Name: Tess
Home: St. Louis
Some Political Thoughts
As the preprimary season kicks into high gear, it's nice to know at least one person I can rule out ever voting for. Kansas Senator Sam Brownbeck has announced his candidacy; according to the Post-Dispatch, "Brownback, an evangelical Protestant turned Roman Catholic and a former Kansas agriculture secretary, said he would focus on reviving faith and families in America; combating abortion, poverty and wasteful government spending; opposing same-sex marriage; and revamping Social Security and the federal tax system."
Meanwhile, the field of Democratic hopefuls grows crowded--even as Sen. Kerry decided not to pursue a second presidential run. (And here I will breath a sigh of relief. I voted for him, and I'm sure he'd have made a decent president, but he had his chance to get elected and he blew it.) I'm very curious to see what will happen over the next year--will Barack Obama withstand the media scrutiny? Will Hillary Clinton be able to convince middle-of-the-road voters? If I were voting in a primary today, I'd be inclined to choose Obama, but I'm interested to hear more from some of the less publicized candidates. Right now I'm giddy with the prospect of Bush leaving office.
*
I find it cheering that Republican politicians are turning their attention to health care. Bush proposed health care changes in his State of the Union Address; the next day, Missouri Governor Matt Blunt put forth his own health care proposals in his State of the State Address. While I'm not thrilled with either plan (Bush's proposal would penalize people for having good health care--huh?), and I don't love their market-driven solutions, I'm glad to see that Republicans are starting to realize it would be politically adventageous to address health care. Of course, I hope that 2008 sees a person elected as president who believes in universal health care; Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards all say they support it.
Meanwhile, the field of Democratic hopefuls grows crowded--even as Sen. Kerry decided not to pursue a second presidential run. (And here I will breath a sigh of relief. I voted for him, and I'm sure he'd have made a decent president, but he had his chance to get elected and he blew it.) I'm very curious to see what will happen over the next year--will Barack Obama withstand the media scrutiny? Will Hillary Clinton be able to convince middle-of-the-road voters? If I were voting in a primary today, I'd be inclined to choose Obama, but I'm interested to hear more from some of the less publicized candidates. Right now I'm giddy with the prospect of Bush leaving office.
*
I find it cheering that Republican politicians are turning their attention to health care. Bush proposed health care changes in his State of the Union Address; the next day, Missouri Governor Matt Blunt put forth his own health care proposals in his State of the State Address. While I'm not thrilled with either plan (Bush's proposal would penalize people for having good health care--huh?), and I don't love their market-driven solutions, I'm glad to see that Republicans are starting to realize it would be politically adventageous to address health care. Of course, I hope that 2008 sees a person elected as president who believes in universal health care; Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards all say they support it.
posted by Tess | 10:18 AM
3 Comments:
For me, the choice is between Edwards and Kucinich. Now I was a volunteer for Kucinich last time, and I still like him a lot, but I just don't see his campaign gaining any traction on the second time around. Edwards, on the other hand, has a real chance and has become a more outspoken, progressive leader on just about every issue. And he has declared outright he was wrong to support the Iraq war and wants to start pulling troops out sooner rather than later. The new version of Edwards seems even better than the '04 version (which raises the question, Tess, if you supported him in '04 and he has improved since then, why wouldn't you support him this time?) He seems to have a real shot and is leading in the Iowa caucus polls. On the other hand, Obama would be better than Clinton, so if it came down to those two, I would go for Obama, I think. But he does seem kind of noncommittal and wishy-washy about most issues, so I kind of wonder if the mystique will wear off when he starts having to make hard choices. Clinton would be a disaster, I think, and her carefully contrived, pre-tested "let's have a conversation America" on-line thing was just embarrassing to watch. So of the front runners, I am going for Edwards right now. In fact, I even covered up the "Kerry" part of my old Kerry-Edwards '04 bumper sticker so it just shows "Edwards" now...
Mike, I agree with you about separating health insurance from employment. I just don't agree with Bush's plan to penalize companies/people for health plans over $15,000 a year--especially since that limit is tied to inflation, and not to real increases in health care costs.
CL, I am a bit less enthusiastic about John Edwards because he wasn't as strong as I'd hoped in 2004. He and Kerry were not vigorous and assertive enough about responding to attacks. I know he has wonderful persuasive skills, but I didn't think he used them as much as he might in the last campaign (possibly since he was the VP on the ticket). Obama seems to be very good at connecting with people and getting them to buy into his vision. That said, I would love to see Edwards become next president.
As far as Clinton goes (why do I keep having the urge to call her "Hillary" and not "Clinton"? I'd like to think it's to differentiate her from Bill), I think I am most swayed by the argument that it's not good to have family dynasties in American politics. I think it's time for some new blood. But I would be very excited to have our first female president.
For me, it's a choice between Obama and Hillary.
My question (and I say this as someone whose main goal is to get Bush out of office and a Democrat in place) is: is America more likely to vote for a black man, or a white woman? :-/
Unfortunately, discrimation (both racial and sexist) is a factor in determining the likelihood of either candidate winning. And living in small town, it is all too evident that factors beyond their control may be what loses them the race.
Post a Comment
<< Home