Quote:ccm911 wrote:

Quote:David, looks like we need to choose the lesser of three evils.

That pretty much sums it up. Three evils.

I was going to vote for Clinton because I figured that McCain would be more of the same of what we've had for the last 8 years. I regard Obama as sorbet - looks and tastes great, but no substance. Clinton was doing pretty well on substance and policy, but I'm really not liking her tendancy to embellish her stories.

As of today I am loathed to vote for any of them.

I'm now at the point where I might be in for some strategic voting.

I'm leaning in the direction that I might end up voting for McCain even though I don't like him or his policies. I figure that at best he's a one term president (probably intended as a stopgap until Jeb Bush cab be made to run) that will continue to ride out the current mess and continue the current trend of predictably bad decisions and policies. He will continue to mess up the country and then a good Democrat (or independent - Bloomburg?) alternative will come up from the ashes and take the presidency for the next 8 years. The wildcard here is who McCain choses as VP. He stands a pretty good chance of kicking the bucket, so his VP choice really matters. I'd have to know that his VP is not Adolf Huckabee, or someone like him.

The alternative is that the Cotton Candy King (Obama) will come along and screw things up even more and then we're stuck with more big spending Republicans for another 8 years.

If Obama gets in I would expect his lack of experience to translate into poor decisions and policy - he supports (and says) whatever is popular and that drives me nuts. He's pandering to the "have-nots", so you can guarentee that I would see tax increases that go to support programs that I would disagree with. His science credentials are almost as bad as McCain's, so you would not see any good science policies, nor any science based decisions (well, we've been used to that for the last 7.5 years!) while he's in office and that would take us further in a bad direction for our future. Note that he's not talking about how to improve education!

Clinton... what can I say? Smart woman. She's calculated in everything she does and says. I like her policies and the substance she has put behind them. She is the one candidate that has said what she will do and how she will pay for it - gotta like that. Sadly she's been making some rookie mistakes recently that undermine her credibility. The mistakes make you ask how you can trust someone who embelishes on unimportant things.... if you can't trust someone on the unimportant stuff, then how can you trust them on the important stuff.

...so, as I said, why bother getting out of bed? We REALLY need some better choices.

Let's assume that Obama gets the nomination. Do we REALLY believe that he could take the majority vote, or the country? I doubt it. To win he needs more than just democrats to vote for him and I don't see that happening.

Quote:Here's the point. Why should I HAVE to read the book?

He should be educating me about the substance behind his words via his website and his speeches - he has not done so.

I have gone out of my way to read his campaign materials and I have listened to his speeches and I have been thoroughly unimpressed by his depth/lack of substance. If I've made an effort to find out about him and failed to find depth, then what does that tell you about his communication efforts?