Primary Results
Well, I'm back in North Carolina and I guess its time to start commenting on what I see in the first two caucases/primaries this past week. I'm watching the New Hampshire results as I type this, so some comments may change as I go on. I enter this endeavor about the candidates with a couple of observations: 1) I usually learn more from the blogsphere than the tv networks, because they usually think they are right, find out they're wrong, then glorify that they were the first to change their minds. 2) I despise the tendency in the press to want to declare things all over as soon as possible, which has only added to the "arms race" of the election schedule that has essentially decided our candidates in Februrary when just 45 years ago, the first primary was in early March and the whole thing lasted until June (which has succeeded in playing off of two of this country's worst tendencies: first, a wanting to get things done quicker before better, and second, the impulse to have to be the first at everything, be it the first to project the winner, to the first to have a 20,000 ft. house on your block). Anyways, I think democracy was healthier when the process was longer.
I'm watching MSNBC. It has its problems, but it has Olbermann, and isn't FOX, so I like it.
Just an hour ago, they were ready to bury Clinton and appoint Obama as the inevitable. Now, after the first results, they aren't so sure and are suddenly talking about how things have changed. And now they are talking about McCain is the winner, but he really has no chance. People listen to this crap. And they reflect it. Clinton is still in the lead (16% in).
I'm going to take the time down to give my own ideas about the candidates. Why? Because having to write makes things more solid in my mind and sometimes changes my initial ideas. I will start with the Republicans, because being a true son of my parents, that is how I started my life politically. In many ways, I think that Reagan's anecdote about the old Democratic Party serves as a good explanation for me: I didn't leave them; they left me. It funny how what we consider "liberal" in this country, is considered to be moderate conservative in any western european country. So when I consider myself liberal, but think I'm more moderate in the scheme of things, I think I have backing.
So let's start with the Republicans. I think they have a really bad group this year. And its a really interesting year, as it is the first one we haven't had anyone running as an incumbent president or vice-president since 1928 (although this is a really interesting story, and one I will write about in a later post). The Republicans have a much tighter race than the Democrats, it seems right now. It will be an interesting race; maybe the Republicans will find their soul again, because this ex-Republican thinks they lost it long ago. But I'm not hopeful. Let's start with the guy who seems to have won the NH primary tonight: McCain. A true Conservative but a military guy, so he can be contrarian to the purposes of the party. He used to be a cool guy, and has done way more than other Republican candidates to reach out to alternative media formats and younger audiences. Personally, I like the guy. But he sold himself out this year and I don't know what he stands for anymore. He has backed Bush's stupid Iraq policy and that is enough for me to say be done. Romney: I knew this guy was an empty suit when he was in charge of the 2002 Olympics and I told my Dad that he was going to end up running for Senate or something. The guy knows dick squat, but has a crap load of money, good looks, good hair, and can talk like a good frat boy, and thus, of course, he is a front runner. To me, Romney is the G.W. Bush of this election, and haven't we learned out mistake? Giuliani for me was a once-good prosecutor who let power totally corrupt him. I cannot allow his fascist tendencies in New York go by, from allowing the police to kill almost indiscrimately, to him having trysts in rooms saved for 9/11 workers and putting them on the taxpayers bill. Huckabee scares me more than any of them, because he seems the most nice. C.S. Lewis, not one of my most favorite authors, nonetheless said once something to the effect that, the antichrist will come, wrapped in a flag and carrying the cross. He was right. Huckabee wants this to be a Christian nation. Both in deed and in law. His comments are numerous to back this up. That scares me. The other candidates...so what? Although, I have to give Ron Paul, the old Libertarian big props, as his group gave FOX News their due this weekend, after the said news group denied him a position in their debate, not because of his numbers, but almost assuredly because Paul opposes the War in Iraq, which FOX has put a lot of capital in.
Now for the democrats.
Me, my favorite candidates aren't going to win. My first choice was Chris Dodd. I had the most in common with him, and he was the only democrat in the Congress to take on Bush and threaten to filibuster the stupid bill to give immunity to all the telecomm companies for giving away our privacy to the so-called "war on terror." My second favorite candidate is John Edwards. Maybe its just being in North Carolina, but I've always liked Edward's populism and he has put his mouth into deeds here at UNC, where he started a Center on Poverty devoted to studying the causes and solutions of said subject. I think he his hurt by his "look" as a trial lawyer (of which he was damn, damn good at serving underpriviledged complaintants) and since he decided not to take any money from big interests, he essentially sealed his long term doom. But I can still hope. And I'll be a fan, just like I am with Al Gore. Biden is now out: too smart for his own good and should be a good cabinet member if anyone will give him a chance. Obama looks like the frontrunner according to all the pundits today. As of now, it is still too close to call between him and Clinton. Very interesting. Of the two, I would prefer Obama, though not for the reasons one might think. I am not one of these folks who idolizes Clintion or despises her with the vitriol my father does. Personally, I am against Clinton because I am a patriot, and I do not believe it is in the best interests of democracy to have the Presidency committed to two families for a potenial 36 years, But, given the choice between Hillary and the Republicans, I would have to go with Hillary. The last 8 years have been too destructive, and I don't see any of the GOP'ers enthusiastic about fixing the damages that have been done to our Constitution, our international standing, or the protection of our working and middle-class peoples.
Hillary is still leading. Interesting. Maybe our press isn't so omniscent? Oh my! Stupid f*cks. They say they have a "liberal bias," but that's bullshit as anyone who has done any research will tell you. What they DO have a bias toward is the "mainstream" and its interests. Let's see what works out.
I'm watching MSNBC. It has its problems, but it has Olbermann, and isn't FOX, so I like it.
Just an hour ago, they were ready to bury Clinton and appoint Obama as the inevitable. Now, after the first results, they aren't so sure and are suddenly talking about how things have changed. And now they are talking about McCain is the winner, but he really has no chance. People listen to this crap. And they reflect it. Clinton is still in the lead (16% in).
I'm going to take the time down to give my own ideas about the candidates. Why? Because having to write makes things more solid in my mind and sometimes changes my initial ideas. I will start with the Republicans, because being a true son of my parents, that is how I started my life politically. In many ways, I think that Reagan's anecdote about the old Democratic Party serves as a good explanation for me: I didn't leave them; they left me. It funny how what we consider "liberal" in this country, is considered to be moderate conservative in any western european country. So when I consider myself liberal, but think I'm more moderate in the scheme of things, I think I have backing.
So let's start with the Republicans. I think they have a really bad group this year. And its a really interesting year, as it is the first one we haven't had anyone running as an incumbent president or vice-president since 1928 (although this is a really interesting story, and one I will write about in a later post). The Republicans have a much tighter race than the Democrats, it seems right now. It will be an interesting race; maybe the Republicans will find their soul again, because this ex-Republican thinks they lost it long ago. But I'm not hopeful. Let's start with the guy who seems to have won the NH primary tonight: McCain. A true Conservative but a military guy, so he can be contrarian to the purposes of the party. He used to be a cool guy, and has done way more than other Republican candidates to reach out to alternative media formats and younger audiences. Personally, I like the guy. But he sold himself out this year and I don't know what he stands for anymore. He has backed Bush's stupid Iraq policy and that is enough for me to say be done. Romney: I knew this guy was an empty suit when he was in charge of the 2002 Olympics and I told my Dad that he was going to end up running for Senate or something. The guy knows dick squat, but has a crap load of money, good looks, good hair, and can talk like a good frat boy, and thus, of course, he is a front runner. To me, Romney is the G.W. Bush of this election, and haven't we learned out mistake? Giuliani for me was a once-good prosecutor who let power totally corrupt him. I cannot allow his fascist tendencies in New York go by, from allowing the police to kill almost indiscrimately, to him having trysts in rooms saved for 9/11 workers and putting them on the taxpayers bill. Huckabee scares me more than any of them, because he seems the most nice. C.S. Lewis, not one of my most favorite authors, nonetheless said once something to the effect that, the antichrist will come, wrapped in a flag and carrying the cross. He was right. Huckabee wants this to be a Christian nation. Both in deed and in law. His comments are numerous to back this up. That scares me. The other candidates...so what? Although, I have to give Ron Paul, the old Libertarian big props, as his group gave FOX News their due this weekend, after the said news group denied him a position in their debate, not because of his numbers, but almost assuredly because Paul opposes the War in Iraq, which FOX has put a lot of capital in.
Now for the democrats.
Me, my favorite candidates aren't going to win. My first choice was Chris Dodd. I had the most in common with him, and he was the only democrat in the Congress to take on Bush and threaten to filibuster the stupid bill to give immunity to all the telecomm companies for giving away our privacy to the so-called "war on terror." My second favorite candidate is John Edwards. Maybe its just being in North Carolina, but I've always liked Edward's populism and he has put his mouth into deeds here at UNC, where he started a Center on Poverty devoted to studying the causes and solutions of said subject. I think he his hurt by his "look" as a trial lawyer (of which he was damn, damn good at serving underpriviledged complaintants) and since he decided not to take any money from big interests, he essentially sealed his long term doom. But I can still hope. And I'll be a fan, just like I am with Al Gore. Biden is now out: too smart for his own good and should be a good cabinet member if anyone will give him a chance. Obama looks like the frontrunner according to all the pundits today. As of now, it is still too close to call between him and Clinton. Very interesting. Of the two, I would prefer Obama, though not for the reasons one might think. I am not one of these folks who idolizes Clintion or despises her with the vitriol my father does. Personally, I am against Clinton because I am a patriot, and I do not believe it is in the best interests of democracy to have the Presidency committed to two families for a potenial 36 years, But, given the choice between Hillary and the Republicans, I would have to go with Hillary. The last 8 years have been too destructive, and I don't see any of the GOP'ers enthusiastic about fixing the damages that have been done to our Constitution, our international standing, or the protection of our working and middle-class peoples.
Hillary is still leading. Interesting. Maybe our press isn't so omniscent? Oh my! Stupid f*cks. They say they have a "liberal bias," but that's bullshit as anyone who has done any research will tell you. What they DO have a bias toward is the "mainstream" and its interests. Let's see what works out.
posted by cc at
8:21 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home