2008 Speculation: The Democrats - Comments Page 2

Part of: The Right Side

Mid-term elections are rarely as interesting as presidential races, so let’s take a look at what’s on deck for 2008.

The 2006 elections are fast approaching, but mid-term elections are rarely as interesting as presidential races, so let’s take a look at what’s on deck for 2008. For this column, we look at the Democrats.…
Read comments below, or read this article from the beginning.

Article comments

  • 26 - IgnatiusReilly

    Sep 22, 2006 at 5:22 pm

    nice try, comrade. you won't get me to bite any more. you are too over the top, which makes your act obvious. you need to tone it down if you want people to engage with you. the reverse racial stuff is good to play up and does make conservatives look bad, but now you are forcing it and no one is buying it.

  • 27 - blueman08

    Sep 22, 2006 at 5:31 pm

    Very interesting.... I personally think Warner will come out on top. However, I am also under the impression that it is too early to tell. Microwave, popcorn and tin foil at the ready!!

  • 28 - JP

    Sep 22, 2006 at 8:00 pm

    This whole thread and no-one mentions Wes Clark, who has one of the most loyal and largest internet followings? Who's a centrist with plenty of exposure to Fox News viewers, who could be just as "Electable" as Warner if he puts up a better campaign than he did in 2004?

    Wow!

  • 29 - JustOneMan

    Sep 22, 2006 at 9:35 pm

    Wes Clarke....lollollollollollollollollollollol

  • 30 - Nancy

    Sep 22, 2006 at 9:39 pm

    I had forgotten about Wes. That may be the problem: for some reason he doesn't exactly stick in my mind - and I'm pretty politically oriented. By all means, if he can distinguish himself from the pack, he's worth a look. From what little I remember, he had a good record, but he got buried somehow in the Dean-Kerry MSM hoo-hah. Not sensational or controversial enough to make good copy, obviously.

  • 31 - JustOneMan

    Sep 23, 2006 at 10:11 am

    More proof of Nancys Liberal Racism - See #52 Thank-you Hugo

    "If these 'poor' nations would stop breeding like uncontrolled rats, they wouldn't be so poor because they'd be better able to direct their resources"

    Hmmmm gee arent those poor nations filled with people of color? Equating them to vermin is so PC. Could you imagine if Bush said this on the floor of the UN Nancy would be leading the call for impeachment...its good to see that Nancy has such a big liberal heart....so do you guys see the pattern?

  • 32 - IgnatiusReilly

    Sep 23, 2006 at 5:58 pm

    I do see a pattern: a straight, unwavering line on a graph of JOM's higher brain functions.

    Do the poor nations not have a problem with population growth that they can't afford? Did Nancy make any mention this was due to their race?

    by the way, you must be a racist as well according to your uninformed opinions.

    Fom "Hugo Chavez - One Man Axis of Crazy" comment #76

    "Mexico is a poverty factory with no one caring to lift their citizens out of poverty"

    Isn't Mexico filled with brown people? Your problem is that you see eveyone's actions through your hood-covered glasses. Be glad there's no IQ test to get on the Internet or you'd have to go back to breaking windows for fun, simpleton.

  • 33 - JustOneMan

    Sep 23, 2006 at 8:17 pm

    Ignats please let the "racists" defend herself...
    hmmmm poverty factory vs rats
    you be the judge....
    So only conservatives are racists please....PC crap doesnt work with me fool



    PS Please crawl back under your rock!

  • 34 - Dave Nalle

    Sep 23, 2006 at 9:30 pm

    Wow that's an unappealing field of candidates you throw out there, Drew. I bet the Dems can do better if they try just a little bit.

    As for Wes Clark, he's less articulate than Bush and more boring than Al Gore. By all means nominate him and watch the electorate go to sleep.

    Dave

  • 35 - RJ Elliott

    Sep 24, 2006 at 4:20 am

    "By 2012, if Ellison of Minnesota gets elected, I can forsee him running as well. I look forward to that. It's about time we get someone running (and winning) besides a whitebread Old-Boys'-Network male."

    Yeah, it's about time we get a Muslim black dude who hates white people elected to the Presidency...

  • 36 - RJ Elliott

    Sep 24, 2006 at 4:22 am

    "Edwards will be fine in about 8-12 years, with a little more experience & more of a record to judge him on."

    Uh...he doesn't currently hold any elective office. What additional "record" will be accumulate in the next decade? Do you think he'll run for the Senate again? Or maybe a Governorship?

  • 37 - Nancy

    Sep 24, 2006 at 4:22 am

    That's probably why I can't remember him very well, Dave. He just sort of blends with the background. As for the entire roster being unappealing, well...I suspect the GOP roster will be just as unappealing to half the electorate, only instead of boring, we'll have corruption. Maybe boring would be better.

    We NEED a third party. How's that Libertarian Texan you interviewed doing so far? What do the polls show, if anything?

  • 38 - RJ Elliott

    Sep 24, 2006 at 4:23 am

    "I wish Shirley Chisholm were still alive, well, & young. She was presidential material, IMO, but born too soon."

    And a borderline communist...

  • 39 - JustOneMan

    Sep 24, 2006 at 8:48 pm

    "I wish Mao,Stalin and Pol Pot were still alive, well, & young. They were real Democrat presidential material, IMO, but born too soon."

  • 40 - Dave Nalle

    Sep 25, 2006 at 1:28 am

    As for the entire roster being unappealing, well...I suspect the GOP roster will be just as unappealing to half the electorate, only instead of boring, we'll have corruption. Maybe boring would be better.

    The GOP already has McCain and Giuliani who are both more interesting and more appealing than anything the Dems are likely to come up with.

    We NEED a third party. How's that Libertarian Texan you interviewed doing so far? What do the polls show, if anything?

    I think he'll do well for a Libertarian, but he's not going to win despite that. I'm hoping to interview the Democrat in the race this week. We'll see if he has anything to offer.

    Dave

  • 41 - Nancy

    Sep 26, 2006 at 2:36 pm

    Ha-! My taste is vindicated: "O" Magazine has just named Barak Obama as one of the top 10 sexiest men in politics today.

  • 42 - ModerateTruth

    Sep 26, 2006 at 9:49 pm

    It's not just looks with Obama and he has not been on the national scene very long. The other day, I was driving and flipped over to CNN on XM. They were interviewing someone and I was instantly engaged.

    This interviewee had a strong voice, he was knowledgeable on a range of issues and he had my full attention. Only after a few minutes of listening was he identified as Obama. He is definitely going to be a contender down the road. Just One are you a shut in craving contact? Please man just give it a rest!

  • 43 - JustOneMan

    Sep 26, 2006 at 9:59 pm

    "o" magazine.....gee a black magazine names a two bit do nothing (Name one piece of legislations) this nice non-offensive, white looking, black man has sponsored? Hellooooo...NONE

    You Dems are really over the top with this idiot...

  • 44 - JustOneMan

    Sep 26, 2006 at 10:01 pm

    Nancy,

    Its is well document that a certain race of men like..... shall we say Big Women...so I can undestand your "taste is vindicated"

    Nuff said

  • 45 - Dave Nalle

    Sep 26, 2006 at 10:08 pm

    Obama would be a hell of a lot better than the people speculated on in the article. He's more interesting and has marginally more sensible views on a lot of issues.

    Dave

  • 46 - zingzing

    Sep 27, 2006 at 1:49 pm

    jom... what the hell was that?

  • 47 - Dave Nalle

    Sep 27, 2006 at 1:58 pm

    I believe that was the non-rap version of the Sir Mix-a-lot classic "Baby Got Back".

    Dave

  • 48 - zingzing

    Sep 27, 2006 at 2:23 pm

    so, what was he saying, exactly?

  • 49 - Nancy

    Sep 27, 2006 at 2:32 pm

    Zing, JOM is a juvenile minded-pervert with a gutter mentality and a potty mouth, because he has no capabilites of actually fielding any arguments. Ignore him; I do. He's not worth your time or efforts, nor mine, and acknowledging his crudities only encourages him.

  • 50 - zingzing

    Sep 27, 2006 at 3:20 pm

    i know it... I KNOW IT! but i can't help myself sometimes. maybe i'm just waiting for him to blow up and say something really stupid... but that's always. i sometimes just want to push him to the next level (i.e.-the handjob and my mom comment not too long ago), just because i think it's really funny stuff. maybe i'm just as much an asshole as he is, the little prick.

  • 51 - Nancy

    Sep 27, 2006 at 3:49 pm

    No, he's just pathetic & offensive. I mean, consider what he thinks are witty comebacks, like the comment about your mom. He's like the jerkoff that exposes himself at a church service because he likes to shock people & he thinks of it as humorous, like a 3-year-old. Potty humor. It's all they understand, scatology.

  • 52 - Arch Conservative

    Sep 27, 2006 at 6:52 pm

    You moonbats think you dislike/hate George Bush?

    Well I'm here to tell you that you aint seen nothing yet.

    Just wait until Hillary runs in 2008.

    We're going to make all of the Bush bashing that you moonbats have been doing for the past six years look like a sunday picnic in the park.

    It's going to be nothing but Hillary hate 24-7. A constant unrelenting barrage of pointing out what a total lack of humanity, sincerity, and integrity that the bitch possesses. Every mistep she's ever made or makes will be brought to light time and time again. Every opportunity to attack her will be siezed upon ferociously.


    We will pull no punches, show no mercy, stop at absolutely nothing to ensure that the miserable bitch becomes nothing but a footnote in the annals of US presidential history. One way or the other!

  • 53 - zingzing

    Sep 27, 2006 at 6:57 pm

    oh no, hurt... me? us? her? wait.

    meh.

    no one's really been bashing on bush much here. and hillary hasn't been mentioned much at all.

    so what are you babbling about?

    and who says that most (any?) of us really want hillary to run?

  • 54 - Victor Plenty

    Sep 27, 2006 at 6:58 pm

    Don't worry, Arch. We all know the mouth-foaming psychopathic hatred certain crazy people feel toward Hillary Clinton.

    Being neither a Democrat nor a Republican myself, my suspicion is reserved for those who would ask me to cast my vote based on the wishes of the craziest, nuttiest, and most hateful portion of the electorate.

    I've never been a particular partisan of Ms. Clinton's, but if y'all aren't careful, I might go ahead and vote for her just to piss you off.

  • 55 - Nancy

    Sep 27, 2006 at 6:59 pm

    So what's new? You neonazi moonbats have been bashing Hilary since before Bill was elected & you had any reasons except she was married to him. I'm sure she'll just faint with anxiety when she hears you're on the warpath.

  • 56 - Arch Conservative

    Sep 27, 2006 at 9:31 pm

    That's right......

    Come 2008 we're gonna bring the pain.....

    The bitch is going down one way or another.....

    The Clintons won't be allowed anywhere near the white house ever again....

    VIVE MITT ROMNEY 2008!!!!

  • 57 - mara

    Sep 30, 2006 at 1:41 pm

    I fully support the moderate Democratic candidates for 08. Bayh and Warner top that list. This does not mean I don't support other candidates but Bayh and Warner are closer to my personal political ideology, although on some issues I do lean farther left.

    What's interesting is Bayh and Obama are both in Iowa this weekend. :)

  • 58 - Nancy

    Sep 30, 2006 at 4:12 pm

    Oh, Arch - you've been drinking again. You swore you were off the sauce....

  • 59 - Donnie Marler

    Sep 30, 2006 at 5:53 pm

    Three potential candidate profiles you will NOT see inhabit Pennsylvania Avenue any time soon.
    Female. Hillary Clinton is, as mentioned, far too polarizing to be a successful candidate. No other female could even win the nomination.
    Muslim. You'll see a Wiccan president before you see this.
    Minority. O'Bama? Not yet. Who else you got? Al Sharpton? Jesse Jackson? Didn't think so. (One potential exception: Colin Powell. Highly respected by a lot of people.)
    You won't see the rabid fringe of either party win the nomination for one simple reason. The people that do most of the voting don't like them. They scare them. There's no way in hell Russ Feingold could win an election for the presidency. Anyone who thinks he could is not lucid.
    O'Bama has to be given time to prove himself. Just because he's black and 'cute' doesn't make him presidential material.
    Wes Clark? I have friends who served under him. If he wins, it won't be because they voted for him.
    Both parties will, as always, elect a candidate they HOPE can appeal to enough uncommitted voters to win. You're not going to see any earthshaking nominations for the 2008 election.

  • 60 - zed

    Oct 04, 2006 at 11:07 pm

    Donnie Marler:

    You are probably right about your speculation about the three groups who wont be represented in the White House any time soon.

    What is funny is that it is not because there are smarter, more talented and more deserving white males. Its just that you have to walk on water basically to outseat a white male in our present culture.

    Either of the candidates that you mentioned would make a better president than our current fearless leader.

  • 61 - steve

    Oct 06, 2006 at 12:14 am

    anybody but hillary. I dont want my tax dollars paying for another oval office carpet cleaning courtesy of slick willie!

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for May 22, 2013

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for April

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs