I hope all the nay-sayers that qualified their safe-bets on Clinton by saying that the instant Obama gets the nomination they’ll support him whole-heartedly keep their word. It was this thread, back in February, where I first learned that there were people who thought Obama was the better candidate but were too afraid to put him forward as the standard bearer, all gently chiding you for your naiveté.

We’ll need their help in November.

“As a Pennsylvanian, I don’t get to vote until it’s too late to matter.”

Oh, how times change. Europe for Obama!

Purely from a battlefront standpoint, I DO support Obama as the Democratic candidate, but probably not in the general election. Here’s why:
I don’t trust Hillary – When she speaks, she does not seem genuine. When Obama speaks, he seems to deeply care about the future – he seems passionate, he really is filled with hope.
Now, I think Hillary would be easier for a republican candidate to beat in a General Election because of her political history – prejudices against the Clintons will overshadow anything she says for many conservative leaning candidates. Although I think she may be easier to defeat, I support Obama as part of a “cut your losses” thing.

I’m not sure I want him to win because I disagree with him on several issues, however – if he did win I would trust him to honorably hold the position. I don’t trust Clinton to do that. (Although I might give Billy another go – I just really dislike his wife.)

All THAT said however, i’m not to big on McCain. The republican had really lousy candidates this year, you’d think they’d bring their A game, but nooooo.

I’ll be surprised if we get another republican.

An interviewer asked him if he thought that race would be an issue (or whatever; paraphrased, of course).

Obama says something like: I don’t care about race. I mean, I won in Illinois (I think it was, sry), and that state’s 12.8% black (not 100% on this EXACT stat).

And my brother, who’s walking by, looks at the screen and goes: “Well, if he doesn’t care about race, then how does he know that lil’ statistic?”

I did a double-take and went, “AW! I NEVER would have caught that!”

(My bro kinda shrugged, and said, “Doesn’t matter anyway. The real power’s not in the White House.” Then he left; I never found out what he meant, but I have theories. Anywho.).

The dems like to play the peace tambourine during an election cycle to keep their base interested, but when push comes to shove, they know what is at stake and they wouldn’t dare put themselves in the situation where they could be blamed for either a humanitarian disaster in Iraq, or more terrorist attacks on US soil.

I highly doubt Obama will be the democratic candidate. The Clinton’s have barely begun to delve into their bag of dirty tricks. When Bill and Hillary get backed into a corner, thats when they get downright criminal. Trust me, if Obama pulls this out, it will be a miracle. You Obama supporters will get a good taste of what the Republicans had to deal with in the ’90s.

His campaign is the only one that I haven’t seen any negative campaigning from. I haven’t heard a single lie, mistruth or half truth spun into a mistruth from his campaign. I’ve completely given up on the Republican party to put forward a candidate who really stands up. McCain came close, but he’s been absorbed into the whole neo-con movement that I find deeply offensive.

My personal beliefs tend away from the socialist views of modern democrats, but Barack Obama’s continued support in his speeches for the people in America to get involved has inspired me. His claims that he will do everything he can to make the business of governing transparent to the governed gives me hope.

Hope that the culture of corruption in the federal government will find in him as ardent of an opponent as he is on the campaign trail.

Hope that electing President Obama will be the first, best statement that the days of American policy dictated by corporate interest are well and truly over.

Hope that our government can get closer to a place where the actions and policies of our legislature will support the constitution and bill of rights and oppose hate and discrimination.

Electing Obama will put a real dent in the current lobby-mill in Washington. He has pledged that anyone who leaves his administration will not be allowed to lobby his administration. This means that the people working for his administration do it out of love for their country, not love of a cushy lobbying job after they leave.

Electing Obama will mean more transparency in government. He supports actions which would make any government action not directly classified by national security interests public and visible on the internet. He supports an end to no-bid contracts and back-room deals which sell off American interests for the financial interest of politicians.

Electing Obama will prove that you can win an election without accepting a dime from special interests. That President will then stand the best chance of withstanding those special interests who want their interests advanced before the interests of the American public.

Electing Obama will put a man in office dedicated to supporting the Constitution after an administration that seemed intent on destroying it. Barack Obama taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago. We need someone to respond to the unconstitutional power grabs of the current administration with a true sensitivity to that Constitution. Someone who can not only inspire, but at the end of the day who will take real action to restore those checks and balances vitally necessary to move our government away from the authoritarian state it is becoming and back towards the democratic ideals the founding fathers foresaw.

So, lets put a candidate in office for whom principle trumps politics. A candidate who is truly interested in being the best President he knows how to be. A candidate who knows that special interest politics does not make a good President. Who knows that the Constitution is the embodiment of the source of his power, the document which conveys power from the American people to the President as well as defining the limits which maintain our Democracy. Undermining this document does not make a good President. A candidate who is willing to work across any divide, whether that divide is party, race or class, to accomplish the work of the people. Using these divides for political gain, even if you think what you are accomplishing is for the good of the people, does not make a good President.

This is my view of Barack Obama. I haven’t seen anything yet that has tarnished any bit of this view.

I have heard that he gave a speech opposing the war and then removed it from his website, but research on the “Internet Wayback Machine” has proved that claim to be false. Obama has always opposed the war.

I have heard that his vote supporting funding for the war is inconsistent with his stand against the war. This vote was in support of our military on the front lines. It was not in support of the politics that got us there in the first place.

I heard that although he claims that it was not until recently that he wanted to become President that his own writings dispute this. What they neglected to add to this was that those writings were literally from papers Obama wrote in Kindergarten and First Grade. If you can hold statements we make as young children against us, we’re all doomed.

Now, I have a hard time believing that anyone is perfect. I’m completely willing to believe that there are skeletons in his closet somewhere and he just hasn’t been in public office long enough for them to come out. His speeches are inspiring, though, and his politics inclusive and transparent. This means that unless he completely changes after election he will have a hard time avoiding it if he fails to live up to his campaign. His speeches are so inspiring that they will remembered and if he works half as hard for transparency as he claims he will, his every action of his as President will be available for the entire world to scrutinize. This means that whatever those skeletons are, everyone will know about them and he’s going to have such a hard time covering them up that he will have to deal with them.

Any time you advocate for a candidate and any time you vote you are investing in a dream. The dream that candidate will end up in office. Whether that is a dream or a nightmare depends on three things:

First, it depends on the claims the candidate makes in their campaign. I must say, Obama’s speeches are filled with hope for his Presidency and even though there is a lot of inspiration, the inspirational speech has not drowned out the real changes he is proposing.

Second it depends on whether that candidate will follow through once they are elected. Obama’s history as an Illinois State Senator and US Senator for the State of Illinois suggest that he will.

Finally, it depends on whether the candidate can work with the rest of the government to accomplish the change they are attempting. Obama’s inspiration will go a long way towards accomplishing this. Combine that fact with the current power held by the Democratic Party and I feel that he really has the best chance of anyone to really accomplish his goals.

The dream of America I hear from Barack Obama is the best dream I’ve ever heard from a candidate as long as I’ve been paying attention. I’m willing to do everything I can to give that dream the best chance at becoming reality.

I’m not sure if this will change anyone’s view, but it sure feels good to actually put it down.

Alex Wollangk

I realize that Obama has said some good sounding things about information and internet freedom. However, with all of the spending proposals he’s pushing, I don’t think that will be the problem everyone will be facing. There is only one candidate left in the race that will push for all freedoms, cut taxes, reduce spending, and attempt to get us off of our deep reliance on foreign loans to run the country. That’s why Ron Paul is the only candidate I can support. I think a lot of people discount him simply because they see the R next to his name. But, think about it like this:

He’s a true conservative, which means that he strongly opposes the war, and unlike Hillary, never voted for it. He strongly opposes the patriot act, and strongly defends all of our civil liberties. These are classic conservative principals, but the “main stream” Republicans have gotten so far from this that most people don’t know it. So, if we want absolutely NO chance of having a pro-war, pro-police state Republican in the general election, then everyone should vote in the Republican primary for Ron Paul.

I strongly believe that there is very little difference between all of the other candidates on both sides. The Democrats will support your civil liberties, but will completely fail on financial freedom. The Republicans (other than Dr. Paul) will not protect your civil liberties, and as we’ve seen in the last 8 years, the new Republicans won’t protect your financial freedom either.

Just Google Ron Paul for his positions on all of these things. He’s got a very long record in the House of putting his votes where his mouth is, which is not something that can be said for any other candidate.

If you are indeed a “liberal” by the definition given by a previous post, and you vote based on principal alone, then you must consider Ron Paul. If you vote for either Obama or Clinton you’re getting someone who will do many of the same things. So if you leave that race to the people who care deeply one way or the other, and instead vote in the Republican race for Dr. Paul, then you’ll have 2 candidates in the general race that are for repealing the Patriot Act, and ending the war. I personally can’t support either Obama or Clinton because I feel that they’re over-promising with the spending programs. We can’t afford the programs we have now. The only method for getting money to do the things they’re proposing is to print new money, which devalues the money that we all already have, and therefore causes huge inflation.

Just my $0.02

Thanks for the incredible songs Jonathan. They make my world brighter

Obama’s probably my choice now, but I’d be happy with Clinton to. I *do* remember ‘her last term in office’, and as someone that’s been getting kicked around by our shoddy excuse for an economy and job market as it currently stands, I can’t say I’d mind losing the enormous economic deficit we’ve racked up.

Unfortuantely, the election is a lesser of evils situation on most issues as it currently stands. Both Democrats and Republicans want to play ‘world police’ and only differ on the subject by how they want to approach it(judging by what they actually say on the issue), regardless of whether we’re much of an example of ANYTHING to the rest of the world as it currently stands. Neither party seems to care that much for the domestic civil rights issues on the table excepting that the Democrats’ official party stance seems to be ‘toss them a little bone of compromise to get some votes without losing the center votes’ and both Obama and Clinton are toeing that line. I’m glad they both have health care plans to present, but I’m not all that keen on either one.

Of course, the Republican plans for the economy, Iraq, healthcare, etcetera strike me as wildly reckless, irresponsible, and/or outright lunacy. So against that the lesser evil is pretty un-evil, as it were.

Personally, at this point I’m hoping for an Obama/Clinton ticket. Or the other way around, i could take it either way. I suspect Obama/Clinton would sit more comfortably with voters, though, so I have to back that notion.

And despite his dropping out at this point, I’d highly encourage anyone to go peek at the archived campaign site anyway. Specifically, http://www.dennis4president.com/go/issues/ to see what the man’s campaign stood for. It’s just unfortunate, to me, that the way the electoral process works, he was probably doomed almost as soon as he started. But I really liked what he had to say. It’s just too bad he didn’t get to say it enough, but keeping the Senate seat is arguably a good way to continue pressing for it all.

( All that said, I’ve been over Obama’s site, And I can get behind enough of his stances that I’m comfortable with the man. )

Sed mi sxati via Cafepress butiko!

http://www.cafepress.com/brainchildshop/3901180

Kevin
Obama Supporter since 2008.

Besides, I can’t vote for a candidate that doesn’t support the rights of unborn geeks. To sustain our technology saturated culture/economy we need all the geeks we can get. How many future geeks are we losing everyday because of abortion? If it doesn’t stop then the geeks shall never inherit the earth, because they’ll have been aborted out of existence. If Obama was a true geek candidate, he’d understand that.

Oh, please… I would NEVER vote for that bitch!

Why Obama? Does anyone know what he actually stands for?”

This is on his website, for anyone interested.
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf

I’ll never vote for anyone just because the person is “electable.” That just makes it a crappy popularity contest with no real substance. I prefer substance in my candidates, no matter what political party he/she belongs to. Why should I cave to “electability?” What the crap is that? If that’s the case, I’m pretty sure Lassie would get elected. Who doesn’t like Lassie?

So find someone, anyone, in whom you can believe and feel good about. If it’s Obama, then so be it. If it’s Romney, so be it. Just be able to feel good about your choice.

She’s not ahead with pledged delegates in any count I’ve seen since Super Tuesday. And, super-delegates can change their minds when the wind blows… So, we’ll see how it works out.

I actually liked Hillary a lot before she became a politician. And, I think she was unjustly harangued by the Right. But, she was doomed (for reasons that only she knows) to be the kind of triangulating, opportunistic, disingenuous, manipulative, fundamentally dishonest politician I abhor. Maybe it’s because she went thru her political adolescence under the gun of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy with the likes of James (Gollum) Carville as her guide. She learned how to play that game. And, that’s ALL she learned. …I hate that game with the burning passion of a thousand white-hot suns. And, I won’t be a party to turning the reigns of the Democratic Party back over to the practitioners of it. I would love to have a woman as president. Just not her.

Wow. like Democrats who vowed anybody was better than Bush, then failed to put either Gore or Kerry over the top?

I keep hearing this so-called ‘polarizing’ argument, posited mainly by men who are irritated by ‘uppity’ women, and women who reflect their husband’s views without even thinking about it.

Don’t know why they’re so embarassed to say they just don’t like her, and haven’t got a reason why.

McCain pushes this same wacko button for Republicans, but when they step into the voting booth, they will vote for him.

Barack is great on the vision talk, he just doesn’t have any original vision action. He doesn’t even show up to vote on any of his colleagues’ vision action. Clinton has platforms, can wrestle down laggards on either side of the aisle, and in the end will get more accomplished.

Hillary is ahead with more delegates – go Hill!

I haven’t changed party affiliation because I don’t know where I’d go. I’m supportive of some Republican stances, some Democrat stances, and quite a few Libertarian ones. Mostly, I just vote for the candidate I think would accomplish the least evil. Unless I can’t decide – then I abstain out of a sense of responsibility.

My wife, though probably slightly more in line with Republican values votes similarly. So while neither of us really consider ourselves Republicans, we still vote in the Republican primaries. And maybe have a tendency to pay slightly more attention to Republican candidates. That said, if Obama wins the nomination, we’ll be voting for him in November. If Clinton wins, I’ll responsibly abstain since between McCain and Clinton, I can’t decide who would accomplish less evil.

(I like that word. Ubermaster. Yes, it has a certain ring to it.)

Erm…I think, though I’m not sure, that Obama won London. So I can sit back and pretend that I voted for him. Even though I didn’t because I’m not a registered Democrat. (I’m not a registered American, which may explain that.)

Woo!

The reason I put Nader at the end is that he is much more qualified than the frightening Hillary Clinton.

I’m supporting Obama in his “movement” because I do believe he has a lot of very inspiring words for us to hear, but a large portion of me is very, very cynical and rightfully so. If Obama wins and takes the White House, then can’t or won’t deliver, he’ll have singlehandedly created a new generation of cynics. When I step into the voting booth, I’m not holding my breath.

But considering Kentucky’s primary isn’t until May 20, it won’t count anyway. Hooray electoral process!

Please vote for Obama. We’re tired of getting dragged into silly wars.

I mean, it’s fun and all, but a little tiring.

The view in Europe is generally that the academics and intellectuals support Obama and Miss Clinton. Take that in whichever way you choose. It makes sense to me that Mr. Coulton would support one of them, and I am genuinely glad that he chose Obama. He seems more uncorrupted than Clinton.

“Barack said, “Somewhere along the way, the straight-talk express lost a few wheels,” and he was absolutely right: the McCain that liberals and swing-voters could get behind in 2000 isn’t the McCain that’s running today.”

So true. It’s sad.

On the other hand, Barack Obama has a better chance of getting out more voters who have never voted before. So, whereas Hillary supporters and hard-line Democrats will get out to vote for her, Barack will get the same hard-liners, PLUS an overwhelming number of young and black voters (don’t call me a racist, I’m just making an observation based on primary statistics).

Republicans will inevitably vote Republican, but swing-voters and people new to the voting process will look at McCain’s wrinkled face, with his war stories of Vietnam (which I, by no means, disrespect), his endorsing Bush’s tax cuts, his 100-year-war plan for the Middle East, and his kissing Jerry Falwell (who was, according to him at one point, an “agent of intolerance”), and then they will look at Barack Obama and see youth, hope and change. Barack said, “Somewhere along the way, the straight-talk express lost a few wheels,” and he was absolutely right: the McCain that liberals and swing-voters could get behind in 2000 isn’t the McCain that’s running today.

That said, I think that Hillary could beat Mike Huckabee, but none of the other three, and I think that Barack could beat McCain and Huckabee, but would face a serious challenge against Romney (no idea who’d win that one).

Long story short (too late): I voted Obama. [in best zombie voice] Yeeeessss, maaasssssterrrrr.

From Senator Edward M. Kennedy in 1980 to Mr. Kerry in 2004, the candidates who won Connecticut’s Democratic primary over the years share one unappealing distinction: Not one ever became president.

Break the curse, Barack!

Oh, I don’t know, they seem to like each other a whole lot better than the Republican candidates do. Clinton as Obama’s VP would, yes, definitely drag him down. But I can see Obama adding, you know, virility to Clinton’s campaign. And it’d get all – well, more – of the Obama supporters who wouldn’t necessarily vote for her on her side.

I respect what you’re saying, but why, in that case, are you still registered Republicans? Is it so you can vote in the primary? Because I quit the Democratic Party in disgust this year, but I still voted in the primary because the California Dems allow undeclared voters to cast ballots. And not voting is sort of an empty gesture because SOMEONE is going to be President no matter what.

The last time it “didn’t really matter” was 2000 and look how that turned out. If you voted for Bush in 2000 and/or 2004 and have since come to your senses, shouldn’t you vote for the Democratic nominee out of a sense of penance if nothing else? Because seriously, all my Republican friends are now FORMER Republicans because this Bush/Cheney shit is FUCKED UP.

Oh, hey, Nader’s on the ballot! Go, conscience!

If it’s Clinton vs. McCain, I suspect neither of us will vote because it won’t really matter. Clinton and McCain seem very pea-and-pod to us. Neither one of them are worth having as president and neither one would inspire us to visit the voting booth. And we’re not party-bound enough to care about blue or red. We just want a leader who we can respect and one who won’t harm the country (more) and the world around us (more).

Secondly, I have to applaud the 99% of people who have joined in the discourse in such a respectful way. I think if the electorate were made up of JoCo supporters, I’d feel a lot more safe and comfy about what is to come.

Finally, I have to comment on Anon’s point about which democrat can get elected: If we step away from the idea of which dem you personally support, the nugget of that idea is an interesting one: How do we get a dem in the whitehouse so it does become about ‘who can win?” Anon I can see your point that the ‘don’t like brown people’ issue can play a role, but an equal number if not more ‘don’t like women/feministis/Clintons”. The reality is that with Edwards out of the picture, there *isn’t* that white bread white guy that the conservatives can feel comfy with, so at this point it’s getting behind one candidate and PUSHING (which, I believe is the intent of the original post to begin with, yes?)

Here’s to a hopeful future for all of us monkeys and robots…

It would be different if there was a tiered system, where you could pick a first choice and a second choice, but since that’s not the case, and these races are pretty close, it’s probably better to vote for one of the two active candidates.