I for one would LOVE to see Clinton vs Rice. That way, the south would have no choice but to secede from the union.
Heheheh... so, so true.
And I'm from the south, so I would know.
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/4/04
Actually, I think Clinton vs. Rice rather than Warner vs. McCain would be the race likely to turn on the issues rather than candidate personalities. The sheer novelty of having two women run might be stunning enough to cut through the cliched BS that accompanies every race of two white guys nowadays.
Clinton v. Rice has so many angles that makes it by far the most interesting race:
Would the presence of an African American change the voting demographics?
What about two women?
As Plum said, would the novelty act as a razor causing the issues to become preeminent?
Since it would finally break the "good old boy" club, would the voting turnout be higher?
I think it would be much better than Clinton or Rice against someone else, because the anti-woman rhetoric would be very high in that case. (unfortunately)
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/5/04
Hee hee .......
What about Obama vs. Rice?
That would ENSURE the south would secede......
Broadway Legend Joined: 1/14/05
Yes, that would be hilarious. I would give Obama a few more years of experience.
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/4/04
Margo, I like the way your mind works. That's just brilliant. If we want to simplify matters for the misogynists of the world, we can always go Obama vs. Powell.
I really don't think Obama will be the nominee this time, 2012 though... How is he doing back in IL, Brd?
Plum, did you hear A-Rod took the MVP?
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/4/04
Yes! At last, the BWAA gets one right. I'm still peeved over the NL Cy vote. And the AL Cy was so bad it's not even worth mentioning. Updated On: 11/14/05 at 06:13 PM
In order to avoid a total threadjack, I will simply say I agree and move on.
2008. Candidates. There are many choices, none great.
I was pondering this today.... do you think that any of the other Democratic candidates for the '04 Presidential nomination would've fared better than Kerry?
Personally, I think that what killed Kerry (other than the crazy religous right) was the idea that he was a "flip-flopper" (kjalakdjf8o3iueauer I hate partisan rhetoric and talking points soooo much, not least because the other side is better at it). Dean might've been percieved to be basically insane, but he was at least fairly consistent.
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/4/04
I dunno. Maybe Bush would have won regardless, but I remain a Deaniac.
Me too, I was the Watugan County, North Carolina for Dean chairman.
The spin would have been horrible no matter what. Rove would have assassinated the character of any opponent, but at least Dean held stands.
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/4/04
I was in charge of voter turnout at my dorm. Basically, that meant knocking on people's doors, shoving registration forms in their faces, and later coming back to collect. :) Man, I'm lame.
Broadway Star Joined: 4/3/04
I set up a shuttle for the student voters (because at my school, the campus isn't all in one precinct, and some students have to go to the other side of town to vote).
Dean's biggest problem was that he peaked too early.
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/4/04
No, I think his biggest problem might not have even come from the Republicans but from within the Democratic Party establishment itself. I hate to use stupid Washington vs. Us rhetoric, but Dean was from outside D.C., unapologetically against the Iraq war, and just the kind of guy who totally squicked out the Dem organization, which too scared of alienating anyone to actually come up with its own ideas. Hence we got Kerry, the suit with the military medals. "He'll win because he's a war hero," they said, as if a medal is a policy. But let's not rehash primary bitterness.
Broadway Legend Joined: 1/14/05
Videos