LOL!!! House Democrats choose Hoyer

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

I kinda agree with your Rep assessment. McCain- shaky, Rudy - no way, after that it gets into people without name recognition which means you need someone charismatic with ideas. I think Mitt is a dark horse who will do well for these reasons. I really don't know how his religion will play into it but I don't think it will be a huge detriment. The evangelicals? where will they go if Mitt won the nom? Would they bail out on the party? don't think so. But if the reps again put these types front and center, they'll lose.

its early, lots can happen.

I have to say thought that as bad as the Rep situation looks, it is not much prettier on the Dem side. there are big problems for all of the main characters.

Arlj,
You could be completely right on this.
I don't think the "gay marriage" deal will play with the "religious right" at all, and though Mitt has shown good stuff regarding bringing things into balance after the "big dig", my guess is that the evangelicals will look elsewhere.
It is early. Lots can happen.
Seems that the Repubs still have to play the "commander-in-chief's" hand, and we'll just have to see how that plays.
If Baker comes to the rescue, fine with me. I have my doubts.
The "objectives" have gone through redefinition after redefinition.
Some people don't forget.
Like Edwards, I'll watch. If he picks Obama to run with, the Dems might show some hope.
The Repubs have to put out better than what they've got. Darkhorse?
I don't see one yet, but plenty of time.
We'll see.
It's interesting.
DTS

[Rileyoriley]

Kerry no longer has Kennedy behind him like he did in 2004. Kennedy (the Kennedy who will never be in the White House but desperately wants to be) saw his chance go down the tubes after Kerry lost the election. It was Kennedy's words you were hearing from Kerry's mouth back then. Now Kerry's speaking for himself and well, we see where that's got him.

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

Kerry no longer has Kennedy behind him like he did in 2004. Kennedy (the Kennedy who will never be in the White House but desperately wants to be) saw his chance go down the tubes after Kerry lost the election. It was Kennedy's words you were hearing from Kerry's mouth back then. Now Kerry's speaking for himself and well, we see where that's got him.

Edward is clearly the candidate that is most electable.
Even repubs like me don't have a negative stance on him and would vote for him if he proves his mettle and the repub candidate doesn't meet the needs.
Dems need to moderate, in case noone's told them strong defense and lack of handouts to those who don't deserve them is where mainstream USA stands. Kerry and Gore and Hilary represent the ideals of the old Dems.
They need a fresh face like Edwards to win it.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Edward is clearly the candidate that is most electable.
Even repubs like me don't have a negative stance on him and would vote for him if he proves his mettle and the repub candidate doesn't meet the needs.
Dems need to moderate, in case noone's told them strong defense and lack of handouts to those who don't deserve them is where mainstream USA stands. Kerry and Gore and Hilary represent the ideals of the old Dems.
They need a fresh face like Edwards to win it.

Big-O: Edwards is an "ambulance chaser" in the mold of John Grishams' "King of Torts"! Just ask his constituents!