Anti-Climacus

LINK: Actually, I have read it, and I wholeheartedly agree--voting based on issues is a little silly. You have to vote based on personality. On that basis, the only Dem I'd vote for this time around is Edwards--I trust him in the way you should trust a presidential candidate. However, it's looking more and more like he's toast, and I don't get quite the same fuzzy feeling from a ticket where Edwards is the veep--mostly because I don't trust Kerry at all.

That being said, there is a rather big ideological fight going on in the Democratic party at the moment, and a bigger one in the future as electoral prospects for Democrats brighten: you're either a Clintonista (in that you think government should not automatically be assumed to be the best way to get things done) or you're a left-wing/progressive/Deaniac, who think that getting programs done matters far more than how they're implemented. And, to put it mildly, we've been getting kicked around since 1995 or so (and the Welfare reform bill), sufficiently to the point that if this years' nominee isn't one of us (and he won't be), 2008's has to be one of us, or we start jumping ship (Joe might not think this is a bad outcome, but if we're Hillary Clintons in the Democratic party, we're John McCains in the Republican party... so consider yourself warned). And, simply put, HRC is the person in the best position to win amongst prospective 2008 candidates*... unless there's someone else you can think of who could do it.

*keep in mind as well that she'll be defending her Senate seat in 2006--if she wins, that will likely demonstrate that she has some appeal not solely derivable from her being Bill Clinton's wife.