« Dan Bartlett: Media not biased | Main | The eloquence of Rick Santorum »

December 06, 2007


I agree. Democrats seem to vote for the person most likely to energize the conservative base against the candidate.

Democrats seem to look for the most unappealing candidate to nominate.
Even when almost half of that candidate's own party say they won't vote for them.
What democrats do not understand about electability is that it is the most appealing and the heart candidate that gets elected.
when you pick one that your own party can't get excited about, why in the world do they think anyone else will? that is why we lose. Because we simply cannot figure that out.
Look at Reagan (hate to use him but,) He had nothing much to recommend him as a president. He was seen as a war monger. However, he was appealing and so the conservatives when crazy and they took alot of democrats with them. In the meantime we chose to run Mr. Excitement, Walter Mondale to run against him in 84.
All our democrats running are capable of standing up to the smear machine of the gop. What we need is someone who inspires like and positive feelings like obama or Edwards.
They can at least bring some republicans and indies with them.

Hillary is extremely divisive within our own Democratic Party. As a fairly active Democrat, I have learned that about half of my Democratic colleagues love Hillary, and the other half find her completely intolerable. Republicans, on the other hand, seem to be quite uniformly anti-Hillary, which begs the question of how she could possibly win in any general election. Nearly every Republican says (s)he will vote against Hillary, and approx. half of all Democrats tell me they would rather abstain, write in, or vote third party rather than vote for Hillary in the general. If Hillary becomes the Dem candidate, we will most certainly lose in 2008.

The comments to this entry are closed.