(cross-posted at Daily Kos)

Earlier this week, I wrote a diary that evaluated each of the declared 2008 Democratic candidates by the logo employed by their website. As one can hardly encapsulate what a campaign is about merely from a visual display, I think it's time to delve into that issues that each candidate discusses - and what it may mean for the general election. Below the fold, I'll evaluate the issues section of the following candidates:

* Senator Joe Biden

• Senator Hillary Clinton
  
• Senator Chris Dodd
  
• Former Senator John Edwards
  
• Former Senator Mike Gravel
  
• Representative Dennis Kucinich
  
• Senator Barack Obama
  
• Governor Bill Richardson
  
• Former Governor Tom Vilsack

Senator Joe Biden

As one can see by the issues listed on the left column of Senator Biden's website, his main issues are Iraq, Afghanistan and Darfur, jobs, health care, reducing the cost of college, improving our education system, homeland security, crime, and global warming. As it should, Iraq is Biden's main issue, and he has a five-point plan for ending our involvement in the country. I don't agree with his plan to partition the nation into three parts by ethnicity, but the fact that he has a detailed proposal - as well as a cogent argument for why he believes his plan will work - is fairly impressive. I'm not quite sure why Biden grouped Afghanistan in with Darfur, but it is to his credit that he puts a genocide that has largely been ignored up so high. The only other issue that Biden has an extended policy proposal on is homeland security. I'm not sure why crime is mentioned; while I do think it is an important issue for urban areas to address, I do not think it will be a major issue in the upcoming campaign. Additionally, I'm disappointed he uses the frame of climate change - the earth isn't getting cooler anytime soon; let's call it what it is - global warming. Biden has an energy plan on another page. While it emphasizes alternative fuels, it doesn't address the need for America to use cleaner, renewable sources of energy.

Senator Hillary Clinton

It'd be nice to comment on Senator Clinton's positions on the issues...if her website had any posted. I know that she's still officially 'exploring' running for president, but everyone knows that's a joke. Interestingly enough, her home page has a link to a fact-check on Iraq. It's about phased redeployment in Iraq in an attempt to rebut Senator Obama's comment that she doesn't beginning a phased redeployment. There are many quotes thrown out that are intended to support the notion that Clinton 'has long supported' phased redeployment. If you look carefully, the only vote she references is in November 2005, just a couple of days before John Murtha came out and spoke against the war. It also doesn't address the actual matter Obama brought up - which is that she doesn't support an actual date for beginning the redeployment. It's one thing to say that we need to begin such a move, but it'd also be nice to hear when this should take place. I would reference her Senate issues page, but alas, it's been completely replaced. It'd be nice if she would put up a page soon so we all know where she stands.

Senator Chris Dodd

At first glance, Senator Dodd's issues page looks fairly sparse. On the topics that he does address (national security, education, energy/environment, health care, economic issues, and Iraq), Dodd does have a lot to say. That being said, there is a lot of verbiage but very few details. On health care, for example, Dodd does not call for universal health care as other candidates have. He references many of the laws and legislation he has sponsored and/or passed while in office during his 26 years in the Senate, but there's no reference to concrete details or data about how these measures would actually play out should they be implemented. Dodd's Iraq policy seems largely based in this speech that he gave 4 months ago. In it, he calls for the current troop level to be maintained for 6 months, with the goal of having all of them redeployed in 12-18 months. In all, it's a decent read, but given that the political climate has changed even more since then, I think Dodd would be well-served in possibly updating his stance.

Former Senator John Edwards

The first point I'd like to make is that Edwards should make his Issues page more accessible. It's located under the 'About' drop-down menu, which is usually reserved for profiles about the candidate and their family. I think it's more useful to devote a button to it along the top, making it easier to find for people who aren't patient with technology. Aside from that, though, I am somewhat disappointed to find a fairly lean issues page. There are no additional links that can allow the reader to find out more about Edwards' positions on the issues he lists (foreign policy, health care, poverty, the middle class, and global warming/energy independence). His plan for Iraq mentions the immediate withdrawal of 40,000-50,000 troops, followed by the rest coming home within 12-18 months, but there aren't many other details. His bit about poverty is disappointing, considering that he did come out with the goal of eliminating poverty in 30 years 8 months ago. Hopefully, Edwards will flesh out his beliefs more as the primary evolves. I was somewhat surprised to discover that his website was lacking in this department.

Former Senator Mike Gravel

Gravel lays out his issues as follows: Iraq, the escalation of the conflict in Iraq, Iran, global warming, the national sales tax, Social Security, health care, veterans, education, and the National Initiative for Democracy, which seems like an application of the initiative system, currently used at the state level, writ large. Gravel doesn't have much detail to his issues, but they're fairly straightforward and to the point. He believes in an immediate withdrawal of all troops and opposes militarily confronting Iran. His idea about removing all taxes except for a very slight progressive sales tax isn't a good idea at all. He supports single-payer universal health care. I'm not quite sure about NI4D (as it's abbreviated); it seems like a quixotic matter to include in a campaign - not to mention that it has no chance of ever being taken seriously. Overall, it is the kind of issues page that I would expect from a marginal candidate.

Representative Dennis Kucinich

Representative Kucinich has a page that links to the rest of his issues in greater detail. As a marginal candidate, the topics he addresses (health care, Iraq, trade agreements, Patriot Act, education, Social Security, privacy and civil rights, workers' rights, environment and energy, and agriculture) are an eclectic mix. While there is a good deal of material behind each link, there isn't much substance to back it up. His page on universal health care is more of a fact-check. His page on Iraq doesn't even mention the country of once, instead focusing on treaties we should ratify and creating a Department of Peace. His page on repealing the Patriot Act doesn't have anything on it. And while it would be great to guarantee education from preschool to college, proposing a constitutional amendment - which is what Kucinich says he has done - is not the way things are going to be done. His environmental page has links at the bottom to his voting record. That's great, but in a Congress that has been controlled by Congress, it's likely to tell us more about what he doesn't support than his plans for the future. All in all, it's a lot of bluster from a candidate who seems to be running for the hell of it.

Senator Barack Obama

Senator Obama's website has a general summary of the issues he is focusing on for now (foreign policy, Iraq, ethics, energy, veterans, education, health care, homeland security, family matters, voting rights, and faith in politics), but each has a link that leads to a page that has additional details about what Obama has done, as well as what he will do in the future. Most of his website is light on details, but he does reference pieces of legislation he has worked on (for example, working with Senator Tom Coburn to restrict no-bid contracts on emergency funding). In addition, it is evident that he does have a grip on a large number of issues. On foreign policy, Obama focuses on weapons and nuclear containment, the avian flu, Congo, Darfur, and Libera - quite the eclectic mix of issues. Obama's Iraq page is perhaps the lightest; he references the legislation that he recently introduced with Representatives Mike Thompson and Patrick Murphy to get us out in 12 months. The only troublesome possibility is that it allows for the suspension of redeployment should Iraqis attain particular benchmarks. Given that the Iraqi government has shown itself to be completely incompetent, our troops would be coming home regardless, but I am a bit wary that the plan allows for our troops to stay longer if 'necessary'. Even though he has come out in support of universal health care, Obama's issues page does not specifically mention the issue. Overall, though, the issues that the senator discusses are fairly comprehensive. The only glaring issue missing is a section completely devoted to jobs and the economy. Given that labor is a huge part of the Democratic base, Obama would be best to address this issue in some manner soon.

Governor Bill Richardson

Governor Richardson is the only candidate to specifically mention the issue of immigration. Other issues he addresses are Iraq, foreign policy, partisanship, environment/energy, the economy, and health care. Being that he is well-renowned for his foreign policy expertise, it's no surprise that Richardson has additional links to his positions on Iraq and foreign policy. In addition, as the governor of a border state, he also has additional material on immigration. That being said, these aren't policy-specific proposals; they are simply remarks that Richardson made for another occasion. His address on foreign policy, which he gave as the Democratic weekly address, has calls for a lot but skimps on details. Similarly, his speech on Iraq doesn't contain much meat either. It's clear the the governor has done his homework on immigration; it's an incredibly long piece that covers the subject as well as anyone could. Aside from those topics, though, Richardson relies a lot on referencing his record in New Mexico on the other issues. Nevertheless, the details of his stances are pretty light at this point, and it doesn't do much to distinguish him from the crowd.

Former Governor Tom Vilsack

It appears that the links on the top of Vilsack's website leads to one general website with hyperlinks to several things on one page. From a design standpoint, I think it'd be best to isolate the issues to make them stand out more. Aesthetics aside, it's clear that Vilsack is moving away from the cautious timidity of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), a widely-reviled organization in the grassroots - and an organization that Vilsack had just chaired recently. The call on the front of his website is to end the war in Iraq now, casting it as a moral responsibility. The former governor addresses the issue more in his section on Safety and Security (his other issue pages include health care, economic opportunity, and energy/environment), but it still doesn't flesh out a detailed policy proposal. He speaks about universal health care openly - one of the few candidates to do so - but there isn't much detail about how we get from our current state of affairs to that ideal. Overall, Vilsack's positions on trade (for fair trade) are good, and his Energy Security Agenda is an excellent starting point, most notably for saying that all new power plants by 2020 must be carbon-free. His branding of the escalation in Iraq as the 'McCain Doctrine', following John Edwards' lead, is good. For someone who was seen as an unexciting centrist during his gubernatorial term, it's a pleasant surprise to see Vilsack running solidly to the left on every major issue.

-----

Overall, the candidates who have the best issue pages, in my opinion, are Biden, Obama, and Vilsack. Biden still needs to add more meat, but if he has the kind of detailed policy pieces laid out on his website in the future that he does for Iraq and energy policy, he may have a chance of being taken more seriously. I don't like Biden because of his ineptitude at public speaking and his vote on the bankruptcy bill, but the man appears to know his stuff. Obama has a comprehensive issues page that speaks to a wide range of issues. He needs more meat on some of his details, but even though he's been in the Senate a mere 2 years, he is heavily employing what he's tried to pass in a Republican-controlled Senate to demonstrate that he has a lot of ideas - and he can work across the aisle when necessary. As for Vilsack, he needs to branch out into more areas instead of having a condensed issues section. Nevertheless, his energy proposal is impressive, and he has the right position on Iraq. He also references his two terms in Iowa to back up his positions as evidence that he can deliver.