andrewlooney ([info]andrewlooney) wrote,
@ 2008-01-26 12:50:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current location:wunderland.earth
Current music:Andy's Favorite Electronica mix

Who I'm Supporting for President
Topher wrote to me, asking: "I'm curious. Who are you supporting for this year's election?"

I'm supporting Obama. He's not my favorite, but neither Dennis Kucinich nor Ron Paul have a chance of winning, and having spent my whole life supporting candidates who didn't win, I'm weary of championing another no-chancer this time around.

I really don't care much for Hillary; I love the idea of a female president, but there's just so much unpleasant baggage associated with this particular female, and I REALLY want someone in the White House with an unfamiliar name for a change. Plus I also love the idea of a black president (and I think it's awesome we're being faced with such a choice). Of course neither of them have particularly good positions on the Drug War, but both are way better than any of the Republican candidates (except Ron Paul).

As regards my favorite issue, I actually like the fact that Obama has admitted to "youthful indiscretions" since it means 1) he's honest and forthright about his past 2) he knows first-hand the many falsehoods of the anti-drug propaganda machine and 3) electing him would send the message that yes, it's possible to have used illegal drugs and still achieve great things, including becoming President. Such a man might well be able to support the end of drug prohibition once in office, even though it's probably better for him not to voice such opinions in the meantime. So at the moment, I'm in favor of Barrack Obama.

That said, if by some miracle Ron Paul wins the Republican nomination, I'd totally vote for him over Obama (unless Obama chooses Kucinich as his running mate).



(Post a new comment)


[info]merseine0613
2008-01-26 08:45 pm UTC (link)
but neither Dennis Kucinich nor Ron Paul have a chance of winning,

Especially because he's dropping out of the race

Have some chocolate. I understand it helps after an attack of the dementors (which is what I consider most political pundits)

(Reply to this)


[info]ashley_y
2008-01-26 09:59 pm UTC (link)
It's mostly state law anyway. I think the state approach is better for drug legalisation.

(Reply to this)


[info]mikeyarrum
2008-01-27 05:17 am UTC (link)
Aren't Paul and Kucinich both a bit... lacking in their grips on reality? Or are those just rumors?

(It's late and I promise to research the issues more thoroughly in the morning.)

(Reply to this)

The Horserace
(Anonymous)
2008-01-27 05:10 pm UTC (link)
Since this is a horserace and not a presidential election you make some good points. Obama is 3-1. Plunk down $100 amd you'll make $300!

For myself I'm voting in the presidential election. I'll vote for Ron Paul even if I have to write him in. I don't want to encourage Obama by voting for him when he says he might stay in Iraq until 2013 and will not rule out attacking Iran. And if he has to run against McCain he will surely pivot to the right.

I believe the only way my vote will have any real meaning is if it sends a message.

(Reply to this)

for the sake of accuracy...
(Anonymous)
2008-01-28 03:56 pm UTC (link)
Barack is spelled with one R.

He isn't "black". His ancestry is half Kenyan and half European. I think that's actually cooler and might help to get us away from the stupid "black" vs. "white" terminology in this country.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: for the sake of accuracy...
[info]caprinus
2008-01-29 09:46 pm UTC (link)
"Half Kenyan and half European" -- what's that mean? Or rather, how is it better than "half African and half German" or "half Kikuyu and half Basque"? I am not from the US so I don't actually know nor care to find out Obama's precise genetic profile, but it seems to me that if the man couches himself in civil right movement-era rethoric and name-drops Martin Luther King, Jr. like nobody's business then, for the purposes of US politics and US English alike, he can safely be referred to as "black" and would not object.

I do agree it's stupid and useless to see this as some sort of essential category, but it's generally accepted as salient by the people it matters to. "Kenyan-European" isn't, nor is it any more or less accurate, IMO.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: for the sake of accuracy...
[info]skipernicus
2008-02-01 01:38 am UTC (link)
I read somewhere that in the United States, unlike anywhere else in the world, you are black if you are up to 1/32th of negro descent - which is different than in the old days of "1 drop of black blood makes you non-white".

The truth of the matter is, it doesn't matter if he were green, but this is America.

I don't suppose it should make any difference here either, but apparently having ovaries makes not a white male too.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: for the sake of accuracy...
(Anonymous)
2008-03-16 07:57 pm UTC (link)
Europe is NOT a country, Kenya is.
So either Mr Obama is of African-European ancestry, or he is Kenyan-(fill in the right (or multiple) European country(ies))

(Reply to this)(Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…