21 posts tagged “candidate”
“A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues.”
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of the user.”
“Every reform movement has a lunatic fringe.”
“If you could kick the person in the pants responsible for most of your trouble, you wouldn't sit for a month.”
“In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.”
“It is difficult to make our material condition better by the best law, but it is easy enough to ruin it by bad laws.”
“The most important single ingredient in the formula of success is knowing how to get along with people.”
“The most practical kind of politics is the politics of decency.”
“The most successful politician is he who says what the people are thinking most often in the loudest voice.”
‘When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer "Present" or "Not guilty."’
“THE THINGS THAT WILL DESTROY AMERICA ARE PROSPERITY-AT-ANY-PRICE, PEACE-AT-ANY-PRICE, SAFETY-FIRST INSTEAD OF DUTY-FIRST, THE LOVE OF SOFT LIVING, AND THE GET-RICH-QUICK THEORY OF LIFE.”
The person quoted here is my favorite president of all time…Theodore Roosevelt. Strength, intelligence and straight forward, while also a man of honor and integrity and decency. (the decency is the biggest thing missing from all of the presidential campaigns of recent years.
The whole rock star status of Senator Barack Obama is proven true. He may not be the most qualified candidate ever, but he is definitely popular in many places.
I am a bit confused however about how the votes from Brazil count in the presidential election of the United States.
Brazil must count, because the name of Barack Obama is on the ballots of eight or more local elections in Brazil.
The truth is candidates can put any name they want to on the ballot as their name as long as it is not offensive. The name Barack Obama seems to be a popular one this year and several people apparently seem to think that this name alone is all that is needed to get elected.
That was the way many felt here until the Republican National Convention and the Sara Palin meteor that seems to have crashed into our atmosphere at a million miles an hour in a spectacular display and now seems to be burning out in a fiery explosion of media scrutiny.
The question that I see here again is, why people “like” or “vote for” the candidates they vote for. These candidates in Brazil seem to think that a popular name is all that is needed to get elected. I wonder if this is not at least in part the truth.
For a week straight we heard no mention of John McCain unless it was tied to the name Sarah Palin. Many people suddenly decided Senator McCain was qualified to be president because they either liked Sarah Palin or liked the fact she was a woman.
Need I even say why many of the voters who like Barack Obama are voting for him…
If only there was a way to just get the relevant facts about candidates and not know who they were until after we voted, the world would be so much more logical. But then, what would all of the bloggers have to write about?
Here we are going into September, near the end of the Democratic Convention and the biggest rival Senator Barack Obama has is…Senator Hillary Clinton?
How can this be? How do the Clintons get more airtime and media attention than the nominee, Senator Obama?
I have to question how this man intends to unite the country and the world while he cannot even unify his own party. The independent voters and unsure Republicans in particular have a hard time thinking he can carry out anything if he cannot even get his own party behind his ideas.
The government is divided enough with two parties fighting and being childish without separating the members of one of those parties and in reality pitting three groups against each other in a fight to the death (although it is others that seem to do the suffering and dying while they sit on Capitol Hill playing games).
This potential scenario is quite scary. If that is the new Washington we are being promised, it is actually worse than what Washington is now. Tri-partisan politics under the president of a kingdom divided against itself.
In Senator Obama’s defense I have to admit two things.
The first is that while Senator Clinton has stated all of the right things over the past few days, she has been slow to undo the damage she did to Senator Obama in the brutal cage match that they had against each other.
A simple statement to the effect of: “I know I said that Senator Obama was not ready to lead or to beat Senator McCain, but the experience and growth both of us has had over the past few months on the campaign trail has made him obviously a far stronger candidate than he would have been without our brutal battle and things that were true than have been proven not to be the case now.”
That is the kind of political statement a person who was truly supporting a candidate would make. Her whole case over the past few days as to why we should vote for Senator Obama is that Senator McCain is such a terrible choice (not that I disagree, but it is not a very strong case for Senator Obama).
The second is that the diehard Democrats and Hillary Clinton supporters who seem to be holding out on Senator Obama all seem to be total wing-nuts whenever they are interviewed. I honestly tried to hear their case with an open mind but they sound so silly, petty, and spiteful that I cannot take them seriously.
This one lady I saw on Larry King yesterday named Elizabeth Joyce stated she was not ready to vote for Obama because she doesn’t “vote on the first date” and that he hadn’t “courted” her vote enough yet.
She basically stated that she wants to vote for the person most adept at behind kissing. Not whoever she believes is most qualified, will do the best job, who most represents her values, or even who is more likable, or any of that. She sat on national television as a representative of the progress and strength of women in 2008 and said the key to the votes of strong women like her was political foreplay (I personally think she just set the cause she represents back thirty to forty years in one interview).
This was not an isolated incident (although it may have been the stupidest that I saw). All of the people I heard trying to defend this stand basically made it clear they were making a political statement by not voting for Senator Obama. Most of them would state however that they felt he was a better choice than Senator McCain. A political statement? Who are these people who would throw away what they themselves believe to be better for the nation, the world, and all of us just to make some point.
This is the party Senator Obama is supposed to represent in his plan to unify and run our great nation and this is the result of his candidacy.
Whatever the reason is for how it happened, I am not finding a lot of hope in what I am seeing.
I have been quietly watching Senator McCain and trying to see if there was anything to hope for beyond what I already knew. I tried to have an open mind and was again disappointed.
Over the past few weeks I have watched Senator McCain get on the offensive (and yes it was definitely offensive). I actually was okay with the first few attacks and political ploys, but it has really gotten tired.
I could not place how I was feeling about him until I heard somebody describe him as reminding him of the grumpy elderly people down the street that we all remember for always yelling at the neighborhood children for making too much noise or for stepping on their grass etc.. That hit it on the head. He strikes me as just some grumpy person that that is just angry at a bunch of stuff.
I have also watched him and anyone who supports him build on Senator Hillary Clinton’s theme of his extensive experience in government service.
I was thinking about that and the first images that came to my mind were
- Me watching the news sometime in the late eighties or early nineties and suddenly hearing a song from the very political rap group “Public Enemy” playing on the local news. This caught my attention and although I do not remember which song it was, I will always remember the kinda scary looking gentleman that was the topic of the news story. The story was about the people who were fighting against the Martin Luther King holiday and that “poster child” for this movement perceived to be anti-African American was one Senator John McCain.
- I remember flipping through the channels at some point in history and seeing some guys from the government in some kind of legal trouble and trying to defend themselves. Apparently there was a question of some possible shady dealings and one of those men was this Senator McCain fellow.
- I remember being vaguely interested in the 2000 elections and suddenly this one guy busts out and says a bunch of anti-Christian stuff and blows his stack. I remember thinking to myself; “Isn’t that that crazy guy who fought against the Martin Luther King holiday.”
In sports I have had several coaches that made a correction to a popular saying. The popular saying is “practice makes perfect.” The correction is “No! Perfect practice makes perfect. If you practice it wrong you will only do it wrong in the games and lose.”
Just time spent in the government does not make a person a good president especially if the memories I have are any indicator of what we can expect of McCain presidency.
Court cases, angry outbursts, and the end of those pesky tributes to African Americans. I know it sounds a little extreme, but I am not the only person who has these scattered memories along with some vague recollection of his wife in some kind of trouble for prescription drug addiction.
I honestly have not given these things much thought until the recent push to focus on Senator McCain’s ever so incredible and extensive political experience. I went through the memory banks and this is what was buried back there. Research has revealed much more good and bad, but I am still haunted by these images.
I am even more haunted by the idea of similar images coming from a president of our great nation.
And if I hear one more person defend their plans to vote for Senator McCain by stating he or she doesn’t trust Senator Obama or because he or she wanted Senator Clinton to win the nomination I promise to vomit on them. Not voting for him because he would be a good president, can save us from the current messes, or even is a good candidate, but to spite the other candidate a person would put the fate of our nation and all of it’s inhabitants in the hands of someone they do not truly believe would be a better candidate. A person who would do something this careless and reckless should have their right to vote taken away.
I have yet to see any reason to vote for either candidate from the major parties and yet have reason upon reason why neither one is a safe bet for the Whitehouse.
I am beginning to think there isn’t even a lesser evil. It is like asking which person in the morgue is deader or in effect which is the “lesser” dead? They are all dead and that is that.
Both of these candidates are terrible and that is that!
The Battle for Republican presidential hopeful is about to takeoff at full speed. The big problem Senator McCain is gong to have is that this battle is with the conservatives within his own party.
Senator John McCain, who has had more than his share of troubles with the more conservative of his party, has been trying to straddle the fence and keep both the moderates of his party and the ultraconservatives happy. Both ends (and the middle of his party) have been carefully watching him with one eyebrow raised.
While Senator McCain was using the gopher campaign technique (staying underground and poking his head out every once in while, here and there) and letting the democrats annihilate each other, this problem seemed to be dissipating.
Now that the campaign has moved into the phase where you start to see each of the candidates more and more, there is a push to have him clearly make a stand on some issues that are important within his party.
The few stands he has made have not been popular with the conservative end of his party and the conservatives are ready to confront this head-on beginning at the Republican Convention.
What this means is that the riding the fence days are over. He is going to have to make the clear stands and risk loosing the votes of those that do not approve.
The troubling part (if you are a Republican) is that your candidate has made it to July and is drifting away from having the party united instead of just going through the last needed changes to finish unifying the party. It is as if his campaign is in reverse.
Both Senator McCain and Senator Obama seem to having problems unifying their parties, but Senator McCain seems to be headed in the wrong direction.
The real question is; can the Moderate Republicans, the Ultra-conservative Republicans, and those somewhere in between come together and agree with Senator McCain.
If not there will be third, forth, and fifth party candidates this election season that will be looking to happily take those votes from him and absolutely destroy his chances of becoming president.
I for one am very curious where this is headed and wonder how those in his campaign will seek to unify the soon to be warring factions.
In an interview with the Rocky Mountain News on Monday, Independent Party presidential hopeful (it is hard to type that without believing it should be followed by a punchline), Ralph Nader, made some very interesting statements.
When asked what is different about Senator Obama relative to other democrats he has run against, he stated that the only difference was that Senator Obama is “half African-American.” Oh yes he did. He went there.
He also said that Senator Obama is trying to (are you sure you are ready for this, hold on to your chair) “talk white.”
Did a person running for president actually accuse another candidate of talking white? Seroiusly?
It is interesting that the other candidates have mostly relied on their supporters and spouses to say incredibly stupid things, but not Mr. Nader. He doesn’t need others to do his “stupid” work, he is perfectly capable of doing that himself.
This crazy candidate (I will avoid the other descriptive terms that come to mind) even took a shot at Jessie Jackson while trying to explain why Senator Obama is talking white. He stated that one of the reasons he is talking white is (hold on, I have to compose myself) he doesn’t want to “appear like Jessie Jackson.”
Holy smokes!
Is this guy for real? I seriously think he has come to believe that he can gain more support than he has gotten in past elections by getting the racist vote.
Remember all of the talk about voter who said race mattered in the elections mostly voting for Senator Clinton. It seems he heard that and decided that being a racist was his best bet in trying to get support.
I have looked at comments on several blogs and some chats on the subject and this foolishness seems to have some support.
As for me, a person who does not belong to political party, I have to say I hate to have to refer to myself as an independent voter for fear that I will be associated to such an person (I’m being politically correct and nice instead of using many of the other descriptive terms that come to mind for this person).
Just to leave us with a thought, what exactly are the implications of saying that a person of color or of mixed origin can attempt to “talk white?”
Is he referring to that fact he does not use slang or “Ebonics” or sound like any of the rap stars on the television. That would mean that he is saying that those who are white and “talk white” are okay in sounding educated, but any person of color or mixed origin who “talks white” is faking it to distance themselves from someone (as Mr. Nader implies) as stupid as Jessie Jackson or other persons of color.
Is he saying that “talking white” speaks of people who have money and that he is avoiding talking about those in the inner cities and poor neighborhoods of our country. As if there are no people of color in these better neighborhoods and only people of color live in poor areas and inner cities.
Need I go on? How dare anyone who is not a publicly proclaimed racist support this man. This is an assault on our sensibilities and the Independent party has a responsibility to all of us who call ourselves Americans to pull the plug on this racist madman.
Another blogger recently made some very good comments about third party candidates on one of my blogs. The basic point was that having a competitive third party candidate most often will not get that person elected but slip the votes between that person and the other party closest to what they stand for.
If that third party candidate leans a little left the votes would split between that person and the Democratic candidate. If the third party candidate leans a little to the right the votes would be split between that person and the Republican candidate. The split would allow the unified vote on the other side of the spectrum to win the election and reduce that third party candidate to the role of spoiler and never really lead to a successful candidate.
In thinking about this, I find the evidence to support this hypothesis to be very strong. This is worrisome to me. The party system we have in place is clearly broken and these facts clearly show that there is no hope otherwise.
Maybe if there were to just be one other serious party (along with all of those minor parties that get like one to two percent of the vote every four years) that represented the area closer to the middle. Not too right, not too left, just in the area near the middle.
Obviously, there would be conflicts within this party on some issues and some areas that members of this party could possibly never agree upon, but this party would best represent the average American.
I also think that two serious contenders for the title of president is clearly not enough. The only alternatives we are left with are ridiculously irrelevant and a waste of our time.
The only way there will really be change is if the voters come together and vote for someone else from another party who represents the overall values of the people. That would first require a highly qualified candidate that would attract all of these voters form both ends of the spectrum and was different enough from the other candidates to really represent change.
The sad fact id that I personally have not seen a person even close to this and I think that the other candidates who are running are in fact simply the spoilers who will devour the campaigns of the parties they used to belong to.
Swiftboating has been resurrected and again has raised concerns or at least questions.
Senator Barack Obama separated himself from a statement made by retired General Wesley Clark, while Senator John McCain went on the defensive against this comment. General Clark made several statements on the “Face the Nation” show on CBS’, but I must admit that that most memorable comment was “I don’t think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president.” Although, rude, unnecessary, and possibly outright stupid, there is a valid question raised here.
The real point of the conversation or the real question raised is: “Does his individual military experience make him any more qualified to be president of an entire country?”
I have to say that in reality the question raised here for me is: “Does any of the past actions of either of these candidates demonstrate their readiness to be president?”
From what I have seen the only thing that we have established about these candidates is that they may be schizophrenic and are terrible at choosing supporters to work with their campaigns.
The person who is elected will as part of the job be Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces of the United States.
What is there on Senator Barack Obama’s resume that qualifies him for this job? Absolutely nothing!
On the other hand Senator John McCain at least was a military officer. I do have a personal problem with his service however.
He is in my view a great war hero and a better man than most for having lived through what he lived through in Viet Nam.
The problem I have is one of expecting more from the troops than you expected of yourself. When I was a child (in a family where every man served this country during wartime for several generations) I was told that a good leader is on who does not expect more from his subordinates than he or she expects of him or herself.
When I was in the military I was taught that if captured, I was to kill myself rather than to talk or give in to the enemy. The whole “Death Before Dishonor” thing! I was repeatedly fed the fact that I was to remain “always faithful” (Semper Fidelis) to God, country and corps even if it meant killing myself rather that to be dishonored.
The truth is that I am not convinced I could have done this and think few could. The thing is I was raised to believe in an ideal. That ideal is the president should be the best of the best particularly in terms of military service.
While a great man, I do not think it fair to demand such service from those that are under you when you could not do it yourself.
What I am getting at is that I do not believe that either candidate is even close to qualified to command our armed forces, but I do think that Senator McCain is far more qualified as he at least has some experience.
As a side note, I have to add that one of the biggest atrocities that has happened to our men and women in the armed forces was that a man who dodged the draft was allowed to be Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. This actually was one of the main reasons that I left the military. Think that president (Bill Clinton) was a slap in the face of all of those who have served and those that have died for our nation.
That all being said I think this is a valid discussion, but the punches needs to remain above the belt. The candidates themselves are trying to give the appearance that they are above the fray and not participating in such tactics, but their respective camps are not so “above the fray.”
It seems that that role of Commander-in-Chief has been largely neglected over the past several presidencies and for the past several years. This presidency, far more than most, will need a person of this understanding and that is a motivation to all of those asked to be willing to give their lives to do whatever their country asks of them through the president. That means even if they do not agree with the battle, war, conflict, police action, or whatever.
P.S. Just to make all of this a little more odd a group of Republican senators and military officers jumped to Senator McCain’s defense on a phone call arranged by Senator McCain’s campaign. This group stated that these statement s were “Complete silliness,” “Beyond comprehension,” “A very indecent thing,” and so on. I suppose they wanted to make sure that we all know that the Republican Party is completely opposed to Swiftboating.
The funny thing here is that the Democrats were quick to point out that one of those military officers, retired Air Force Colonel, Bud Day, was actually on the “Swift Boat” add that coined the phrase Swiftboating. For those that don’t remember, those were the adds that cast doubt on the medals earned by Democratic candidate John Kerry in Viet Nam. Now one of the people from that add is crying foul saying that these statements are “A very indecent thing”
Again, the McCain campaign has demonstrated that as a campaign, there is terrible problems in picking people to support Senator McCain publically.
I guess you have to love the irony.
All this talk of “flip-flopping” and supporting evidence from everywhere; can we trust either of these people? What is going on? It’s like there is a flip-flop fever going around.
The camps of both major party’s hopefuls for president have been ramping up the rhetoric about the other candidate’s “flip-flops” and inconsistencies. When one follows the facts, the truth is that both candidates have had major flip-flops over the past year. Flip-flops big enough to make one wonder; “Who the heck are these people and what do they stand for?”
The truth of the matter is that June and July historically are the months when candidates retool their message and their stands to move a little closer to the center and away from the extreme ends of their party’s ideals to appeal to larger voting segments.
What makes it different this year? I think there are two things that are different.
I think with Senator Obama, his voting record shows him to be almost as far to the left as one can be, while his rhetoric, campaigning, and speeches make him appear to be very close to the middle and as “The Candidate of Change.” There a already many huge question marks about who he really is to begin with without him changing the message again.
For Senator McCain, he already has done more and more to alienate the far right within his party over the past eight or nine years and who he really is also warrants a huge question mark from his would be supporters. Many of the things he stands for and represents already is a hard sell to people in the middle or on the right at any level. Keep in mind that he represents the same party as the largely unpopular current president which makes his candidacy a hard sell as it is. He has somehow got to get the support of the right and the middle at the same time when both are skeptical to begin with and he is even going so far as to try to draw from the right betting on the fallout from the Democratic primaries. For those who are not already set on a candidate or a party (voting for a candidate simply because of party affiliation at this point in history with all that could happen over the next four years is not only stupid but grossly negligent) his message seems to be all over the map and makes him even less understandable to us.
The other reason I think this is such a big deal this year is the fact that there are more mediums that will verify what they are saying and more people who are apt to research such things.
How many of us have heard something stated by one of the candidates and then by the next day heard and read a firestorm of contradictions stated by the same person as noted on “factcheck.org” or other such organizations.
What I am saying is that the microscope has grown more powerful for this year’s elections and the candidates are under much more focused scrutiny. I suspect that if previous candidates had been under the same level of scrutiny as the current candidates history would be vastly different.
Are the candidates “flip-flopping” and still undefined? Absolutely! Are these candidates distancing themselves from their own past stands and voting records? Absolutely? When I look at both of their past stands and voting records, this is not really a bad thing if we are talking about a true change of heart.
The problem is, will this newly retooled and refined candidate show up in the Whitehouse if elected president or is it all for votes? I for one sure do like the candidates’ campaign faces a lot better than what the facts show.
Senator John McCain and his advisors finally picked a subject to attack Senator Barack Obama with that actually helps his campaign. Until now the topics Senator McCain’s camp has been addressing seem to only be targeted at getting approval from those who are already his strongest supporters already.
Senator McCain went before small business owners and said flat out that Senator Obama is bad for business. As Senator Obama is speaking of tax breaks for the general population and increasing taxes on businesses (the latest example is big oil) Senator McCain is speaking to the businesses saying: “Hey! This means more taxes for you and less profit!”
This serves to make all of the rhetoric about how to fix he economy look a lot different to American business owners.
Another smart benefit that Senator McCain gets from this ploy, is that while Senator Obama has been a campaign contribution machine that has been getting millions of dollars from lots of small contribution s from lots of donors this starts massaging the large donors that are largely untapped by the Obama campaign. This says, “I am the candidate that will give you return on your investment in me” to the business owners.
This appears to finally be the real start to Senator McCain’s serious campaigning as much of the rest of what has transpired from his camp over the past few months seemed to be just killing time until real campaigning started.
There is however, another side to this coin. There is the risk of appearing to be the “Same Old Washington” candidate who steals from the poor to buy support from the rich.
Senator Obama responded to Senator McCain’s accusations by discussing things like three-hundred billion dollar tax breaks and loopholes for big corporations and the wealthiest Americans to start to show this as the nest wave of media we will be hearing.
I have to admit, that while I agree that we need businesses to stay open or there is no economy, I do have to wonder if it is not rewarding businesses and the rich while hanging the general population out to dry in the hopes of saving the economy. Maybe, something in between the rhetoric of the two camps is much more realistic.
As I have repeatedly stated that I am not a big fan of either of these candidates much in terms of becoming our commander and chief. The thing is, if I am going to end up casting my vote for the lesser evil, for lack of a better choice, I would like to know that there was a good campaign that dealt with real issues. Like the ref before a boxing match I want to see a good clean fight. I do not just want one candidate to just pummel the other one in the media and at the ballot boxes.
This is finally a good and sensible start to Senator McCain’s campaign against Senator Obama although it is very risky and may backfire. I think it is also good that actual issues for right now have come to the surface for discussion.
I hope to hear more about different sides of the issues (including both candidates’ strange voting records that seem to contradict their campaign rhetoric) and less about the candidate’s friends and distant acquaintances.
Maybe the real campaign has finally has begun at last.
