i think MR.dean will bring a sense of the everyday joe to the party, he is self made, fairly smart and a bit eccentric. :roll: maybe he can pull up the normal people of the country to the middle. he didnt get the Dem. pres. nod b/c he was too in the middle when the party was looking for the anti bush, preying on the fact that half of america disagreed with bush's hard right stances. he isnt a hippie liberal stereotype. he is engaging and humorous without being too aloof.

the normal democrat, who is a huge company man(john kerry), seems to have alienated thier base in the majority of the USA outside of the big city areas. either way, they need a boost to keep it somewhat balanced b4 the republicans take full control, and this comes from an outright bush fan.

as much as i like the fact that bush doesnt care about his opponents and will force what he deems the right thing, i realize that we cant allow him to basically have full run without a balance in gov't

anyone wanna chime in>

I don't know the man, have any useful links?

Sor-ree...didn't recognize the name... :oops:

Re: who do you want for the DNC

I've been asking myself this question as well, and I have to say, I'm really not sure. It depends to some extent upon whether you are talking about party leadership in a general sense or who the Dems want to post up in '08 (although there could obviously be some overlap there). One thing is very clear, and that is that the democrats need to do something in a bad way because they are getting their clocks cleaned right now.

Dean is a great guy to have in the party. I give Dean credit for the anti-Bush sentiment that existed and allowed a guy like Kerry to get 40-45% of the vote just by showing up. I also credit Dean for getting democrats fired up and energized about trying to win an election that had looked decidedly unwinnable a couple years earlier. With that said, I don't know how I would feel about him getting the candidacy in '08. Silly though it may be, that scream turned a lot of people off and confirmed the impressions many had of him as a wild and unhinged guy. Electibility is a factor in todays politics, and I am concerned that he may not have it.

Edwards and Barrack Obama are both tagged as rising stars in the party. I think Edwards may need to take a cycle off before throwing his hat back into the ring to let the loss hangover subside. Also, although I like Edwards a lot, I thought he ultimately proved to be a bit green at campaigning to really be effective.

Obama is an interesting pick. He is an outstanding speaker (anyone remember his speech during the DNC?) and he's been picked for great things in the future. The question in my mind is whether this country is ready for a black president. We've come a long way since the days of segregation, but the reality is that racism is still out there, and although African-Americans are often considered aligned with the democratic party (for lack of a better way to put it), I suspect that there are enough democrats that would allow prejudice to affect their votes for it to make a difference. Sad, but true. I'm pulling for the guy, though, because I think he would do a great job from what I've seen.

My dark horse pick would be Rob Blagojevich, governor of Illinois. He's done some very progressive and popular things since he has been governor, including introducing a program to allow the importation of prescription drugs from Canada. After 4 years of Bush coddling the prescription drug industry, someone with a track record of actual action, as opposed to talk, to help lower drug costs could really do something, I think.

Like her or hate her, you have to include Mrs. Clinton in the mix there somewhere. She's one of the most recognizable democrats out there, and she should play a role in the party's direction. I'm not suggesting she should be on the ticket in '08, but she should be considered a force in the party.

OK, there are more, but I've got to get back to work. Perhaps I'll add to this later.