I'm thinking Feingold, Clark and Edwards seem like the best three for 08

Even though it's early, I think the best three chnces to throw a monkey wrench into the DLC/Hillary Juggernaut for 08 and revitalize and unify the Democratic Party are Feingold, Edwards and Clark.

Obviously they are three very different individuals, and don't necessarily share the same views on everything.

But each of them in their own way represents what IMO is the kind of new-blood that's needed to infuse some vitality into presidential politics. And to actually make a positive difference in changing the direction of the country in a meaningful way.

Clark for his three dimensional approch to foereign policy, and his willingnes to be a liberal on domestic issues; Edwards because he is championing the real issue today, which is the growing clss divide, and Feingold for obvious reasons.

I also see them as potential uniters -- liberal and progressive enough to satisfy the desire for real change and reform and a return to liberal/progressive values, and moderate enough to satisfy the middle, without selling out.

Just my thoughts at this stage.

I'd love him to be more visible in the campaigns for otehrs though, and then become head of the EPA or Interior Dept.

candidates are , in a sense, a marketable product. It takes a few years to develop the name recognition. Do you have anyone in mind?

The three I have in mind were the ones I mentioned. Each of them already has some nme recognition, and a basically positive image to build on already.

turned into such a great speaker. He wasn't like that in 2000.

are thinking in terms of who could win and appeal to the most people. Knock that off now!:P Geez, it's like you have the best interest of the Democratic Party at heart or something.

And could be good referees for the factional battles.

Unity, what a concept. :hippie:

I like your choices. The important thing at this stage is that WE remember that the choice is ours. The decision has not been made yet, and we can not let it be made by the corporate media or the repukes(same thing). So it's important that we (the grassroots) keep voicing our opinions.

and I totally concur that the most important thing is that no one be forced on us by the howling jackels of the media or the elites.

I would not dismiss either Kerry or Gore though. They have both learnt from their errors in 00 and 04 and have the name recognition and the competency that will be needed to beat Hillary.

I think Kerry could do it, but he'll have to work really hard to break away from his corporate ties and his perceived stiffness.

John Kerry as a FIGHTING UNABASHED LIBERAL Democrat could be just what the doctor ordered, in terms of bringing diofferent factions together.

I think Gore is great, but IMO he has too much baggage at this point, both earned and unearned, to be a successful prsidential candidate. He'd have a loooot of work to do for that, and he doesn;t seem to have the fire in his belly for that anymore.

Just for variety's sake (;-)) I'm willing to give Gore another look, though. Actually, I'm fairly happy with a number of our likely candidates. I don't think we'll have to settle for Clinton or Warner.

...Let's hope we don't have to settle for leftovers.

Please visit www.russforpresident.com.

We are having a chat tonight at 9 pm eastern on the site. Come join other Russ supporters.

senator from New York a bad case of the shivers.

Gore is on record as not iinterested but history suggests that minds can change, especially when the opportunity for higher office is involved.

Given the strength of the Democrfatic primary field, it's not hard to imagine a brokered convention, in which the party turns to an agreed consensus candidate, very possibly among the three you mention, and possibly to Al Gore.

and I'm with you.

Like you can serve in the government for 34 years and have "no record." :eyes:

as another unnamed candidate would were she to win the nomination.

I saw Edwards on MTP last week and I was impressed with him saying he regretted his vote for the war. He's not as "green" as he was in 2004. He was impressive.

I think we should let 2008 take care of itself. Talking about 08 is only taking the focus of * and the GOP congress. That's why I give kudos to Clark, Kerry, Feingold, Edwards, and Gore for trying to hold * accoutable and help get dems elected in 06.

You're right about 06 being the next Big One.

But behind the scenes it seems like Hillary and the DLC are weaving a web. So it's not too eartly to pay attention, instead of waiting until it's too late.

Straight winner ticket if you ask me. Warner pulls in moderates, independents and red staters, Feingold pulls in the Dem base. Can't ask for me.