Republican/Democrat Primary Rundown
I think that it's time to evaluate what's happening in this big cluster@#%* called a Presidential Primary.
First off, this kind of open field is nearly unprecedented. The only thing that would make it more confusing is if we had a three party system (which we should).
Secondly, the Democrats are far too positive about their choices than they should be, while Republicans have the opposite problem.
Thirdly, the top three candidates on either side are not the most qualified or the least divisive of the parties' offerings. This still confounds me.
Fourth(ly?), Hillary Clinton is a disaster waiting to happen. Democrats would be wise to dump her before she becomes a liability.
In the Fifth place, Rudy Giuliani should likewise be dumped before he splits the Republican party in two. Everything they have built for the last 30 years would be destroyed in one election cycle.
Sixthish, the writer's union strike is seriously effecting my mood. All my favorite television shows are having truncated seasons. Unless something gets resolved soon, we're going to be forced to watch all 24 hours of the 24 hour cable news outlets' programming.
Lastly, Bill Richardson for President!
"Respect mah authoritah!!" --Eric Cartman
Showing posts with label Bill Richardson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Richardson. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Post Debate Run-Down
Senator Clinton...Senator Edwards...Senator Obama...back to you Senator Clinton...
The most frustrating thing about these debates is the ineptitude of the "moderators."
I can't stand Tim Russert anyway, but Brian Williams was just following the Russert playbook with regard to questions asked. The question to Kucinich about UFO's was utterly ridiculous. Russert was able to "get" Hillary with a question about driver's licenses for illegal immigrants. It was the first time I've ever seen her flustered when trying to express herself. Thankfully, the other candidates are no longer letting her get away with dodging questions and speaking out both sides of her mouth.
Here's the run-down of worst to best:
7. Dennis Kucinich: While I appreciate your candor and honesty, you sound more and more like a socialist everytime you speak. While I'm sure a great many of your supporters like that sort of thing, most Democrats won't buy it. Try to hold your composure when talking about ET's.
6. Barack Obama: Call it coming short of expectations. "Coming out hard against Hillary" means getting a little more energetic in your responses. You have the best speaking voice in the field. Let it get fired up!
5. Bill Richardson: I'm starting to get a little fed up with your performances. I really think you are the most qualified candidate on either side and you have the right ideas. Just start ignoring the questions that are asked like everybody else. Get some shit started. Oh, and don't defend Hillary!
4. Hillary Clinton: For the first time, I can honestly say you lost a debate. This one was all about you. Howard Dean had a similar moment in 2003. And guess who took him down...
3. John Edwards: By far the best anti-Hillary of the night. You didn't handle the trial lawyer contributions rebuttal by Sen. Dodd very well. You always seem a little too privileged to be the champion of the lower and middle classes. Maybe that's unfair, but it's a common perception.
2. Chris Dodd: I think you had the fewest minutes of the night, but they were all quality minutes. You were the first person to give the "right" answer on DL's for IA's without sounding like you were hedging your bets. Maybe Connecticut's illegal population is insignificant enough for you to feel no fear. Either way, you took Sen. Clinton down a peg or two.
1. Joe Biden: I thought you had the best debate performance, even though I think John Edwards technically won. It all came down to the minutes you were given. I have the feeling that the next debate will give you more time to deliver those gems for which you are famous. "Gaffe machine" or not, kudos to you. "Rudy Giuliani...a noun, a verb, and 9/11..." Priceless!
Senator Clinton...Senator Edwards...Senator Obama...back to you Senator Clinton...
The most frustrating thing about these debates is the ineptitude of the "moderators."
I can't stand Tim Russert anyway, but Brian Williams was just following the Russert playbook with regard to questions asked. The question to Kucinich about UFO's was utterly ridiculous. Russert was able to "get" Hillary with a question about driver's licenses for illegal immigrants. It was the first time I've ever seen her flustered when trying to express herself. Thankfully, the other candidates are no longer letting her get away with dodging questions and speaking out both sides of her mouth.
Here's the run-down of worst to best:
7. Dennis Kucinich: While I appreciate your candor and honesty, you sound more and more like a socialist everytime you speak. While I'm sure a great many of your supporters like that sort of thing, most Democrats won't buy it. Try to hold your composure when talking about ET's.
6. Barack Obama: Call it coming short of expectations. "Coming out hard against Hillary" means getting a little more energetic in your responses. You have the best speaking voice in the field. Let it get fired up!
5. Bill Richardson: I'm starting to get a little fed up with your performances. I really think you are the most qualified candidate on either side and you have the right ideas. Just start ignoring the questions that are asked like everybody else. Get some shit started. Oh, and don't defend Hillary!
4. Hillary Clinton: For the first time, I can honestly say you lost a debate. This one was all about you. Howard Dean had a similar moment in 2003. And guess who took him down...
3. John Edwards: By far the best anti-Hillary of the night. You didn't handle the trial lawyer contributions rebuttal by Sen. Dodd very well. You always seem a little too privileged to be the champion of the lower and middle classes. Maybe that's unfair, but it's a common perception.
2. Chris Dodd: I think you had the fewest minutes of the night, but they were all quality minutes. You were the first person to give the "right" answer on DL's for IA's without sounding like you were hedging your bets. Maybe Connecticut's illegal population is insignificant enough for you to feel no fear. Either way, you took Sen. Clinton down a peg or two.
1. Joe Biden: I thought you had the best debate performance, even though I think John Edwards technically won. It all came down to the minutes you were given. I have the feeling that the next debate will give you more time to deliver those gems for which you are famous. "Gaffe machine" or not, kudos to you. "Rudy Giuliani...a noun, a verb, and 9/11..." Priceless!
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Richardson is Finally Stepping Up
As you may know from this blog, I was once a supporter of Howard Dean for President. And while they are very different, I sensed some of the same qualities in Bill Richardson. Enough so to make me support his campaign.
Around May of 2003, Howard Dean changed. Up to that point, he had been a reserved, yet consistent critic of the Bush administration and his "enablers" in the Democratic Party. At a rally during the spring of '03, Dean became visibly aggressive. The "angry liberal" the press loved and conservatives despised, emerged that day. His campaign skyrocketed. It was a critical moment in U.S. political history. Today, Bill Richardson had what could be his moment.
At the "Take Back America" conference, Bill Richardson "laid in" to his Democratic opponents for their political calculation and pandering. He made a zero residual troops pledge for Iraq, something he's been saying for months, but which noone seemed to hear. The only other "serious" candidate saying similar things has been John Edwards (he's my second choice). Gov. Richardson even called Edwards to the carpet over his support of the "legislation" congress passed last month.
I had hairs standing up on the back of my neck after hearing the Governor's empassioned statements. For the first time in four years, I felt like I had picked the right guy. Only time will tell if I'm right.
As you may know from this blog, I was once a supporter of Howard Dean for President. And while they are very different, I sensed some of the same qualities in Bill Richardson. Enough so to make me support his campaign.
Around May of 2003, Howard Dean changed. Up to that point, he had been a reserved, yet consistent critic of the Bush administration and his "enablers" in the Democratic Party. At a rally during the spring of '03, Dean became visibly aggressive. The "angry liberal" the press loved and conservatives despised, emerged that day. His campaign skyrocketed. It was a critical moment in U.S. political history. Today, Bill Richardson had what could be his moment.
At the "Take Back America" conference, Bill Richardson "laid in" to his Democratic opponents for their political calculation and pandering. He made a zero residual troops pledge for Iraq, something he's been saying for months, but which noone seemed to hear. The only other "serious" candidate saying similar things has been John Edwards (he's my second choice). Gov. Richardson even called Edwards to the carpet over his support of the "legislation" congress passed last month.
I had hairs standing up on the back of my neck after hearing the Governor's empassioned statements. For the first time in four years, I felt like I had picked the right guy. Only time will tell if I'm right.
Labels:
Bill Richardson,
election 2004,
election 2008,
Howard Dean,
Iraq,
John Edwards
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Democratic DEBATE
This is how I ranked their performances from best to worst:
1. John Edwards: He really mixed things up with Clinton and Obama trying to move up in the standings.
2. Joe Biden: He gave some of the most impassioned responses of the night. I've always enjoyed his candor and demeanor. Strikes me as a more liberal version of Harry Truman.
3. Barack Obama: For standing your ground against attacks from John Edwards.
4. Bill Richardson: His answers were a little "heavy," but alot of Democratic primary voters like that. See John Kerry 2004. The media's giving you a hard time for some reason.
5. Mike Gravel: Love to see somebody pick on the big guys!
6. Hillary Clinton: I'm not sure she's trying to win the Democratic primary. We're safer than we were on 9/11? Is she running for Rudy's VP? She still has good stage presence. I'll give her points for that.
7. Dennis Kucinich: He just reminds me of the OLD liberal: Authoritarian, a spend thrift, and enamoured with all things European. We've got to keep him in the race to remind everybody that most Democrats are not to the far left.
8. Chris Dodd: I like Chris Dodd, but this was a pitiful performance. Partly it was due to CNN and the chuckleheads from New Hampshire. He needed (as did many of the lower tier candidates) to "insert" himself into the debate like Edwards was doing. When they don't do that, they look like they're auditioning for somebody's VP or Secretary of State. It's hard to get supporters if they don't think you're serious.
All in all a better debate than MSNBC put on. I can't stand Wolf Blitzer anymore. Some of the questions would have been better served in a "Rock the Vote" debate on MTV. We depend on CNN to be substantive. They're certainly not entertaining.
This debate probably didn't change much of anything. Edwards, Biden, and Richardson might get a bump. Hillary didn't do herself any favors with the core Democratic primary voter. In her mind, she's already "put this thing to bed" and is now running against the presumptive Republican nominee. I doubt we'll roll over that easily.
This is how I ranked their performances from best to worst:
1. John Edwards: He really mixed things up with Clinton and Obama trying to move up in the standings.
2. Joe Biden: He gave some of the most impassioned responses of the night. I've always enjoyed his candor and demeanor. Strikes me as a more liberal version of Harry Truman.
3. Barack Obama: For standing your ground against attacks from John Edwards.
4. Bill Richardson: His answers were a little "heavy," but alot of Democratic primary voters like that. See John Kerry 2004. The media's giving you a hard time for some reason.
5. Mike Gravel: Love to see somebody pick on the big guys!
6. Hillary Clinton: I'm not sure she's trying to win the Democratic primary. We're safer than we were on 9/11? Is she running for Rudy's VP? She still has good stage presence. I'll give her points for that.
7. Dennis Kucinich: He just reminds me of the OLD liberal: Authoritarian, a spend thrift, and enamoured with all things European. We've got to keep him in the race to remind everybody that most Democrats are not to the far left.
8. Chris Dodd: I like Chris Dodd, but this was a pitiful performance. Partly it was due to CNN and the chuckleheads from New Hampshire. He needed (as did many of the lower tier candidates) to "insert" himself into the debate like Edwards was doing. When they don't do that, they look like they're auditioning for somebody's VP or Secretary of State. It's hard to get supporters if they don't think you're serious.
All in all a better debate than MSNBC put on. I can't stand Wolf Blitzer anymore. Some of the questions would have been better served in a "Rock the Vote" debate on MTV. We depend on CNN to be substantive. They're certainly not entertaining.
This debate probably didn't change much of anything. Edwards, Biden, and Richardson might get a bump. Hillary didn't do herself any favors with the core Democratic primary voter. In her mind, she's already "put this thing to bed" and is now running against the presumptive Republican nominee. I doubt we'll roll over that easily.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Sleep Good
Steve Beshear is our man. Primary voters voted on May 22 and gave him a substantial vote for the Democratic nomination considering the size of the field. We actually avoided a runoff. He will face off against current governor, Ernie Fletcher in November. I wish Mr. Beshear the best.
It's been a slow start to the Presidential primary season. The field of Democrats is still pretty much where it was before the first debate. Clinton, Obama, and Edwards are all clustered at the top in national polls. The polls in Iowa show some movement, but it is more or less insignificant. My man Bill looks to be gaining some support in early primary states, so that's interesting. Otherwise, boring.
The next Presidential debate is set for Sunday, June 3rd. Maybe some news will come out of that.
Steve Beshear is our man. Primary voters voted on May 22 and gave him a substantial vote for the Democratic nomination considering the size of the field. We actually avoided a runoff. He will face off against current governor, Ernie Fletcher in November. I wish Mr. Beshear the best.
It's been a slow start to the Presidential primary season. The field of Democrats is still pretty much where it was before the first debate. Clinton, Obama, and Edwards are all clustered at the top in national polls. The polls in Iowa show some movement, but it is more or less insignificant. My man Bill looks to be gaining some support in early primary states, so that's interesting. Otherwise, boring.
The next Presidential debate is set for Sunday, June 3rd. Maybe some news will come out of that.
Labels:
Bill Richardson,
Democrats,
election 2007,
election 2008,
Steve Beshear
Friday, May 04, 2007
That's it, I'm endorsing Bill Richardson for President
I've been leaning toward endorsing Bill Richardson for President for a couple of months now, and his latest remarks on immigration just cinched the deal. Here's a transcript of an older immigration speech from his governor's office that reports the same information with a bit more detail: Reform Speech from Bill Richardson
Here are the high points:
1. Secure the Border--Richardson supports doubling the number of border patrol agents, adding high tech security devices, and tearing down fences that don't work and send the wrong message.
2. Penalize Employers--He also supports raising the minimum wage and fining businesses that hire illegals.
3. Amnesty--He doesn't call it that, but admits that the term will be used against him. It's alot more complicated than that.
4. Work with the Mexican Government--Richardson realizes that there will always be a weak link in the chain of immigration reform unless the border is secured from both directions. He's already met with President Calderon as New Mexico governor.
5. Increase the number of Legal Immigrants--Just to accommodate the family members of current illegals who will become permanent legal residents, Richardson supports doubling the number of available family visas.
To me, these ideas are common sense. He lays them out articulately and with the wisdom afforded a public servant with his experience. I had not sought to endorse a candidate this early, but felt that it was necessary before Hillary sucked all of the oxygen out of the room. More on that later.
I've been leaning toward endorsing Bill Richardson for President for a couple of months now, and his latest remarks on immigration just cinched the deal. Here's a transcript of an older immigration speech from his governor's office that reports the same information with a bit more detail: Reform Speech from Bill Richardson
Here are the high points:
1. Secure the Border--Richardson supports doubling the number of border patrol agents, adding high tech security devices, and tearing down fences that don't work and send the wrong message.
2. Penalize Employers--He also supports raising the minimum wage and fining businesses that hire illegals.
3. Amnesty--He doesn't call it that, but admits that the term will be used against him. It's alot more complicated than that.
4. Work with the Mexican Government--Richardson realizes that there will always be a weak link in the chain of immigration reform unless the border is secured from both directions. He's already met with President Calderon as New Mexico governor.
5. Increase the number of Legal Immigrants--Just to accommodate the family members of current illegals who will become permanent legal residents, Richardson supports doubling the number of available family visas.
To me, these ideas are common sense. He lays them out articulately and with the wisdom afforded a public servant with his experience. I had not sought to endorse a candidate this early, but felt that it was necessary before Hillary sucked all of the oxygen out of the room. More on that later.
Labels:
Bill Richardson,
Democrats,
election 2008,
immigrants
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Debate Rundown...
Okay. Here's the "down-and-dirty-I'm-up-at-1:15-in-the-morning-three-days-after-the-debate" rundown of how the candidates measured up.
First of all, let me say, I was not happy with this debate format. I hate group interviews that are called debates. This was a "speed forum" if nothing else. That being said, here ya go:
1. Hillary Clinton: Can this woman get any more fake? If I had never heard her speak and had no idea what she stood for, this performance would have made me her fan. As such, I give her the debate-winning prize. Her strong answer on the terrorist attack question and believable tone reminded me of her husband. Good going. (A)
2. Barack Obama: Who was this guy? Stick to the platitudes. They are your strong suit. Unfortunately, you are running for the Democratic Party nomination. If you don't get some policy points in your presentation before Labor Day, you'll be sunk. You said more words than anyone on stage, and yet you said nothing of substance. Down you go. (C-)
3. John Edwards: That $400 haircut looks just like your $50 haircut. Too bad that story got attention prior to the debate. I think alot of people were looking more at your hair than your platform. Overall, you gave very succinct answers that were heavy on policy. I like that. (B+)
4. Joe Biden: "Yes" was the best answer you gave all night. You dodged Mr. William's questions like a pro. I was particularly intrigued by your answer on the Virginia Tech shooting. Considering none of the gun laws you mentioned would have been useful in this case, what was your point? Thanks for complementing the Democratic field of candidates. Don't fawn over Hillary too much, though. (B-)
5. Bill Richardson: For experience, policy positions, and downright balls, you are my favorite candidate. However, you did yourself very few favors in this "debate." Did you have trouble hearing the questions? If not, were you constipated? Your answers were garbled and you looked uncomfortable. If I didn't like you so much, I'd give you a lower grade. (B-)
6. Chris Dodd: Stiff. Boring. At least you gave a creative answer on abortion and Justice John Roberts. (C+)
7. Dennis Kucinich: You have improved so much since 2004. Fmr. Sen. Gravel made you look almost sane. You earned a high grade, but your still just a bottom feeder used to make other candidates look more reasonable. (A-)
8. Mike Gravel: Dude! You like to scream, don't ya! I can't stand people who are too angry to make a convincing argument. (D)
Overall, a disappointing night for me. I can't stand Hillary Clinton, and yet, she did best everyone on tone and content. She probably just added to her already burgeoning lead in the polls. Everyone else gained a little name recognition and introduced themselves to primary voters. Hopefully the next debate will be more inspirational.
Okay. Here's the "down-and-dirty-I'm-up-at-1:15-in-the-morning-three-days-after-the-debate" rundown of how the candidates measured up.
First of all, let me say, I was not happy with this debate format. I hate group interviews that are called debates. This was a "speed forum" if nothing else. That being said, here ya go:
1. Hillary Clinton: Can this woman get any more fake? If I had never heard her speak and had no idea what she stood for, this performance would have made me her fan. As such, I give her the debate-winning prize. Her strong answer on the terrorist attack question and believable tone reminded me of her husband. Good going. (A)
2. Barack Obama: Who was this guy? Stick to the platitudes. They are your strong suit. Unfortunately, you are running for the Democratic Party nomination. If you don't get some policy points in your presentation before Labor Day, you'll be sunk. You said more words than anyone on stage, and yet you said nothing of substance. Down you go. (C-)
3. John Edwards: That $400 haircut looks just like your $50 haircut. Too bad that story got attention prior to the debate. I think alot of people were looking more at your hair than your platform. Overall, you gave very succinct answers that were heavy on policy. I like that. (B+)
4. Joe Biden: "Yes" was the best answer you gave all night. You dodged Mr. William's questions like a pro. I was particularly intrigued by your answer on the Virginia Tech shooting. Considering none of the gun laws you mentioned would have been useful in this case, what was your point? Thanks for complementing the Democratic field of candidates. Don't fawn over Hillary too much, though. (B-)
5. Bill Richardson: For experience, policy positions, and downright balls, you are my favorite candidate. However, you did yourself very few favors in this "debate." Did you have trouble hearing the questions? If not, were you constipated? Your answers were garbled and you looked uncomfortable. If I didn't like you so much, I'd give you a lower grade. (B-)
6. Chris Dodd: Stiff. Boring. At least you gave a creative answer on abortion and Justice John Roberts. (C+)
7. Dennis Kucinich: You have improved so much since 2004. Fmr. Sen. Gravel made you look almost sane. You earned a high grade, but your still just a bottom feeder used to make other candidates look more reasonable. (A-)
8. Mike Gravel: Dude! You like to scream, don't ya! I can't stand people who are too angry to make a convincing argument. (D)
Overall, a disappointing night for me. I can't stand Hillary Clinton, and yet, she did best everyone on tone and content. She probably just added to her already burgeoning lead in the polls. Everyone else gained a little name recognition and introduced themselves to primary voters. Hopefully the next debate will be more inspirational.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)