The MSM and many in Democratic circles (including right here on DailyKos) are framing the process for the nomination of a Democratic Presidential candidate as a three way contest among Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Barack Obama.
It's a bit early for that. The framing also arrogates the selection process to agents other than "we the people" who make up the Democratic Party.
Stop! It is our choice, not their's, so stop letting them select our candidates.
We are not so limited in our choices. And I am not writing here about the fringe candidates I wrote about a couple of weeks ago in this diary.
more after the fold....
If we let the punditocracy, etc. tell you your choices are limited to Clinton, Edwards and Obama, we've already lost a bit of our democracy.
So if you are not so sure about the so-called "top three" then it is a right and a duty to look further. Here are some other choices we have, at this point:
Chris Dodd - Dodd served in the Peace Corp in the Dominican Republic, modeling service other than in the military. He is one of two candidates who are fluent in Spanish And he is a guy who could be president if he can get a little traction to break through. Maybe not the most charismatic, but he could be a competent president for all Americans. And we sure could use one of those about now.
Joe Biden - another who is at least qualified to step into the presidency. He is knowledgeable on foreign affairs and is the most experienced.
Dennis Kucinich - for progressives, he's probably right on more issues than any other candidate - and he is actually trying to start the impeachment of VP Dick.
Bill Richardson - An experienced diplomat and governor, he also has the resume for the job. He is the other candidate fluent in Spanish. He has made some gaffs, but he could make a comeback.
Perhaps they are seen as long-shots now, but all of these candidates are experienced at winning elections, so they should all have some idea of how to put together a campaign. In fact, all of them but Kucinich have won state-wide elections. They are also all experienced at operating in Washington.
On the downside, Biden and Kucinich have mounted unsuccessful campaigns for the nomination in the past. With Biden, it has been twenty years, so perhaps it is time to have another look at him. For Kucinich, being an asterisk just four years ago should perhaps tell you that it is not going to happen. But then, if he is in the race to get some attention for his views, rather than to actually win the nomination, his year-long exposure (2003) prior to being swept out in the early rounds in 2004 may be all the payoff he needs.
Al Gore - will he run? Will you work for Gore? At this point, Gore's entry into the race would upset all the conventional wisdom, now wouldn't it? Again, Gore has experience in winning statewide (in many states), eight years in an administration, and at winning a presidential race, at the very least by popular vote, and likely in the electoral college, had the votes been counted in Florida.
I am sympathetic to the frustration level with the Dems in Congress. But it is also frustrating to see so many Dems who are unhappy with the MSM appointed front-runners just give up rather than to rally around someone who represents their views more closely.
I'm not advocating for any one of the candidates here. I'm just advocating that we don't let the pundits, the MSM, or anyone else weed out candidates this early. The weeding out is our job, not theirs. So check out the others.
That's all for now.
Update I: It was pointed out in the comments that I left out any discussion of Wes Clark as a potential candidate. Is it possible he is going to jump in?Is there a draft Clark movement? Here is a link to WesPAC and Clark04. If there are better links for a Clark Candidacy, let me know in the comments.