Any of them are better than Chimpface McBomby
posted by Liberal Eagle at 1:33 PM
I've put some thought into who I support for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.
Sen. Clinton? I admire her personally, and in many ways I think she'd make a pretty good president. But I can't support her in the primaries. She voted to authorize the war, and she's noncommittal about whether that vote was wrong. Plus, as Seagull has pointed out, health care reform is an enormously urgent issue--one more child dying from an avoidable lack of medical care is one too many--and, having already botched the matter 14 years ago, Ms. Clinton has damaged credibility there.
Sen. Edwards? I love Sen. Edwards, on domestic issues. He's the one candidate running I've actually shaken hands with, and he's an inspiring, hopeful speaker with a pleasingly populist message. Furthermore, the kinds of David-taking-on-corporate-Goliath cases that made his name as an attorney reveal him as a thoroughly good human being. And, he has said unequivocally that his vote to authorize the Iraq war was wrong. I almost, almost, support him for the nomination.
But at this early stage, I'm for Sen. Obama. Obama is also an inspiring, charismatic speaker who's good at hitting positive themes but, I suspect, won't take crap from Karl Rove lying down. In many ways he and Sen. Edwards are similar figures (Obama/Edwards? Edwards/Obama?). What tips the scales in his favor for me is, Obama spoke forcefully against the war in 2002 and 2003.
This is, to me, critical. Edwards recognizes that his war vote was a mistake, in hindsight. Obama knew it at the time. I support Barack Obama for the nomination because, in my eyes, this evinces superior real-time judgment.
There are, of course, a lot of candidates besides these three, and of course they deserve a look (really, who thought Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton was going to be the next president, in February of 1991?). For instance, I know Beagle is a big Wesley Clark fan, and justifiably so--if Gen. Clark runs a really good campaign, I would have no problem supporting him for the nomination.
It's early. I am entirely open to being won over by any of the candidates (now that none of them is Joe Lieberman). A year and a half is a long long time in politics.
Sen. Clinton? I admire her personally, and in many ways I think she'd make a pretty good president. But I can't support her in the primaries. She voted to authorize the war, and she's noncommittal about whether that vote was wrong. Plus, as Seagull has pointed out, health care reform is an enormously urgent issue--one more child dying from an avoidable lack of medical care is one too many--and, having already botched the matter 14 years ago, Ms. Clinton has damaged credibility there.
Sen. Edwards? I love Sen. Edwards, on domestic issues. He's the one candidate running I've actually shaken hands with, and he's an inspiring, hopeful speaker with a pleasingly populist message. Furthermore, the kinds of David-taking-on-corporate-Goliath cases that made his name as an attorney reveal him as a thoroughly good human being. And, he has said unequivocally that his vote to authorize the Iraq war was wrong. I almost, almost, support him for the nomination.
But at this early stage, I'm for Sen. Obama. Obama is also an inspiring, charismatic speaker who's good at hitting positive themes but, I suspect, won't take crap from Karl Rove lying down. In many ways he and Sen. Edwards are similar figures (Obama/Edwards? Edwards/Obama?). What tips the scales in his favor for me is, Obama spoke forcefully against the war in 2002 and 2003.
This is, to me, critical. Edwards recognizes that his war vote was a mistake, in hindsight. Obama knew it at the time. I support Barack Obama for the nomination because, in my eyes, this evinces superior real-time judgment.
There are, of course, a lot of candidates besides these three, and of course they deserve a look (really, who thought Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton was going to be the next president, in February of 1991?). For instance, I know Beagle is a big Wesley Clark fan, and justifiably so--if Gen. Clark runs a really good campaign, I would have no problem supporting him for the nomination.
It's early. I am entirely open to being won over by any of the candidates (now that none of them is Joe Lieberman). A year and a half is a long long time in politics.
<< Home