Go for it --

[alfreda89]

Are you as mad as I am? How about either Dennis Kucinich or Ron Paul for President? I want to see them in the top three candidates, because I don't think anyone owns them, and they can't be bought. They will force the front-runners to talk about real solutions. Here's the president DFA Pulse poll:
*********
Hey Friends,

I wanted to drop you a short note to ask for your help. DFA is holding a Presidential Primary Pulse Poll to decide which candidate deserves their support. I voted for Representative Dennis Kucinich and I need help to move them from 4th place in the poll.

Could you take just a minute to vote for Dennis Kucinich right now? Here's the link:

http://DemocracyforAmerica.com/VoteKucinich

Thanks for your help.
*********

I have this deep fear that the Constitution is slipping out of our grasp -- and we may be struggling the rest of our lives to get it back. So go for it -- liven things up. I sure don't want Rudy and Hillary as the candidates, because then I'd have to vote for Hillary, who is only slightly less acceptable than Rudy (who would be the nails in the coffin for democracy.)

Comments

[mongo42.livejournal.com]

I really like Kucinich. Ron Paul is a staunch defender of the constitution and personal freedoms, but in my eyes he comes across as all-out crazy in a lot of ways. He wants to eliminate the IRS and the Federal Reserve. He wants to defund and pull out of the United Nations and NATO.

Having sad that, I also agree with some of his other positions like drug legalization, restoring habeas corpus, and of course his position on the Iraq war.

[alfreda89.livejournal.com]

I agree.

Kucinich is MUCH to be preferred. I don't think Paul could get all that even if elected, because right now that's how we fund the Federal part of this country. And we're too used to it -- giving it up will be more than many can do.

And -- looking at the clock -- Happy Birthday!

[mongo42.livejournal.com]

I think my main disagreement with Paul is that he's another of those "smaller government" people. I'm firmly in the "we need a bigger government" camp.

[alfreda89.livejournal.com]

I'm firmly in the "we need a bigger government" camp.

I don't know about bigger, but more efficient? We need a VP who can streamline things even more than Gore tried to do. It would be a good thing for the VP to be active on.

[mongo42.livejournal.com]

There are some services that a centralized government just plain is better suited to perform than private enterprise, and those are being savagely cut back and underfunded at every turn.

[alfreda89.livejournal.com]

It seems like only yesterday they were cutting back on National Guard support...and look where that's gotten us. Poor kids dying before they even have sand in their shoes.

And the Feds and states can talk about toll roads all they want, but I think it's a bad thing as the majority solution -- we need another great Interstate project and we need it yesterday.

[morfin.livejournal.com]

Kucinich sounds cool, but totally unelectable, and a vote for him is just a vote thrown away. Paul is a scary libertarian. What does this mean? No federal protections on anything, it's up to the states to decide to protect environment, minorities, etc. Women's right to choose? No federal protection, only on a state by state basis. No social security, no medicare, no funding for education, etc.

I also hate being narrowed down to just one or two choices, of people usually rather too moderate or too careful not to say the wrong thing, but unfortunately, with the current system, voting for someone who may truly share your views means you're voting for someone who can't get elected and thus helping the other side.

Where did all this go wrong?

Re: Where did all this go wrong?

[alfreda89.livejournal.com]

The fundamentalist revival. Once abortion and other "religious" viewpoints dominated one of the party's platforms, everything blew up.

I wish we could modify Roe V. Wade to no obstructions in first 12 weeks, doctor and couple decide in 2nd trimester, etc. Because 90% of the country would go along with that. (There are even stats, a friend who is a priest told me. The hysterics are on the extremes, about 10% each end.)

It used to be we'd elect a moderate president, who dealt with the congress that was sent to him. I think people still think that's what is happening -- but with a Bush, he plays to the 10% he can count on for the next election.

Obama-Kucinich....I could go for that. Or Obama/Edwards. Or Stewart/Colbert. At least they care about the issues.