Monday, January 22, 2007

Sums it up for me EXACTLY

If Hillary Clinton is the nominee in 2008 I'll vote for her. But until then, she is absolutely my last choice among the announced candidates.

It has a little something to do with her constant triangulation, a trait of her husbands that also drove me nuts. I also don't want a President just to the left of Joe Lieberman. But that is not the main reason.

Mostly it is this, and I know it is seemingly petty but nevertheless in the long-run I think it is important.

We are supposed to be a democracy not an oligarchy (or at least we should pretend to be the former). I know that is naive, but nonetheless I think we should at least keep the appearance. I simply cannot abide the United States going Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton. It's disturbingly anti-democratic looking if nothing else. This from David Kurtz sums up my thoughts exactly (apparently it is Talking Points Memo day here):

I think you may have touched on this before, but I'd like to reiterate the single biggest mental block that currently makes me think I will not cast my vote for Clinton. It makes my stomach hurt to think that in twenty or thirty years I could look back at a list of presidents that includes "Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton." This country is far too great to have to rely on two families for so much presidential leadership. Think about it: a two-term Hillary would be TWENTY-EIGHT years of Bush and Clinton. It's petty, but like I said it's a mental block, and I'm just not sure how I can get over it.

On the Democratic side I would vote for anyone but Hillary Clinton for the nomination, unless Joe Lieberman or Zell Miller enters the race. It's nothing about her capabilities, rather it is a block I cannot get over. There are many other candidates available of both sexes available that I would gladly vote for over Ms. Clinton.

Besides people, do you really want to enable another Bush to run in 2012?


No comments: