Super Tuesday build-up, decision
In the last few days I have seen Bill Clinton (Thurs. on campus), Barack Obama (very briefly before a bigger rally on Fri. I couldn't get into due to overcrowding) and Hillary Clinton (at a rally tonight at Highland High - and since Mike Judge grew up in Albuquerque, this is probably THE Highland High of Beavis and Butthead. Awesome.). I saw Chelsea tonight too, so I feel all friendly with the Clinton family this week. I guess everyone was holding off on coming to NM until Richardson dropped out. Bill Clinton is coming back tomorrow to watch the Super Bowl with Bill Richardson, which I find amusing.
Check out this website. It's really interesting to have someone actually check the facts of all the candidates. Nobody is innocent. It's fun.
http://www.factcheck.org/
After putting it off, I've really been debating the last several days who to vote for on Tuesday. My initial idea was to vote for Kucinich just to make a point. I still like Kucinich, but decided that since it's so close, I should pick one of the real candidates. My trouble is that I actually like both Obama and Clinton just fine. They would both be a huge improvement over Bush. So trying to be all rational-like, I have come up with these criteria: electability, the issues and possible job performance.
Both could probably both beat John McCain (and McCain would be an improvement over Bush. Almost anyone would be). A more recent poll put Obama and Clinton about equal in a match-up with McCain. I'm still not sure here and tend to feel like Obama has the edge, but as Clinton said tonight, the Republicans have been attacking her for 16 years and don't have any more dirt to dig up and who knows what they'd do with Obama. I also feel like the irrational Hillary-haters probably wouldn't vote for Obama or any other Democrat anyway. But it's pretty much impossible to tell at this point, so I'm not sure.
On the issues, Obama and Clinton are actually, as far as I can tell, very, very close. Both want to phase out of Iraq, invest in alternative energy, help the middle class, etc. Clinton was trying to make a big deal out of healthcare; she does technically want universal healthcare, but Obama's plan is closer to universal than she gives him credit for. Clinton's plan on Iraq also sounds slightly more detailed and like it might work, but both are fairly vague at times. Both are good Democrats and we need a good Democrat in the White House.
As for possible job performance, I think Clinton's experience gives her the edge in actually getting stuff done, or at least a small chunk of what she says she'll do. Both candidates are promising to try to do a lot of stuff I'm not sure is really possible politically, but both sound very nice. Republicans will put up a fight on healthcare and getting out of Iraq at this point without totally fucking up the region is, I suspect, much easier said than done. Obama is still young and could be a much better candidate in four or eight years. All the political weight and connections of Clinton, as much as they make her "dynastic" and an "insider," just might make her able to deliver on more of her promises. Neither candidate is perfect, but we have to start moving forward on the environment, getting out of Iraq eventually, education, healthcare, etc. and I suspect that Clinton is more likely to actually do so. But I could be wrong. Of course, omniscience is not a pre-requisite for political opinions, so I'll most likely vote for Clinton.
Check out this website. It's really interesting to have someone actually check the facts of all the candidates. Nobody is innocent. It's fun.
http://www.factcheck.org/
After putting it off, I've really been debating the last several days who to vote for on Tuesday. My initial idea was to vote for Kucinich just to make a point. I still like Kucinich, but decided that since it's so close, I should pick one of the real candidates. My trouble is that I actually like both Obama and Clinton just fine. They would both be a huge improvement over Bush. So trying to be all rational-like, I have come up with these criteria: electability, the issues and possible job performance.
Both could probably both beat John McCain (and McCain would be an improvement over Bush. Almost anyone would be). A more recent poll put Obama and Clinton about equal in a match-up with McCain. I'm still not sure here and tend to feel like Obama has the edge, but as Clinton said tonight, the Republicans have been attacking her for 16 years and don't have any more dirt to dig up and who knows what they'd do with Obama. I also feel like the irrational Hillary-haters probably wouldn't vote for Obama or any other Democrat anyway. But it's pretty much impossible to tell at this point, so I'm not sure.
On the issues, Obama and Clinton are actually, as far as I can tell, very, very close. Both want to phase out of Iraq, invest in alternative energy, help the middle class, etc. Clinton was trying to make a big deal out of healthcare; she does technically want universal healthcare, but Obama's plan is closer to universal than she gives him credit for. Clinton's plan on Iraq also sounds slightly more detailed and like it might work, but both are fairly vague at times. Both are good Democrats and we need a good Democrat in the White House.
As for possible job performance, I think Clinton's experience gives her the edge in actually getting stuff done, or at least a small chunk of what she says she'll do. Both candidates are promising to try to do a lot of stuff I'm not sure is really possible politically, but both sound very nice. Republicans will put up a fight on healthcare and getting out of Iraq at this point without totally fucking up the region is, I suspect, much easier said than done. Obama is still young and could be a much better candidate in four or eight years. All the political weight and connections of Clinton, as much as they make her "dynastic" and an "insider," just might make her able to deliver on more of her promises. Neither candidate is perfect, but we have to start moving forward on the environment, getting out of Iraq eventually, education, healthcare, etc. and I suspect that Clinton is more likely to actually do so. But I could be wrong. Of course, omniscience is not a pre-requisite for political opinions, so I'll most likely vote for Clinton.