Wednesday, April 04, 2007

I don't like any candidates so far. Can we start fresh?


Kaylene said...

I've liked John Edwards since the last Presidential election. When John Kerry was running, I remember saying that I wished Edwards was the Presidential candidate. Now I have my wish, at least at this stage. I don't think he's perfect, but I think he's a step in the right direction. I was swayed toward Obama for a little while, until The Old Git at GifS showed me enough Obama-quotes to put the fear of his god-belief into me. I think John Edwards is focused on the job of being the President and not on the politics surrounding it. Unfortunately, his opponents are better funded - but, 80% of his $14M was made in $100 or less contributions, so money doesn't necessarily reflect support. He seems to be the Gen-Y nominee this year. If he isn't the final candidate (pipe dream, I know), it will take a lot of strength to vote for either candidate that would be left. But maybe he could be Hilary's Vice President, then, should something terrible befall her, he would be President. Hm. I'd love to hear your veiws on the candidates as, in the end, I'm still open to new ideas and more research.

Kaylene said...

I guess I should have mentioned, this is Bean from GifS.

Damian Zerek said...

Its not what campaign you lead or what platform you believe in but how much cash you put into it. Its hard to call this a democracy when really only those with money can have a say and I honestly doubt that DEMOS means People with Enough Money to be Important.


Jason H. Bowden said...

There is a reason why liberals are never happy with their leaders.

First, consider the context. If the Democrats make cynical liberals unhappy, then the solution is either 1) vote for the Republicans, or 2) vote for a 3rd party candidate. But liberals never leave the Democrats, which suggests the unhappiness is a pose.

It becomes more revealing when you consider how conservatives view their candidates. No one is perfect. A lot of people think Bush is a socialist LBJ with an R next to his name, and the current crop of 2008 candidates are far from pure. But within the conservative philosophy itself resides a recognition that you can't have things all ways, and that you can't always get what you want. So you do your best, and be happy about it.

Not with the liberals. If one believes the military is a tool of the corporations, that limited government is fascist, and the State is more important standard of the good than the individual, then you are *doomed* to be unhappy, even when you win, because the standards are completely unrealistic.

Look at William Jefferson Clinton. He smacked down Hussein in 1998, and smacked down Milosevic in 1999. Clinton, as a matter of pragmatism, created jobs through free trade agreements, cutting the capital gains tax, deregulation of sectors like telecom, and so forth. Clinton even compromised to get things done to empower individuals like welfare-reform. This is a great record. But liberals look at it as if Big Money and Big Business and the super-secret defense contractors were pulling the strings behind the scenes, and Clinton was a corrupted failure who initially showed great promise.

The angry Gloom and Doom stuff is a force in itself, and if the liberals don't watch out, they'll turn into Pat Buchanan-- with an isolationist statist stance where individuals are regimented to the greater good, where liberty is sacrificed on the altar of Order, at home and abroad. The Democrats are halfway there already.

Stardust said...

Kaylene...thanks for stopping by and commenting and hope you will come back often!

There is no way I would vote for Obama.

I will wait and see who else might throw their hat into the ring, as of now, however I am ready to write-in Mick E Mouse.

Stardust said...

Jason, it doesn't seem like conservatives with the leader they chose either.

I am sick of the wishy-washy politics of both parties. Few say what they mean, and even fewer mean what they say.