Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

M

MELISSA B

Guest
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

Just asking because the Democrats could have won this election in a landslide, now they've lost many people's votes. I liked Bill Clinton, but since I've been of voting age there hasn't been a competant Democrat on the ticket that I could justify voting for. I couldn't pull the lever for Kerry in 04, I sure as heck am not going to vote for a racist in 08. My question is do the Dems always self-destruct or is this something new?And yes, to answer some of your questions, I do consider McCain as a Very Competant and qualified leader. That's a lot more than I can say about Bush (Who I voted for over Kerry, he was the lesser of 2 evils) and the rest of the above mentioned candidates. Those who think McCain is 4 more years of Bush really need to do some research. McCain has been a thorn in the GOP's side for over a decade now.Socrates- Repubs weren't the ones voting in New York, then flying to Ohio and Florida to vote twice. They also weren't filling in provisional ballots in Ohio with names like Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse like the Kerry supporters were doing. And didn't Kennedy get in because of all the tombstones in Illinois that voted for him? Hmm... Which party is rigging the elections?And in Florida, every hand recount came in favor of Bush, not Gore. Gore lost the election get over it!
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

No, the Republicans got Bush!
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

The Far Left-Wing Liberals are the only ones the Party will nominate.........Ask Joe Lieberman if the party will accept someone who reaches across the aisle to Republicans.
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

To answer your question;If you notice that all three are extreme left wingers. To be a socialist is whats required to be the DNC nominee. The problem is that the rest of the country is not going to elect a socialist to the White House. Democrats will never learn this, America does not want another Jimmy Carter.
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

This is a difficult question to really answer. After all, Gore and Kerry were both clearly more qualified than Bush. I'm not a huge fan of either Obama or Clinton, but either one would be better than another four years of Republican policies. You need to look at the big picture, which includes who they're up against.
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

I wouldn't say they "always" do but I think you might be on to a trend from the last two elections.By the way, Gore technically won in 2000 so I don't count him as a bad nominee but truth be told, it doesn't matter what side you pick - they're both equally corrupt and controlled. So maybe the nominee really doesn't matter anymore?
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

Well if the Dems floated the least qualified and in both elections they got more popular votes, what does that say about Bush?
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

and you think our current bushie and mccain are exactly..."competent?" interesting.
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

And it appears to be getting worse.
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

It does show a downward trend.
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

McGovern, Humphrey, Mondale, Dukakis, to name a few more. Now some Dems think that Gore will jump into the current race and save them. Right.
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

sorry clinton is least qualified try again
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

i would have thought the smart money would have been on richardson or biden. but i guess the idea of a good president is more important than actually having one.
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

only in your opinion
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

That's just too funny. If Gore could have gotten the supreme court to appoint him against the will of the people in 2001, like Bush, if Kerry could have gotten Diebold to fix the election for him in 2004, like Bush, the U.S. wouldn't have been stuck with this monkey, Bush, for the last seven years or so. The only qualifications the Democratic candidates seem to lack are qualifications in election rigging. Here's hoping they've learned something.
 
Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, now Obama in 2008. Do Dems always pick the least-qualified candidate?

Liberals don't get it they keep nominating quasi-socialist and America is not socialist. They keep falling under this illusion just because they holler the loudest that people agree with them . Nixon once said the silent majority are the ones that win elections....a famous saying by a liberal reporter at the time "I can't believe Nixon won nobody I know voted for him".
 
Has anyone else noticed that no matter who we vote for, our nation is run by C-Average graduates?

Our nation isn't run by the smartest people, and the people who support them are blind.
 
Idiots

Has anyone else noticed that no matter who we vote for, our nation is run by C-Average graduates?

Our nation isn't run by the smartest people, and the people who support them are blind.
 
Back
Top