joyfulgirl said:I liked Hillary better than usual and for the first time could imagine voting for her. I think she's really the most qualified.
I've heard that from 3 people tonight, which is interesting.
joyfulgirl said:I liked Hillary better than usual and for the first time could imagine voting for her. I think she's really the most qualified.
Originally posted by Irvine511
or, they're just chickenshit.
Lila64 said:is the debate up online anywhere to watch?
(or tv)
joyfulgirl said:I liked Hillary better than usual and for the first time could imagine voting for her. I think she's really the most qualified.
Irvine511 said:the gay marriage section -- am watching what i missed earlier this evening -- and it's amazing how they just can't say they support gay marriage. they do, in content, just not in form.
why not?
it reminds me of someone loving and supporting their daughter and her spouse, but they just can't bring themselves to say the words, "my daughter is a lesbian."
or, they're just chickenshit.
I believe that equality of opportunity should be afforded to all Americans regardless of race, color, creed or sexual orientation. For that reason I support the right of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered persons to have the full protections and rights afforded under civil law including the right to marry the person of their choice. - Kucinich
U2democrat said:Hillary still doesn't do it for me
Irvine511 said:why not?
unico said:but see thats the contradiction i'm not quite getting. why do his ideas seem to agree with people, yet people don't want to vote for him?
joyfulgirl said:
I don't know. I don't know that the media has played much role in how I perceive Kucinich. I am just doubtful that he can get the job done even though I like his ideas. Personality does count and there's something off-putting about his and the media didn't tell me this, it's just how I perceive him. I just don't see him in an international leadership capacity and at this point I can't support a Democratic candidate who obviously wouldn't win the election.
ETA: And, what anitram said.
unico said:but see thats the contradiction i'm not quite getting. why do his ideas seem to agree with people, yet people don't want to vote for him?
Irvine511 said:
and i'm not a one-issue voter. i admire many of his positions, but i can't see the rest of the world taking him seriously. i guess i do genuinely feel as if the leader of the world's only superpower has to be something of a "heavy" -- that "power through peace" is nice in theory, but it's really something only a country like Norway or Canada could conceivably pursue.
Irvine511 said:
he doesn't have a chance of winning. his economic ideas do not speak to the center and the right-of-center in this country. victory is more important -- whether right or wrong -- than taking a principled stand.
unico said:
however, as someone who is a homosexual male who has found love and wants to marry his homosexual male partner...i think it is more than just saying "i'm not a one issue voter" is it not? this isn't just an issue, it is your life! it is what you want for your future and for your eventual family.
does it really mean more to you to cast that aside and support clinton or obama because they are "heavier"?
unico said:
i think that right there is what is so hard for me to swallow. that is how we ended up with kerry, because of the whole "anybody but bush" mentality.
i know at times i can be irrationally idealistic. but i just wanna know WHEN in this country we will FINALLY be able to vote for what we WANT.
Irvine511 said:
actually, i think marriage equality is best left as a state issue -- i see no reason why Mississippi and California should be goverend by the same set of laws when it comes to cultural practices like marriage. so, on a presidential level, their stance on same-sex marriage is less important to me than it would be on a state/local level. if Kucinich were elected president, i doubt VA is going to let me and Memphis get married anytime soon -- not that we're at that point, at least not just yet.
to me, the president's most important "job" is walking well in the world, and there are certain responsibilities that the US cannot shirk away from under the banner of a "power through peace" mentality. i am a million miles away from the Bush hyper-aggression, but i do favor a somewhat interventionalist foreign policy when that policy is created by men who read books and have actual knowledge of the rest of the world. one of the reasons that i opposed Iraq so doggedly is because i felt that these were exactly the wrong people to go about such a difficult mission. however, i do think that some sort of "reckoning" with Hussein was inevitable, and i don't think that a psychopath such as that is going to respond well to a "power thorugh peace" mentality.
that's just one example, but that's what my primary concerns are when picking a president. a governor is a different story, absolutely.
unico said:
i know at times i can be irrationally idealistic. but i just wanna know WHEN in this country we will FINALLY be able to vote for what we WANT.
anitram said:
Nobody is preventing you from voting for what you want. You are free to vote for Kucinich in the primaries. The fact that most other Dems disagree with you and will vote for someone else is the reality. If you are not satisfied with the Dem nominee, vote for a third-party candidate (sucks that you guys never actually have a viable one).
unico said:
peace doesn't have to be using the "care bears stare."