Comments | 5500: This is what they call straight talk

5500

This is what they call straight talk

Jan 05, 2008 15:08

From an article on McCain's potentially improved prospects comes this quote from the Huckabee campaign manager about their plans for New Hampshire next week: '"We’re going to see if we can’t take Romney out," Mr. Rollins said. "We like John. Nobody likes Romney."' When are political campaigns this honest? And, thus, how much did I laugh to read ( Read more... )

u.s., politics

Comments 8

anonymous January 5 2008, 18:07:29 UTC

Matt! Hellos!

Some things!

1: How awesome to be one of your favorite Sarahs! That is quite an honor.

2: The Iowa Caucauses are AWESOME and don't you forget it.

3: That article is also awesome; that Rollins guy kinda amazing.

4: I was going to post a follow-up comment about the whys and wherefores of my obama fandom, but it started to get really long and vigorous so I'll find someplace else to put it. But regardless--isn't this week fun? I'm loving it.

brasstax January 5 2008, 18:11:17 UTC

Yeah, for real. The Iowa caucuses (and others) are actually the most closely related to the original Athenian democratic process that still exists in the world today.

5500 January 5 2008, 18:20:55 UTC

Which is fine, except that only 7.5% of the population of a tiny state participate in them, and that tiny state is in no way representative of the country. I agree that it's Athenian and all, but the US is an enormous republic, and for this one contest to have such an outsize influence on the race seems to me profoundly unfair. I can understand Sarah's love of it, being an Iowan, but for the beautician in Harlem or the housepainter in San Francisco or the doctor in Mobile, what's there to appeal? Nothing but disenfranchisement so far as I can tell. I'm glad that lots of states have moved their primaries, so people can feel like their vote counts, but I believe the candidates will be all but decided by then.

brasstax January 5 2008, 18:25:29 UTC

I'm torn on the issue. On one hand, the way the primaries used to be spaced out sort of allowed every candidate the opportunity to stumble or rise and reveal their flaws or merits over time. On the other hand, a mass national primary might not be so bad either (or at least having them all take place within the span of a month). That way, no state's citizens count less than others, really.

Thread 7

rosalier January 7 2008, 03:29:26 UTC

Wonderful point. I voted for Sharpton in the last Illinois presidential primary because well Kerry was going to win the nomination and who could get excited about that? Now, it's like an embarassment of riches. No candidate is perfect-- but each of the top four I'd be happy to vote for... each for different reasons.