I decided to start a new thread rather than derail the Afghanistan thread. I haven't gotten behind any of the candidates yet and, as usual I am dismayed at the choices we have. Obama has the least experience as a public servant than any of them and he's a Kennedy democrat. He has no foriegn policy experience at all. He talks a blue streak but he has no real record to stand on. Clinton's experience is much better but not outstanding compared to Richardson or Biden, who didn't have the legs to get this far. Clinton at least leans toward the middle, while Obama leans to the left. I supported McCain in 2000 until he dropped out because he was the only candidate who sought the independent moderate voter and he was a rare center-leaning republican. He is the most experienced of the remaining candidates, but he lost his mind when he abandoned his criticism of the war and jumped onto the "send more troops" bandwagon. He was trying to pander to the conservatives that went with Bush last time, but he lost the independents and the moderate democrats that he had before. He's also too old now, a melanoma survivor, and will likely die in office. Romney is too conservative and a snake-oil salesman who changes his policy to suit his audience. Huckaby is a right wing tool of the evangelists. Paul is a marginal candidate like Richardson, the candidate I most favored. As usual, there is no remaining candidate made of Presidential timber, The primary election system sucks in this country by allowing a few states to determine who the candidates will be, way too far in advance of the election. I never got the chance to vote for my candidate in 2000, 2004, or this year either. Why? Because they couldn't survive after losing early primaries. I can't even vote in Louisiana's primary because independents can't vote! In other states, independents can chose to vote in the democratic OR the republican primaries, lest they be disenfranchised. In the election itself, the "winner takes all" elector system prevents small parties from having a chance. The primary election system and the electoral college system conspire to prevent the advent of any third parties. It has to be changed.
Re: The remaining 2008 Presendential candidates Red, I'm just as disappointed as you with not only the way we elect our President, but especially by the "choices" we have this year. I cannot find ONE candidate to favor.
Re: The remaining 2008 Presendential candidates I'd also like to see the precinct reporting suspended or delayed so that voters out West don't feel like our votes don't count. Sure I could do absentee ballot but just like I prefer to read an actual paper as opposed to reading news on the internet, I like the experience of going to the polling location and voting in the booth.
Re: The remaining 2008 Presendential candidates Neither of the front runners stand out to me, I'm pretty dissapointed that neither party was able to identify a viable candidate. Politics has deteriorated so much that quality people decide not to be a part of it. Every 4 years we hear the same thing, "that we're gonna change Washington", but that's just impossible . Corruption and cronyism rule Washington D.C. and that's just not gonna change until lobbyists are exiled to a secluded place far and away but it won't happen since not one candidate has the power or the will to accomplish that task. I do believe that the primary system is flawed but I'm not sure if holding all primaries the same day is the answer. There's a school of tought out there that believes that primaries are actually bad for democracy since only a small fraction of the population votes (republican and democratic base). With record turnouts this year, I think that theory doesn't have any validity any more except in states that have closed primaries.
Re: The remaining 2008 Presendential candidates The only time your vote does not count or is wasted is when it is not used.
I'll help you, Red. Go ahead and support McCain. Your only real problem with him was his support of the surge (which helped things). I know how you feel about our presence in Iraq, but it is a reality and better McCain be in office to get things settled than some greenhornKennedy liberal or an ambitious Ho who only cares about her image. As for the possibility that McCain could die during his term? So could we, my friend.
I can't in my own mind ever vote for McCain. He is so not what my Republican value stand for and his stances on War are just idiotic IMO. While I know my man Paul won't win I will still try and spread his message of sound monetary policy, economics, and foreign policy. Finding a candidate that can actually win that actually has an ounce of brain is a delimma I face with Red. Although we don't agree on every topic. Ugh
It's a long way to the finish and there are lots of questions we need answered. Right now I'd have to rank them: McCain -- most experience and leadership but too much kissing of the extreme right wing's ass. Clinton -- adequate experience and leadership, very smart and centrist but not sure if the baggage of Bill is good or bad. Obama -- inadequate experience, good leadership, very smart but too much kissing of the extreme left wing's ass. Paul -- It just ain't Paul's year to be in the top tier, but if he moves the republicans towards the center it's a good thing for the future. Huckabee -- some experience, good leadership, but too much kissing of the evangelical Christians' ass. Romney -- I just don't trust this guy. He looks and talks like an insurance salesman. He kisses everybody's ass.
Re: The remaining 2008 Presendential candidates I agree which is why I always vote but I can tell you that when you're heading to the polls after work and you hear that the election is "over" or that California is already being called, it takes the wind out of your sails.
