by smackwpc20 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 7:09 am
I was recently at a conference where Chris Matthews was one of the keynote speakers. He said that Obama was the most "exciting, erudite, and inspiring" political candidate that he had ever seen. While I am a bit concerned at the amount of experience that Obama has, I can't help but agree with Matthews' assessment of Obama's appeal. I am afraid that a McCain presidency would mean more of the same policies from the current administration. While McCain is certainly different than W and while I do feel that he would be more successful working with the Democratic leadership in Congress than W, I am still not totally convinced that he is the best answer. So I guess my analyses of the three remaining candidates can be broken down as follows:
McCain - plenty of experience, not afraid to go out on his own to get things done, can work with the other side of the aisle. But - still hasn't convinced me that he will work aggressively to end the war in Iraq or deal with the serious economic problems facing the U.S.
Obama - passion-filled, inspiring, and purpose-driven. Has been accused of lacking substance. Actually, if you listen to him speak and drown out the cheering and hysterics that have come to characterize his rallies, Obama has indeed offered substance and solutions. Lately, he is unfairly being held responsible for comments made by supporters. Candidates cannot be accountable for every word spoken by his or her supporters. HOWEVER, if a candidate's supporters are also members of the campaign staff and continue to speak "out of school" (e.g., Ferraro, Power, etc), the candidates should take necessary steps to let those people go. I think that Obama is more likely than Clinton to reach across party lines. Obama doesn't have a long political resume but maybe we could use a fresh perspective on things. I tend to agree with Obama's reasoning that if we send the same people back to Washington, the same things will happen. It's like the unofficial definition of insanity - "doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results."
Clinton - she's tough, has some pretty good experience in both domestic and foreign affairs. But she has made a lot of enemies over the years. Not very likely to have the ability to work well with Republicans. Missed the opportunity to outright fire Ferraro for the racially charged comments made about Obama. Such commentary should not and cannot be tolerated by a candidate for President of the United States. Has shown her "soft" side during the campaign which is refreshing. Clinton is very smart - no doubt about that. She's determined but also comes across as stubborn and unwilling to listen to alternative solutions (that sounds alot like W's way of doing things.)
As you can see, I haven't yet decided on my pick for President. I am leaning a certain way but will need some more time to make a final decision. On the Democratic side, my hope is that we can get past the race/gender issue and make this campaign about more pressing issues. Specifically - the economy (NO candidate from either party has adequately addressed the economic downturn which, in my opinion, has been partially caused by out of control spending at the state and federal levels), the war in Iraq (we need to get serious about solutions), and education (we are the wealthiest nation in the world, have access to the best resources, yet our students rank far below where they should in many subject areas. That's deplorable.)
Anyhow - those are my thoughts.....as of now.