Speaking as an Edwards supporter, I must admit that the time has come to ask a hard question. At what point should the race be narrowed to only two candidates?
I do not dislike Hillary Clinton and will vote for her if she wins the nomination. But she is, in my view, the weakest of the Democratic candidates. Not only does the right despise her with an irrational passion, she alienates many on the "progressive" left.
Imagine a race in which Hillary faces McCain, Paul, Bloomberg and McKinney. Each of the minor candidates would chip away at a different segment of her natural constituency. (If Huckabee or Giuliani win the nomination, Democrats who hate Hillary may be more likely to hold their noses and vote for her. McCain arouses less antipathy. Romney? I'm not sure...)
The dynamics of the campaign may require but one major "anti-Hillary." On the other hand, and speaking as a Californian, I hate the idea of not having a chance to vote for my preferred candidate in the primary.
Truth be told, I've hated that fact of political life for quite a few elections now. Today's must-read is John Dean's prescription for fixing the primary process:
Actually, there are good and relatively simply solutions to this nightmare. Not for this year, but for the future. For example, among the soundest is the concept of rotating regional primaries.
This approach would divide the country into (typically, in proposals) four or six regions. The states within those regions would then all hold their primary or caucus at the same time, with the election in each of the regions staggered over the first four or six months of a presidential election year.A further suggestion: Before the election cycle begins, representatives from each region can draw lots to determine the order of voting.
4 comments:
John Dean. OMG.
"Speaking as an Edwards supporter, the time has come to ask a hard question. At what point should the race be narrowed to only two candidates?"
Notwithstanding the dangling modifier, wait for the South Carolina results. If Edwards finishes behind Clinton and Obama, he's gone. Any other outcome makes him a contender. If he wins, he essentially moots any 3rd-party insurgency since he's acting like a 3rd-party candidate. The guy's brilliant. His campaign has been tailored (and stonewashed) for his birthplace, South Carolina: "I was born for this!" he's been saying. Yet I love Hillary.
I don't know if your take is realistic or merely cautious. Whatever people think about Hillary may not play into conventional wisdom; no one, including herself, knows what she's like with this much at stake. So far, Edwards has changed his style and his message (elegantly), Clinton has changed hers, but Obama has been static. I'll be ecstatic with any ticket that includes any two of them.
This election really is the most important in everyone's lifetime. Beware the green-eyed monster mainstream.
Thanks for pointing out the error in grammar, which I have rectified.
Speaking as a writer, that mistake always bothers me when others make it.
(Kidding!)
You have to ask yourself why, since the 2002 Max Cleland loss,. The same year where Chuck Hadley, also way behind in every poll, and who actually owned the e-voting machine company, also won. There is no doubt in my mind that our election process is deeply flawed. There is no way that other countries could get away from this without either an uprising, coup de tat, or outright declaration of fraud. Look at the Carter Institute's rules of fair elections! Our country fails on all of the requirements. These elections are a scam. Even the CEOs of these voting machine co.'s are drug traffickers and felons! Since when is this legal? OR why hasn't it been made illegal? If NH pulls an Ohio recount with doors closed and opt scan recounts of unfairly selected precincts, this will be a waste.
Not only that, Kucinich and Paul have rated the highest by far in online polls for the past 2 months. Go to their websites for the exact blow by blow on this.
McCain will be the Republican nominee. I'm positive of that at this point. McCain's assured position as the GOP candidate is one of my reasons for actively praying our nominee is somehow, some way, anyone but Clinton.
Post a Comment