Listen, My Children...

Every Little Helps

Sunday, January 18, 2004

Edwards 2004?

I've mentioned before that I like John Edwards (ahh, problems of names: as Jonathan, he's a fire-and-brimstone preacher; as John, he's a TV psychic -- well, in plural). I don't think he's the best person out there; likewise, I don't think Bush is the best person out there. We can't choose from everyone in America for President, though, so you have to pick the best of what you've got. I'm highly unlikely to begin campaigning for Edwards, but I still think you could do quite a lot worse.

As R. Alex Whitlock puts it, "next to Lieberman, he's probably the one I'd view most favorably in the Democratic field should a Dem win the presidency." He's got the same appeal to me as Kennedy -- young, optimistic, small kids, nice hair... Ok, ok, that's not the way to choose a President (although it's well proven that both men and women are more likely to vote for an attractive and tall male candidate). But he seems the best of the lot!

That's what worries me a lot about the focus on Dean. There have been many comments made, several seriously, that Republicans should be supporting a Dean campaign because he's the looniest (well, besides Sharpton!) and therefore the easiest to beat. I think that's a dangerous strategy. If something should go dreadfully wrong, causing masses of people to fall into the "well, I don't normally go Democrat, but -- anyone but Bush!" camp, we do not want Dean as a president! Should we not be hoping that the one we'd choose, if we had to choose one, will win? If he's close enough to Bush (Lieberman, for example), there's nothing to differentiate him much in a race anyhow, so he's probably less of a threat than someone (Kucinich) quirky and different and interesting.


Post a Comment

<< Home