINISTRATION WITH SOME REPUGNICAN PIGS.

Now that I got that out of my system, let me say that I, too, want my candidate to win and I've been living with a great deal of stress about it. I don't LIKE Clinton or Obama because both are right wing and KISS corporate ass. However, neither of them is as right wing extremist as the Repukes, and my concern is not with my own desires, but with the outcome of those who have suffered the most for 8 F years under this heap of dung in the White House currently.

So please, even tho you're upset that it's not going to be Kucinich or Edwards or whichever lefty you or I might really really really want, take a deep breath, FORGET ABOUT YOUR PRIDE DAMMIT, and vote Democrat for those who are suffering so much right now. They might not fare as well under Kucinich, Edwards, etc., but they'll still fare a tiny bit better under a Dem President than under a Repugnican one.

Suck it up!

[Yuugal]

12. For me its a strategy issue.

If progressives keep caving in and supporting the party when all they ever offer us are corporate bought turds, things will never change. The reason the kkkristians always have so many nutters to chose from is because they will stay home and their party knows that. Progressives are regarded as spineless chumps and I think its time we start using our vote or lack thereof to swing the party left.

[mondo joe]

15. I think that strategy is no different than the far right Kristians who say the same.

They don't have enough critical mass to change anything, and neither do you.

[Yuugal]

20. Are you kidding me?

The rep party hacks are terrified by the religious people in their party. Progressives get laughed at and dismissed in the dem party unless its election day and then we get the usual "vote for our corporate candidate because where else are you gonna go, huh?"

How can we change that when we keep playing along? Voting for corporate war mongers and enablers hasn't been working.

[mondo joe]

21. Both parties end up trying to balance the whole "coalition" that makes them up.

Look at the Republicans and how pissed the Kristians are - they've had the white house and congress both for years, during a war, and they still haven't gotten the things they most want. They're just being pulled along for their votes, given just enough to keep them going.

But if you think the repub power base isn't scared by Huckabee, you've got another thing coming.

[Yuugal]

22. we get the same shine from our party

I'm a lifelong progressive and at 42 I'm still waiting for one to have a chance. My reward for voting in lockstep with my party has been negligible.

"Look at the Republicans and how pissed the Kristians are - they've had the white house and congress both for years, during a war, and they still haven't gotten the things they most want."

Our party is doing the same things to progressives. 2006 was supposed to be our glorious victory and an end to war funding. That didn't work out so well. We were gonna stop any more crazy Bush appointees too. That didn't work out so well.

"They're just being pulled along for their votes, given just enough to keep them going."

Just like us.

"But if you think the repub power base isn't scared by Huckabee, you've got another thing coming."

The reps fear of Huckster stems from his anti-free trade stance, not from his religion.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

32. So you think that allowing yet another 8 years of Repukes to kill and hurt the weak is a great idea

Fascinating. Unfortunately, it's not fascinating to the ones that suffer the most, who are the only ones I care about.

[Yuugal]

33. I am that poor person

I can't afford to wait through 4-8 years of a corporate dem who doesn't even know I exist. Then I'll have to wait through 4-8 yrs of Jeb. No thanks. I live in NY so my vote isn't going to matter anyway. We always go blue. I'd rather use my vote for a progressive even if I have to write in Maxine Waters.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

35. Then enjoy another 8 years of GOPers. nt

[Yuugal]

40. Why would I enjoy that?

I live in NY. We are going blue.

My premise is simple. The religious right always gets a bunch of fundie candidates falling all over each other to out-God the rest of the field. This is because they have the guts to stay home when the party puts up centrist reps. The reps intentionally drove away the moderates in their party and became stronger not weaker.

In our party, instead of showing the corporate centrists the door and providing a clear alternative to the corporate/fundie reps, we pushed away the left wing. This hasn't worked out too well. I'm 42 and have always voted straight Dem, but once in a while this party needs to run a populist. Otherwise, what are working class progressives and advocates of the poor doing here?

Choosing between two store bought corporate candidates isn't my idea of progressivism. If NY gets close I'd maybe be able to hold my nose so hard it bleeds and pull the lever for whichever dem is running in the GE. NY won't be close though.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

41. Exactly. You're going to make sure that Dems you don't like get very few votes....

... so that a Repuke can get into office for 8 years. Is there something about this you're trying to explain to me that is explained differently?

[Yuugal]

44. I live in NY

The Dem will carry NY. Therefore I am free to vote progressive. Is that so hard to understand, even after I've explained it 3 times?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

63. I love NY. But you're still playing with fire. nt

[Djinn]

47. if you think

the poor will cease being killed and exploited in order to further the US empire just because a Dem is in the Whitehouse then I can only assume you are very young or woefully ignorant of history.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

64. Hell no. There's still going to be shit unless we can manage to get a socialist govt in there....

... which this country's culture and personality does not want.

However, on the local level, I know PLENTY of older people who are having a horrific time making ends meet. To be at the end of their life and having to decide if they can afford to buy some chicken this month, or just make do with pasta in order to buy a necessary and outrageously expensive med, is about as sick as it gets. Which is why there's no way in hell I would ever vote for Kucinich, or anyone who can't get enough votes.

I'll either leave the U.S., or stay here and fight for these people. Fighting for these people does NOT mean taking measures to help another fascist @-hole Republican get 8 years to torture these poor, old people in.

[Djinn]

76. socialism is hardly the answer either

what I'm saying in that for those on the bottom of the ladder Democrats are NOT an improvement.

All the much repeated accomplishments of Clinton's time in office was the booming economy - that "boom" left poor people EVEN POORER

If you work with the poor then you would be well aware that a Democrat President will NOT improve their circumstances.

Only wide ranging structural economic and political changes will help them. Voting Democrat simply puts off the day for a bit longer

[Sarah Ibarruri]

77. My definition: Economics is the science of how to make the rich richer.

Economics never tracks, promotes or even gives a sh*t about the poor and middle class.

As for prolonging the day by voting Democrat, wrong. Your idea was tried already and was a horrific failure. It was tried by the Naderites. BIG mistake that cost MANY LIVES because it allowed an evil village idiot and his evil masters to have 8 years in the White House destroying the lives of the weakest folks in the U.S.

Your idea was already a failure, a disaster, couldn't turn out worse.

Change has to be done slowly, and not by throwing our Dem party away.

[mondo joe]

46. Sure. The difference, for me anyway, is that I don't expect to win on certain issues

no matter how near and dear they are to me. I know that progress is gradual, and I know I'm to the left of most people on most issues.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

31. By hurting the helpless you're helping them? Is that some kind of deceptive logic?

Kinda like, "This hurts me more than it hurts you?"

[Tesha]

39. Then you have nothing to fear from us and don't need our votes.

So don't complain when we vote for real progressives
instead of fake Democrats.

Tesha

[mondo joe]

45. Democrats decide who represent us - not you.

If you don't like the choices Democrats make that's fine.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

30. You're strategizing on the backs of the old, the poor, the helpless. nt

[bigwillq]

7. As of now

I will vote for the DEM nominee.

[Chovexani]

9. Anyone but the R

I'm too worried about the courts.

[mondo joe]

11. I'm fine with voting for ANY of the Democratic nominees in any configuration in the GE.

I have some misgivings about Obama, but I none that would compel me to not vote against the Repub.

[Elspeth]

13. Unless a Spotted Owl or Eggplant is running, HRC and BHO get my vote as a ticket

Or a chocolate bar. I could vote for chocolate over anyone.

[Hoof Hearted]

26. Elspeth, I have a lovely bumper sticker for you :-)

. . . . But I could vote for chocolate too!

[Elspeth]

49. I love it!

Mmmmm. Chocolate....

[CK_John]

14. She'll pick Gov K Sebelius. n/t

[dorkulon]

16. I'll vote for whoever gets the nomination, regardless of VP. /nt

[IDemo]

17. Not gonna happen. Non issue.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

18. I would be FINE with ANY Democratic ticket against the REPUKOCRATS!!!

Even McCain has, is and will CLEARLY SERVE THE ELITE AGAINST THE PEOPLE.

The Clintons believed they could negotiate with these greedy fuckers. Edwards knows better and the Clintons have LEARNED.

ANY Democrat ticket is worth voting for over the evil lot of AMORAL profiteers!!!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. I always vote. But, I'd sure be grateful for the write-in option.

[EstimatedProphet]

24. If she gets the nomination, I'm voting for her

[debbierlus]

27. Brilliant...all of you not voting. Let the Repukes put in even WORSE people

Hillary would stand up for reproductive rights for women, reinstitute environmental protections, & work to fix no child left behind. And, I support Kucinich with Edwards as his second. But, even if it would only protect the social issues of society instead of the financial, it would be MUCH better to have a dem in the White House.

[Kucinich4America]

36. Oh happy happy joy joy, another loyalty oath thread

I just couldn't survive the fucking day without one. :eyes:

[Warren DeMontague]

52. Guess what. If Kooch gets the nomination, I'll support him, too.

I'm going to support our nominee, not because I'm blindly "loyal" but because EACH AND EVERY POTENTIAL ONE OF THEM is a fuckload better than any conceivable GOP alternative.

[dysfunctional press]

38. i just cannot bring myself to vote for hillary this time around.

if she gets in, and does well- i could consider supporting her in 2012.

but that's just me.

[femmocrat]

42. I have already decided and will not change my mind.

I'm sitting this one out. Sorry.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

69. How dare refuse to....

[JanMichael]

43. I'd probably vomit then press the "None of the Above" button.

Wait, we don't have a "none of the above" choice in this great democracy of ours, which would show disgust.

Puke.

[alittlelark]

48. The high 'NAY' count is due to the troll invasion we have had lately

....it kinda really SUCKS.

[gdaerin]

50. Keep Dreaming, Hello Bloomberg nt

[goodgd_yall]

51. What's with all the nays and not votings???

[Warren DeMontague]

53. This is a wildly unpopular position with some here, but I will happily vote for ANY of the top 3.

Personally, I'd prefer Edwards. But Obama and, yes, Hillary each have their solid, strong points too.

We have a great field- you might not know it with all the eye-rolling and foot-stomping and shit-flinging and never-evering and huff-puffing and "I'll scream and yell and chant the holy name of Ralph Nader"-ing..

..but there's a high likelihood ONE of those 3 individuals- Hillary, Barack, or John- will be our next president.

I think it's great. I can't fucking wait.

[SmellsLikeDeanSpirit]

55. I'm sorry guys, I can't vote for Hillary.

I feel she is nothing but a DINO. She doesn't represent me or my beliefs.

[Warren DeMontague]

66. I'm not a Hillary supporter, but I'll vote for her in the general. What specific Democratic

Party beliefs do you feel she doesn't represent? Specifically.

[Lucinda]

56. SCOTUS

And I would anyway. :)

[Quantess]

57. Nay votes: Why not be honest and admit you'd vote NADER?

Look where that got us.

[SmellsLikeDeanSpirit]

59. BS. What about the Dems that voted for Bush in 2000?

[Quantess]

60. What about them. They're sorry now, along with the rest of USA!

I wasn't aware that Dems voted for Bush in 2000. I suppose they would be the type of Dems I wouldn't hang out with.

Edit: I'm an idiot!

[SmellsLikeDeanSpirit]

61. Here are the National Exit Polls from 2000.

Party ID

39% self described Democrats voted in 2000. Of that 39%: 86% voted for Gore, 11% voted for Bush, and 1% voted for Nader. Again that was national.

Link: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/results/

[Quantess]

62. SmellsLikeDeanSpirit, I still do want to hear from you.

I still meant what I asked.

[Warren DeMontague]

65. Do you know any?

I sure as hell don't. Certainly none that would admit such a thing out loud.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

70. Maybe.

But, I have the quaint notion that my vote belongs to me. Not to any candidate or party.

[XOKCowboy]

58. I'd once again vote for Anybody But A Republican

Just once I'd like to vote for the best candidate. I guess that's Democracy in America today.

:shrug:

[Elspeth]

71. Amen

b

[LisaL]

72. Yes, I would.

[Norwood]

73. Nope

At the moment the thing that'll make me vote for her is if Huckabee is the Repubs nominee.

[newspeak]

75. I'm tired playing hypotheticals

maybe some did not pay attention to why we are in this mess. It seems that a majority of Americans just love being constantly ripped off. Remember the S&L debacle-did you know that it was monetarily one of the worst rips offs in history. With deregulation and junk bond nonsense they ripped us off--and we are still paying for that con job today. You remember the Iran-Contra BCCI deal? Did you know that BCCI is a Pakistani created bank that apparently has been investigated for drug and terrorist money laundering. Did you know that drugs were put on our streets by an element of our own government? Three journalists are dead attempting to bring the truth to the american public. Where's the outrage? And some who were involved in that clandestine deal were working for this administration, some are spouted as bonafide heroes (Ollie North). With every corrupt action that goes unpunished, it signals those that perpetrate such wrongful actions, can do so with out consequences, thus they become more brazen.

I am for someone, anyone who will finally bring real investigations into the total corrupt network that has had carte blanche working in this country--at the detriment of the American people. Tell me--Are there any takers? Will it still be business as usual, while we as frogs slowly boil in a huge pot!

I'm tired of being fed by a corporate media who attempts to influence the masses on who their next nominee will be . I remember my dad telling me years ago about the media, when our local paper appeared to favor one democratic candidate over another--I told my dad it looks like the paper is really going for democratic, he said no, just wait and watch, they want this candidate to run against the republican because the paper thinks this democrat will lose to their chosen candidate. Sure enough, the paper came out and endorsed the republican after the primary. So, who has the cajones to get us out of this mess? At this point, I don't know.:shrug: