|
True, we are supposed to vote for the person for president and the presidential ticket that we really believe in. I will never dispute that, at least in ideality.
As someone who volunteered for Nader/LaDuke, I certainly used to feel that very strongly.
Nevertheless, I don't see how it can reasonably be stated that Nader's presence in the race didn't affect Gore's electoral results negatively.
I just don't know if, at least in this day and age, adherence to an independent party is all that effective.
True, there isn't a whole lot of choice. But I also do not agree that Kerry/Edwards was all that bad of a ticket. To write that Kerry/Edwards is no better than Bush/Cheney is bonkers to me.
True, Kerry is a Yale Skull & Bones member, but why is that everyone forgets how Kerry welcomed ridicule and invited misunderstanding with how he resolutely stood up for his beliefs during and after Vietnam? How does that or the fact that he's a war hero of the highest order get continually overlooked when people evaluate his character? I think people are far too hung up on looks. And sometimes people get all spun-out too because of propaganda about voting records. People make mistakes and learn from them; life is a process. Well, at least it is for most people in general. Life is recognized as a process by nearly everyone everywhere; that is, except for George Dubya. Bush, of course, never admits to any errors in his judgement.
Let's examine Kerry's choice for running mate, Senator John Edwards. Here's a guy that has now wisened up and who, along with Senator Barack Obama, is the only candidate for president that has refused to take contributions from political action committees. That's real change. That's a real commitment. Here we find a case of someone actually putting their money where their mouth is, which is extremely rare in today's political milieu. Edwards is someone that has a sure chance of winning the presidency for the Democrats, but some sort of obvious corruption is holding him back. Instead, likely to be nominated is Hillary Clinton who has accepted more money than any candidate, be they Democrat or Republican. I'd rather vote for John McCain if it came down to between him or Hillary Clinton, although I'd rather not have to vote for the narrow-minded, aging, ex-P.O.W. at all. Still, it's apparent to me that John's more honest that Hillary. If it comes down to Guiliani against Clinton, then shit, I guess I just gotta leave the country. You too can call me "an unreasonable man," but unless something changes soon, and quickly, the shit is really going to hit the fan.
Oh well, we'll see how the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primaries go.
|