Friday, December 14, 2007

Campaign '08 Update: Edwards vs. Clinton and Obama -- Reality vs. Fantasy, This is No Time for A Tin Ear or A Pipe-Dream

Bulworth, Written and Directed by Warren Beatty

Campaign '08 Update: Edwards vs. Clinton or Obama -- Reality vs. Fantasy, This is No Time for A Tin Ear or A Pipe-Dream

By Richard Power

No. Words of Power is not endorsing John Edwards. Words of Power is not going to endorse a candidate in the primaries (unless, of course, if Gore were to... )

But Words of Power does have a Short List of Preferred Candidates (i.e, Gore, Clark, Edwards, Kucinich, Richardson), and it has taken some hits.

Wes Clark has somewhat predictably, although disappointingly endorsed Clinton, and it looks increasingly unlikely that Al Gore will enter the race (and that is probably for the best, what he is doing is even more important).

The Short List is down to three: Edwards, Kucinich and Richardson.

John Edwards is by far both the most "electable" (yes, that means he is handsome, white, male and speaks with a southern drawl) of all the candidates and the most progressive of the candidates other than Kucinich.

If you are going to vote on principle alone, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is your candidate. His strength, passion and clarity of mind have been inspiring.

Gov. Bill Richardson's style is refreshing. He has taken some strong positions, particularly on Iraq and energy security, and he has more depth of experience than any of the frontrunners. He may still defy the odds, especially if the race breaks open after Iowa and New Hampshire (which well might happen).

I admire the choice of issues that Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) has articulated in this race, and the integrity he has shown, but he is still way behind in the polls, and so, unfortunately, I see no reason to add his name to the list.

What about Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE)? Well, I love to listen to Biden, but I do not know if he can be trusted on Iraq, and like Dodd, he is way behind in the polls.

What about the two "frontrunners" selected by the US mainstream news media and the corporatist campaign financiers, Sens. Clinton and Obama?

In the past few weeks, some of Clinton's weaknesses as a candidate have been exposed, and at the same time, some of Obama's strengths have broken through his handlers and he has begun to show some game. But neither of them has an impressive record of experience. Neither of them has taken bold enough positions on what has happed to the USA over the last seven years. Neither of them is highly electable (yes, the USA is still racist and sexist). I could promote a candidate who had lacked one of these three vital characteristics, but to be limited to a choice between two "frontrunners" neither of whom have any of these three vital characteristics is worrisome.

Will I support Clinton or Obama in the general election?

Of course. I understand the difference between Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Samuel Alito.

But there is still time and opportunity enough to change the nature of this race.

See Campaign '08 Update 8-12-07: Open Letter to Democratic Primary & Caucus Voters -- Turn This Race Upside Down!

Ian Welsh at The Agonist has a worthy post on Campaign '08.

Here are some excerpts with a link to the full text.

Edwards Is More Electable. Period. ...
This has been clear in poll after poll, the latest of which is CNN's poll, which shows Edwards crushing Republicans.
Versus McCain: Clinton loses by 2%, Obama is in a dead heat, and Edwards wins by 8%.
Versus Giuliani: Clinton wins by 6%, Obama by 7%, Edwards wins by 9%.
Versus Romney: Clinton wins by 11%, Obama by 13%, and Edwards wins by 22%.
Versus Huckabee: Clinton wins by 10%, Obama wins by 15%, and Edwards annihilates Huckabee by 25%. ...
Edwards is male, southern and telegenic. He has run a populist campaign. He is probably as left wing as someone can be in the US and still run for President. He has been a friend to unions and to the poor. He has had the guts to admit he was wrong on the war and while his anti-war platform isn't as strong as I'd like (he should commit to pull out) it's better than Clinton's or Obama's.
He's electable. Of the big 3 candidates he's the most progressive.
And he's in third place. ...
Vote your heart, but by all means also vote electability. And don't let political correctness blind you to political realities. Because the country simply cannot afford another 4 years with a Republican president.
The Agonist, 12-11-07

For an archive of Words of Power posts on Campaign '08, click here.

, , ,, , , , , , , , , ,