07 March 2008

The ultimate compromise:

More political musings from your friendly webmaster, so feel free to ignore if you don't care much about politics.

The Democratic nomination race enters its umpteenth week. It's nuts and crazy how many people are getting bent out of shape in this process, which is an absolute shame. My own position is a fairly simple one. Barack Obama first, John McCain second, Hillary Clinton last. This is because I admire Obama's policies and his experiences and feel that he is the best representative of the people that we could hope for as President. The second part is not so much an endorsement of McCain, but a repudiation of Hillary Clinton; I feel that she is a liar, that her character is such that she will continue to issue promise after promise and not follow through, and that she will not only continue the current "money for influence" politics that already happen in Washington, that they will only get worse and far harder to stop.

I would not be surprised if there are Clinton backers in the audience right now, and I wouldn't be surprised if they are unhappy with my opinions. I'm seriously not here to try to convert anyone to my position today, but to extend an olive leaf (much like I would believe Obama would if it was a possibility). After all, Obama's and Clinton's stated policies are rather the same. And unfortuntately, one of the two has to win -- and that is the problem. I hear more and more that Clinton supporters do not want to vote for Obama just like I wouldn't want to vote for Clinton.

So, how about a compromise -- John Edwards for President?

Compromise candidates used to happen all of the time. Just take a gander at conventions which happened before 1950. The primary process is a process that was created to give citizens a more-balanced say in what happens, but ultimately we are dealing with what is a private organization, the Democratic Party, who makes their own rules and everything.

Edwards has already attempted to run earlier anyway. He has many of the same policies that Obama and Hillary has. And if what I'm hearing is correct, that race and gender do not matter, then I can't imagine that his race or gender should matter either.

There's just been too many bridges burnt in this process. Clinton has alienated many Obama supporters by saying that they "don't matter" and Obama has certainly raised questions about his ability to lead and his experience to Clinton's supporters. I would not be surprised to see that both candidates have passed through the point of no return, especially with a Republican candidate that has shown his ability to capture Independent voters.

While Edwards would be my first choice, especially since he was running a modestly successful campaign, there's always Richardson, or Biden, or other Democrats that the compromise could settle on. While I understand it would likely be a disappointment to the hardcore partisans of either candidate, both candidates would probably feel that they have to bow to the party in this way (as the Democratic Party still provides access and other needed services) and it would reestablish the Party's ability to control what is going on and not have it completely ripped apart in the process.

Ultimately, compromise has to happen though; one set of people have to compromise whether they want to or not. It should not be this way. Hillary's supporters should be able to point to specific parts of her platform that they feel is important, Obama's can do the same, and the compromise candidate can be rid of the baggage of the last four months of hard-core campaigning, attacks, and other needless and unnecessary shenanigans that have happened in the Democratic primaries and caucuses.

In summation: Edwards for Democratic President 2008!

No comments: