Politics, the good and the bad (not yet ugly)

[theatokos]

I AM SO DISAPPOINTED!!

I just got to work (late, I'm dragging today) and checked the news headlines as I always do. John Edwards is dropping out! I don't get to vote for him Tuesday! What am I going to do?! I figured it would come after Tuesday, because really, he doesn't stand a chance. But I so looked forward to voting for him anyway. And now, my only choice on Tuesday is Obama. And the man has no policy. I might consider voting for McCain, but as an undeclared voter I can't do that in California. It's back to the drawing board.

In good news, Australia is set to apologize to Aborigines, as soon as Kevin Rudd's new administration takes office on Feb. 13. I am so proud of Australia! The new government over there certainly looks set to do new and good things. Hopefully this time next year the people will be saying the same things about the United States.

Update Thanks to erinya who posted links to the candidates voting records on abortion issues, I will NOT be voting for McCain. His record is atrocious. Plus, he's been playing the I'm More Conservative Than You Game lately. I always thought he was above that.

It's Obama or bust. Sigh.

Comments

[mz-seshet.livejournal.com]

I've been dreading Tuesday so much lately that I even thought about NOT voting for the first time EVER! Even with the Bush fiasco, I stuck to my guns and voted my concious when I knew it wasn't supporting a possible win and perhaps even aiding the other side, but for some reason, I've been thinking its so important to support the lesser of two evils this time.
UG!

[makeda55.livejournal.com]

I'm still wondering what to do myself.

If it's only a choice between Clinton & Obama, I lean Obama.

But: Edwards has "suspended", not "ended", his campaign, and has not endorsed either of the two frontrunners. He is clearly holding out for as much influence on the Democratic agenda as he can muster given his financial situation. He's met with both Obama and Clinton about his anti-poverty/economic justice issues. I think he is waiting to see which of them actually does something more than make pleasant mouth noises.

And because the campaign is suspended, Edwards can still accumulate delegates. Specifically, he gets a delegate in every district where he wins 15% of the vote.

So if all the Edwards supporters believe that they now need to choose another candidate, Edwards (and the economically progressive agenda) will in fact have less influence than might otherwise be the case.

That's what I'm grappling with. FYI...

[makeda55.livejournal.com]

Or as eye_of_zohar puts it: "How badly does Obama want my vote?" If I just give my vote to Obama without Obama having to do anything to earn it, why should he listen to my concerns?

[ewigweibliche.livejournal.com]

No kidding. I agree with Mr. Zohar! But because the campaign is suspended does this still mean that I can vote for him on Tues? Because I reaaaalllllyyy want to. At this point I'm hoping that vote says "some people still really like him! make him a running mate!!"

Yes, you can still vote for Edwards!

[makeda55.livejournal.com]

All those absentee ballots already cast for him and all the votes he receives Tuesday still count toward delegates. (I confirmed this with an Actual Democratic Grassroots Leader.)

Yeah...NARAL is right where I would go for unbiased political research

[snowcalla.livejournal.com]

Here's the thing...a candidate (or a person like myself) may think that Roe vs Wade should be overturned without thinking abortion should be illegal.

While i don't think thet the US constitution as written protects abortion as a "right"...I do think that State laws and State Constitutions can, and many do. State protections can go farther than Federal, but can't strip away Federal.

That is a VERY Federalist way of looking at the issue...and Old School Republicans hold that view. That is not to be confused with candidates who wish abortion to be outlawed...

Quote from McCain..

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask one question about abortion. Then I want to turn to Iraq. You’re for a constitutional amendment banning abortion, with some exceptions for life and rape and incest.

MCCAIN: Rape, incest and the life of the mother. Yes.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So is President Bush, yet that hasn’t advanced in the six years he’s been in office. What are you going to do to advance a constitutional amendment that President Bush hasn’t done?

MCCAIN: I don’t think a constitutional amendment is probably going to take place, but I do believe that it’s very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should — could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And you’d be for that?

MCCAIN: Yes, because I’m a federalist. Just as I believe that the issue of gay marriage should be decided by the states, so do I believe that we would be better off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states. And I don’t believe the Supreme Court should be legislating in the way that they did on Roe v. Wade.

So....while he IS saying if he had the final say he would like abortion only available for rape, incest, prevent death of mother...he is saying he and the Federal Government shouldn't be in charge of the decision...States should be and it should be up to the people in the State, not him, not the Supreme Court, and not Congress.

This issue is hard for me. I think it should go back tot he States, like many issues. So you would think voting Repub would be a no-brainer, right? Kind of. I agree with the legalities of the Repubs, and the sentiment of the Dems.

Re: Yeah...NARAL is right where I would go for unbiased political research

[ewigweibliche.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of NARAL either. Thank you for pointing this out. The problem is, that while in theory states rights makes sense, on this issue I could see the vast majority of states voting to ban abortion - and extremely so. Some states would go so far as to outlaw it even in cases of rape and other horrors. Now, shouldn't I think that if the people have spoken, then we should respect that decision? Not in this case. Most of the people who would vote to ban abortion never have to deal with the realities of the issue or the complications surrounding it.

So, in theory I may agree with McCain on his over riding logic, the fact that he desires to put this particular choice into the hands of the states is worrisome to me. However, I don't think that he would actually act on this.

Should McCain become the Rep candidate, I will do more research. I'm thrilled that I might actually have to do real research to vote in Nov. Nothing makes me happier than having choices and tough decisions. So... maybe I should hold off on making any statements of preference for the time being.

Re: Yeah...NARAL is right where I would go for unbiased political research

[snowcalla.livejournal.com]

Oh I agree that some states would ban abortion. But...that's what the people in that state wish to have happen. Who am I to say I know better than them? I'm not. Also...if States had stronger rights, people would move to the state that aligns more closely with their ideals. Those states would get more tax revenue. So states would be trying to attract good citizens through a bit more careful laws.

So yeah...some backwater, hosed up states would do all kinds of crazy crap, but they would do it to a pretty low population. Where as now....WE ALL get screwed in so many ways and there is not much of a chance to change it. At the state level...changing laws isn't such a hard thing.

I can't say I would vote for McCain...he acts like an independ....but I think he is a tool.

I don't know. I'm more unhappy about this election than I have about any other one I can remember. I feel like we are at a crisis point and no one that makes it through to get named to either party ticket will be a person that can deal with it. No one is up to the job....

States rights

[ewigweibliche.livejournal.com]

I disagree with your first paragraph. I want to say that if the majority thinks it's a good idea to ban abortion then it should allowed. But I just can't. Because for those that can't afford to travel to that states that allow it, banned abortion is a real problem. (I, morally and ethically, lean strongly toward pro-life, but politically I just have to lean pro-choice.) I want to think that people would move to where their values are, but it's more complicated than that. Connection to land, economics, family, etc all keep people in a place that may not line up with their political values.

Hmmm.... I would love to hear more about why you think McCain is a tool. If I haven't expressed it, I really value your opinions and thoughts in these matters. Even if I don't agree all the time. I mean, I have an especially hard time not feeling waaaay more optimistic about the next president, even if few people are as equipped for the job as I'd like. Hell, a person just can't be more UNprepared for the job than GW - and we're all still alive.... except for the people who aren't. But, you know.