Who Should I Vote For and Why?

[dkamin]

Brief history: I'm currently on the fence, leaning Dean. Started out pro-Kerry, was disappointed because of his passivity in the Senate prior to Iraq. Like what Kucinich has to say, but think that image still matters (many Americans if not most need a leader who physically represents what they want themselves to be), and think that an unmarried vegan who unfortunately (and I really take no pleasure in saying this) looks like a Star Trek character is not going to win against Bush.

Was interested to hear what Clark had to say, and unfortunately gave him money too quickly before realizing that he had become DLC-ized. Still like Gephardt in some ways. My main concern is beating Bush. My secondary concern is changing the direction of this country, in more meaningful ways than just cancelling part of the tax cut. I think corporate and special interest power needs to wane, I think community needs to be reemphasized, I think that social security (not the program, but the idea of a safety net) needs to become part of the national dialogue again. I'm also a liberal socially, but think that the economic changes are more important right now; also, I think that better educated, more economically secure citizens tend to be more tolerant and liberal anyways.

The reason I lean Dean right now is because he's the only one who seems to be willing to say what he thinks, and to challenge the insane orthodoxy in the national dialogue that's being driven by GOP talking points (actually, to his credit, I think Gore is doing the same). When I hear Kerry, Clark, even Gephardt to some extent, I think DLC talking points. They don't want to come off as too extremist, and they seem more concerned about triangulating themselves as moderates than in fighting for what's right and important. Maybe I'm wrong.

I'm not one of the Dean guys by any means, but he's grown on me. I think I'm about to send money (not a ton, probably a couple of hundred) and my support (was also thinking about sending an email to my friends and family asking them to donate in lieu of holiday presents) to a candidate soon, but wanted to hear, without negativity, reasons to support each candidate, given the above. (also, I apologize if i seem presumptuous in assuming that anyone will care who i support).

Thanks for any replies.

[MercutioATC]

1. Well, as a Dean supporter, I'll say "Dean"...

but I'd encourage you to continue to look at what each one of them is saying. Not having a distinct choice, you're in a great position to ignore the bias and spin and see what's really being said.

If you decide on Dean, that's great! If not, that's o.k. too. At some point, we WILL all be pulling on the same end of the rope.

[plurality]

2. Kucinich...here's why

Because he has the best ideas on:

Health Care- the ONLY plan that will cure what ails us. Keep the health care in the hands of for profit insurers only ensures the continuation of our current problems.

Iraq- The Iraqis will NEVER accept the presence of our troops their. As long as our troops are there they will continue to be shot, bombed, killed. DK so far is the only one with a concrete, workable plan to end this fiasco and spare the lives of our troops and innocent Iraqis.

Budget- The only one who has any plans on doing ANYTHING about the massive fraud and waste going on at the Pentagon. How big of a deficit do you think we'd have if the Pentagon hadn't LOST $3 TRILLION in the last 5 years?

Economy- Plain and simple, we can blame tax cuts, NAFTA, and deficits all we want for the economic problems we face, but the reality is that American INNOVATION and PRODUCTION are severly lacking. DK has a plan to fix this by putting Americans to work with a new WPA and an Energy Apollo program. Plus Universal Health Care will take the burden off of small businesses for health care and allow more capital for investing in new jobs and technology.

Education- Only DK has a plan to fix the seperate but unequal education system that allows the rich to recieve a quality education yet leaves the poor short shrifted. It's called universal pre-K and universal college. All at the expense of the Pentagon, which has so much money they can't even find it all (re $3 trillion lost over 5 years)

As far as the image thing goes, I'm sorry you feel that way, but image will continue to matter until people stop voting on image and start voting on what's best for the country. It starts with YOU!

Hope this has been helpful, good luck with your decision.

[dkamin]

4. thanks plurality

i feel the same way about Dennis's ideas. While I think electability is overblown as an issue, I don't think it's completely irrelevant.

hmm, i'll think about it. appreciate your reply.

[plurality]

15. no problem

glad to be of service.

[plurality]

3. i guess not too many people feel like convincing

unfortunately candidate bashing is the flavor of the year and not candidate pushing.

[Eloriel]

5. Well, there are a gazillion reasons I'd say Dean, but let me just

suggest one article that I thought was interesting:

http://www.theunionleader.com/prez_show.html?article=28818

November 12, 2003

Dean is rewriting
campaign rule book
By KENNETH S. BAER
Lost Angeles Times

The fact that a presidential candidate publicly discussed this decision before making it is shocking in and of itself - and the fact that he submitted himself to a vote is unprecedented.

While this "money poll" was dismissed (perhaps rightfully so) as a stunt to give political cover to a decision to withdraw from the public financing system - a decision Dean and his campaign manager, Joe Trippi, clearly wanted to make - such a dismissal is only blinding people from what is really going on in Burlington, Vt.

In any case, he announced that he would not accept public financing.

Simply, Howard Dean is running the most radical campaign in a generation. The former Vermont governor's political team is reinventing how campaigns are run, rejecting a decadelong trend toward near-Orwellian campaign centralization (which has reached its apotheosis in the Bush administration) and trading that control for a more energized group of supporters.

To understand how radical the Dean campaign is, one needs to appreciate how influential the success of the Clinton campaign in 1992 has been on the practice of politics.

-- more --

He's a fighter, he's clear-eyed and clear-speaking, he energized and excites not just the base but people who've felt completely alienated from politics for a long time if not their entire lives. Spend some time on his blog, especially reading the Comments from Supporters (click "commnents" link under each entry).

http://www.blogforamerica.com/

He's also revolutionizing politics and wouldn't it be fabulous to have someone in office who's not bought, doesn't owe anything to anyone but The People? (He doesn't get near enough credit for this on DU, IMO, but then there are a lot of professional Dean-bashers on the board.) Even if I disgreed with him about more of his policies than I do, I'd be real tempted to support him for these facts alone.

Eloriel

[NewYorkerfromMass]

14. Dean clear-eyed and clear-speaking?

Can you tell me where he is on pre-emptive war? Good luck nailing him down too.

[redqueen]

6. Gotta go with Kucinich

He's 'prematurely right' on his Iraq exit strategy.

He's proven to be capable at getting support from both parties.

He's bound to have the longest coattails due to his broad appeal to the base.

He's the most likely to heal our country and repair our alliances with our former allies as well as build new ones.

Put plainly: he's the best hope for America.

Plus, the whole world is watching. :)

[TLM]

8. What broad appeal does DK have?

If he has such broad appeal, why is he polling less than Sharpton?

Kucinich is not even popular within the democratic party, let alone the general voting public.

[redqueen]

11. I know many Kucitizens have pointed this out before...

most people don't even know his name, much less what he stands for.

People can't really decide if they support a candidate if they don't know who he is or what he stands for.

When you consider that most people don't want to be stuck in Iraq for years and years, and prefer universal health coverage (that means for EVERYBODY not just the poor, or the young), etc... he really does appeal to a lot of people.

Overwhelmingly, the main reason most who know about him don't support him is because of the 'electability' myth. And due to past lessons learned, I'll point out the obvious inferred in that statement: those who have issue disagreements are not included in that group. :)

[WilliamPitt]

7. ABB

Why? Because otherwise you...

[TLM]

9. Dean all the way... and Clark is a very very bad man.

"The reason I lean Dean right now is because he's the only one who seems to be willing to say what he thinks, and to challenge the insane orthodoxy in the national dialogue that's being driven by GOP talking points (actually, to his credit, I think Gore is doing the same). When I hear Kerry, Clark, even Gephardt to some extent, I think DLC talking points. They don't want to come off as too extremist, and they seem more concerned about triangulating themselves as moderates than in fighting for what's right and important. Maybe I'm wrong."


No, you're right on. Kerry, CLark, Gephardt and lieberman all have that damn annoying way of answering a question with some pontificating platatude that means nothing, and avoid taking a real stand on anything. They want to ride the fence to avoid offending anybody, and as a result they also to not inspire anybody.

Look at Kucinich and SHarpton, both inspire people because they don;t sit on the fence. They coem right out and say what they think too, but neither of them are presidential material. Kucinich is too shrill and Sharpton is well... Sharpton.

Dean speaks the same straightforward way, but he also has the charm and demenor of an experienced leader... a winning combination.

Take the leadership and charm of Clinton, the intelligence of Clark, and the passion of Kucinich, and you get Howard Dean.


"I'm not one of the Dean guys by any means, but he's grown on me. "

That's how we all started. Just wait until you meet him or at least get to see him speak in person.



And on Clark... look into who he worked for when he left the military, and I bet you'll find him much less appealing.

[loudnclear]

10. I have to go with Kucinich.

After listening to him on Talk of the Nation today, I feel certain that he is the only candidate who will not be "Bush-lite." Even Dean does not line up squarely with my positions on all the issues.

Dennis will catch hell for wanting to decrimianlize "pot" but I agree with him on this too.

[redqueen]

12. Can't wait to hear the streamed interview!

My local affiliate doesn't broadcast that show. :(

He's a stand up guy, so I'm not surprised he went the courageous route and took a stand on decriminalizing a substance that's less harmful than alcohol! :D

Go Kooch!

[morgan2]

13. Kucinich

I was serving on Jury duty today and had a long time sitting around reading old Time Magazines they had lying around. I read an article from back in May by Joe Klien about the Democratic party and what they need. While I think Klien is a dolt, he had a few good points. His main argument is that the Democratic party has no convictions and no political courage. On almost every issue they take a stand on, it's on that is already popular. He went on to describe how the "6 viable" candidates were all this kind of Clinton Democrat. This is where his article started to contradict itself. I would say the three candidates he didn't consider viable, Kucinich, Sharpton and to some extent Mosley Braun, are the ones that do have convictions and political courage. I would be happy with Kucinich or Sharpton, but I think Kucinich has more experience and a clearer plan for the country. He is my top choice by far, and think because he does have convictions and courage his nomination would be the best for the Democratic party and the country, win or lose against Bush in 2004.