And I guess I am. I preferred Bill Richardson for the Democratic nomination. He is the strongest anti-war candidate and I still believe he is the most experienced, if experience matters. But his campaigning has been ineffective, downright embarrassing at moments, the opposite of what a candidate running on experience needed to demonstrate.
Then I wasn’t sure about Obama or Edwards. I was influenced considerably by Paul Krugman’s negative take on Obama, that the Senator is too conciliatory, that he is, for pete’s sake, using Republican talking points at times. I thought this post at Corrente was valid. But I had liked Obama’s The Audacity of Hope very much.
Edwards clearly is the strongest on domestic issues, and arguably has pushed his fellow Democrats in the correct directions — universal health insurance, for example. But Edwards just can’t seem to get real traction.
I admire Hillary Clinton. Perhaps she should have been running for office all along instead of Bill. But I don’t want another Clinton. The 90s are over; I don’t care for the country to relive them.
So my loyalties have been changing; I have been fickle. I may continue to be fickle. But today …
For me, I’ve been torn between Clinton and Obama. I’ve admired Hillary Clinton very much in the past (especially after reading her autobiography), but I’m convinced that Obama’s message of change is what the U.S. needs right now.
I’ve noticed that just about everyone my age and younger (32) while impressed by Edwards and Clinton, and even Richardson and Dodd, thinks Obama is pretty much a no-brainer. My parents and a lot of older friends and co-workers appear to have a lot of trust in Hillary. I’ve found that generational split to be pretty striking.
I’m sure any of these candidates could run a competent administration, but why choose the status quo when you can have something so much better? The man is practically a personification of the nation’s loftiest ideals. Anyway, just an observation.
Told you so.
The man has HONOR. Something I haven’t seen in politics in a very long time.
Exactly what honor does he have?
Talking about change and making it happen are two distinct things. How will he be able to accomplish significant change in the soft fascist government we now have?
His donation disclosure is only 88.2% compared to Clinton’s 90%, Giuliani’s 89.7%, Romney’s 92.6% according to opensecrets.org
If you read further you will learn that 99% of Obama’s contributions are from individuals; only 88% of Clinton’s are. Contributions under $200 do not have to be itemized with the same amount of detail as those of more than $200.
2008 Presidential Election
I, of course, did read further. I just think it is an interesting fact. I didn’t say it was bad. In fact, the data illustrate more small dollar contributors for Obama, which I think is a good thing.
After reading his website, I am more likely to vote for him than after listening to his stumps.
I still, however, think Richardson is a better choice.
Recommended:
Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance
The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream
I wanted to comment on a comment above . . . I really liked the following line from kbrennan, “The man is practically a personification of the nation’s loftiest ideals.” It really hit home with me. Thanks!