Caucus in 90 minutes, and I STILL don't know who to vote for

Make that "whom" to vote for.

Anyway, I'm supposed to be walking to my daughter's old elementary school in just a could of hours, and I'm still torn.

I take those online quizzes and look at the checklist, and the candidates that most accurately are Kucinich and Gravel. They're not really viable options, especially not in a caucus format.

Edwards is running a distant third, plus I'm not sure he can win a national election. I kind of feel like we already gave him a shot in 2004 and he lost. Besides, he's too good looking.

Which leads me with Clinton and Obama. They're virtually the same candidate, differing only slightly. So I come down to my two main issues: Electability and Education

On the electability issue, it's an issue of pragmatism. It's not only important to pick a candidate that will do the most good for the most number of Americans, but to pick the good candidate that can WIN. Running McGovern and getting Nixon isn't the answer this time around. But which one of them -- Hillary or Barack -- can win nationally? Who are people going to be least inspired by and more angered by -- a white woman named CLinton or a black guy with a funny name?

Never underestimate the shallowness of the American people. This is a country that mostly doesn't care if we carpet bomb women and children for no sane reason, but if two people who both happen to have dicks between their legs want to hold hands in public, lynch mobs form and congress tries to amend the constitution. Am I the only one who feels like burning a flag sometimes? Not as some sort of statement or political protest -- just to piss off some sanctimonious right wing jackass who's got nothing better to do with their time than worry about what other people do with theirs.

Sorry. I've obviously got some anger issues that need to be worked out.

The other issue that's key to me is education. Both of them were pretty much the same on federal education issues: do more for student loans, "fully fund" NCLB.

I was leaning heavily towards Obama, but in the last couple of weeks I heard Clinton say that we needed to scrap NCLB altogether. I heard her say it on the TV and I heard her say it in person. It's the only logical thing to do, and if you care about not leaving children behind, then getting rid of No Child Left Behind should be the first step. Is that enough to tip me? I don't know. I'm leaning towards it. She had some other good education-related ideas, too, and I liked her comparison of teachers to indentured servants. Was she being honest? Probably no more and no less than most other Democratic politicians.

So whom do I vote for?

'ya brother-rap on"

"ball of confusion"

In fact, she's known as a brainiac, so if you heard her, you are privileged. Like Obama, she's effective in person. For someone who cares so much about grammar, you mind your manners and so does she. We kept her as our senator to make your choice as easy as possible.

Whatever you do, have a great day.

:D

Talk the people in the caucus into standing with you!

but with a Clinton nomination, and the fact that independents dislike her so much, I think that leads to a Bloomberg run. I wouldn't be surprised if Nader got in the mix since he hates Clinton so much.

Racism will be a challenge for Obama, but he only needs to add states like Virginia or Iowa or New Mexico to the Kerry states to win. He doesn't need south.

Sometimes the mind gets confused but the body is rarely wrong.


Ambivalence usually means no.

our progressive ideals!

The corporate media WILL pick our candidate for us unless WE DO -- and they'll pick one they think they can beat. Don't let it happen, don't believe what they say about our candidates.

If you have any doubt about what's happening, pls see this quick summary:

http://c-cyte.blogspot.com/2008/01/help-bust-media-blackout-on-edwards.html

"Nothing is inevitable, except defeat for those who give up without a fight." --
Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea (1961, script by Irwin Allen & Charles Bennett)

:eyes: I've heard it all now.

I'm just saying a I have a very low opinion of the voting populace. We've had 7 years of a guy we can drink a beer with, after all.

just go with your heart.

Let your maternal instinct kick in .

something we haven't had in decades: a brokered convention. In such a scenario, Kucinich or Gravel delegates have some power to effect change in the party's positions, and ultimately, who gets the nomination.

Voting the bandwagon just gets it rolling that much faster.

That is a great phrase!

Obama has shown the ability in Iowa and NH to attract Independents and even some Republicans, in a way that Hillary or anybody else really cannot. The independents are crucial to winning this election, and I think he has the best chance to get them.

...either Edwards, Obama, or Clinton. Or someone else.

You make the final choice.

Don

The photos topping their lead story right now indicate that. Nice of 'em to give the GOP four candidate pictures while leaving out Edwards and any other non-top-two Dem candidate.

There's a reason NOT to vote for someone.

:eyes:

Here's a graphic from Rasmussen...looks like John DOES have the best chance to win nationally. Beware the MSM.



Thanks for actively participating in our Democracy!:hi:

I like John a lot, too.

How many states is he leading in ? :shrug:

and polls a year out are merely a blurry snapshot.

from Firedoglake. That site is completely reputable.

as I said they're merely a blurry snapshot. Polls a year away from an election are laughable as far as reliability goes. That should be obvious. And in a more recent poll Obama beats all the repukes- including McCain.

then Edwards is the closest candidate to their platforms.

He is electable.

Jesus H. Christ in a Mediterranean spa, are you serious?

If you vote based on crap like that please don't go. I don't care who you vote for, but go with the policies not the bullshit.

Electability is an issue, though, and I think he was SAVAGED with the "pretty boy" stuff in one election already.

Again, I'm not advocating anyone here but I do want to correct you on that perception. He beats every one of the Republicans.

He even beats McCain. He's electable. Don't let them tell you otherwise. Go with your gut.

Seriously, though, I think caucusing would be a wonderful experience. We don't do it here in California. Good luck to you!!! Again, thanks for being part of the process!

I like him, but I'm also indecisive :)

Maybe I'll go down there and stand with the Edwards group, and if he doesn't look like he can pull out 15 percent at our cauces site, I'll break for Obama.

walk into the polling location!

Good luck!

:hi:

:hi:

:think:

it much stronger bringing in tons of new people.

JOHN EDWARDS

On the way to vote. I'm bringing the kid, leaving the dog, and I kind of wish it were the other way around.

Maybe I've narrowed it down to Edwards or Obama, probably, and I appreciate all the great replies and encouragement.

should be your choice. :toast: and happy voting!

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." --John Quincy Adams

The MSM is trying to dismiss him out of hand though he has a lot of support and he's worked incredibly hard for this, as has Elizabeth. I agree with Bill Maher that he's probably our most "electable" candidate, but my reason would be that we can't let the MSM determine who our candidates will be and they have decided that it's a contest between Clinton and Obama. I like Edwards and think that he deserves a shot. It's still early days, long before even a nomination and the MSM has practically already decided who will succeed Bush*...:grr:

vote for Edwards.