Reply #7: Okay [View All]

Braun. Sometimes she fumbles at debates, like she knows she's not supposed to just sit there and let everybody talk past her, but when she asserts herself, it can be awkward, like really embarrassing. Partly it has to do with deviating from her notes and trying to speak extemporaneously, but not really striking a chord. She needs to be onmessage and condifent in a variety of forums, and she needs work on some basic speaking skills.

Clark. Well, I think he defeneded himself in Phoenix with aplomb and skill. On a few topics like defense spending he seems capable of cutting through the b.s. and exposing the core issues in a way that favors Democrats and his candidacy in particular.

Dean. Paints his own house. Seriously, I love that. Also the way his campaign stuck up for that grafitti artist, KEO. This is a populist campaign with a truly competitive spirit. Gotta admire that.

Edwards. He not only understands the law, but how the law is used against the people's interests, and how it can be used to correct injustices. He's actually very sharp.

Gephardt. He's like the Mutual of Omaha candidate--and I mean that in a good way. You really know what you're getting with Gephardt, and it ain't half bad.

Kerry. He has a good record on civil rights and environmental issues, and on foreign policy he has a realistic grasp of the problem we face and what we can do to address them.

Kucinich. Has the best array of policy positions, presenting workable solutions to genuine problems. I just love reading his website. Dean is often credited with having the most successful web campaign, however, I think Kucinich has made great use of the web. If you were to ignore the discrepency in fundraising, ignore the polling numbers, and only look online, you might think that Kucinich was a front runner. Even if he isn't able to capitalize on his netroots politically, he has contributed a lot, in terms of raising the bar for internet campaigns, but more importantly he has enriched the debates we're all having. He enables us to talk smarter, and that's a great thing.

Lieberman. He does try to be civil I think. He said he would endorese any of the eight other candidates, and if you can take him at his word, as I do, then it really is unfair to call him a DINO. Most of disagree with his views, but he does seem genuinely interested in beating Dubya for all the right reasons.

Sharpton. The best speaker bar none, as most of us know. One dimension of his oratory many people don't pick up on is that he speaks with heart. He is totally unafraid to show genuine feelings. Also, he doesn't pounce on every opportunity to speak as a means scoring tactical points. For that reason, I'd say charges that he is an opportunist are unfair. He represents the voice of the Party, and although he does engage in factional disputes, his overall message has been encompassing and broadly representative of the Democrats' traditional constituencies.