Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (1027)	2/6/2004 11:06:24 AM
From: JakeStraw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

I personally think Kerry would do better choosing Lieberman...

To: stockman_scott who wrote (1027)	2/6/2004 11:24:12 AM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

It bothers me when I hear both the talking head media and the Democratic Party chair, Terry McAuliffe, claim candidates should drop from the race if they don't win a primary. First of all, it's a given Kucinich and Sharpton will not win the nomination. This is understood by all, including them. However, both of these candidates serve an important role for delivering a much needed, often ignored message and also for helping to energize a grassroots voter base. They should continue and their message should be heard in future debates. Secondly, the top tier of candidates, Kerry, Edwards, Clark and Dean represent perhaps the best grouping of potential winners I've ever seen from my memory and participation in politics. Frankly, I'm impressed! I'm deeply disturbed when I hear calls for either of these candidates to get out of the race. Why? Together, I think they move the agenda. Together, I think they are exciting voters into a stronger participation. I don't see the message getting bogged down as a result of their participation. In fact, I see it widening. It's important to note that from the top tier it's very possible that two of them will comprise the Democratic ticket. And since neither of them have had any prior experience running for national office, I think it's important that they all get their feet wet campaigning in the many respective states. This campaigning experience and the lessons learned could prove very valuable for the general election. Say, Kerry wins the nomination and he selects either Edwards or Clark as his running mate. Both Edwards and Clark will thus draw larger and more committed audiences once the general campaign is underway. Say Edwards or Clark wins the nomination and selects Dean as the running mate. This would mean more people would have become exposed to the good doctor and what he stands for. Whatever the combination, if all four continue their campaigns to the convention, it'll mean that more folks will have been drawn into the electoral process. In my view, this is crucial for the Democrats winning. I think most rank and file voters detest the media or the insiders trying to pick their candidates for them. I don't think everyone wants a nice and tidy process made available to them. Instead, I think everyone wants to feel like they're actually part of the process. Toward this end, it's my view that all of the present candidates should continue speaking out on their respective issues in as many places as they can, and energizing as many possible voters in as many places as they can--and bring the depth of this experience right into Boston where the final team will be decided. The Democrats look good this year--all of 'em--they should keep it that way!