Create an Account
username: password:
 
  MemeStreams Logo

MemeStreams Discussion

search


This page contains all of the posts and discussion on MemeStreams referencing the following web page: Edwards focuses on electability argument - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Boston Globe - Political Intelligence. You can find discussions on MemeStreams as you surf the web, even if you aren't a MemeStreams member, using the Threads Bookmarklet.

Edwards focuses on electability argument - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Boston Globe - Political Intelligence
by k at 11:31 am EDT, Oct 19, 2007

"We need a leader who can compete anywhere in America, and win," former Georgia Governor Roy Barnes said in a statement provided by the Edwards campaign. "Some pundits say that a Democrat can't win in some places in the South, Midwest or West.

"Some pundits" huh? Jesus christ, this notion of "electability" is a dead end street. Even discussing it is an effective resignation of politics as a competition of ideas. "Electability" means "popularity contest" and as much as I recognize the reality of those elements, discussing them like this is cheap and harmful to the larger discourse. I like Edwards well enough, but I'm very tired of seeing this "electability" stuff. I've entertained the idea before, but ultimately it's just plain detrimental to democracy.


 
RE: Edwards focuses on electability argument - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Boston Globe - Political Intelligence
by Mike the Usurper at 3:06 am EDT, Oct 21, 2007

k wrote:

"We need a leader who can compete anywhere in America, and win," former Georgia Governor Roy Barnes said in a statement provided by the Edwards campaign. "Some pundits say that a Democrat can't win in some places in the South, Midwest or West.

"Some pundits" huh? Jesus christ, this notion of "electability" is a dead end street. Even discussing it is an effective resignation of politics as a competition of ideas. "Electability" means "popularity contest" and as much as I recognize the reality of those elements, discussing them like this is cheap and harmful to the larger discourse. I like Edwards well enough, but I'm very tired of seeing this "electability" stuff. I've entertained the idea before, but ultimately it's just plain detrimental to democracy.

I think I've thrown enough up that people know my position on this, but I also think this is an extremely significant issue. It is not one I care for, but the current front-runner is Hillary, who will do anything she can to not piss off anyone. I also think that is an uttrly wrong approach to the next election, I think someone should take a stand, piss part of the sheepulace off and extend the nation from there.

Hillary is not that person. She already has (at last poll count) 41% of the populace who can't stand her, and Edwards does not. Aside from the fact that I think Edwards is a better candidate all the way around, he does not have the "Hillary factor" and can afford to piss people off, which I think he should, but has yet to do so.

The democrats are turning into a train wreck by being too polite. They don't want to piss people off. I think they should stop being afraid. If you don't piss anyone off, you can't rouse anyone behind you, you're position is too wishy-washy to jump up and seize the day. Hillary is mentally incapable of seizing the day.

Worse, we need a president to flat out renounce what Bush has done with the "imperial pesidency." I utterly fail to see Hillary do that, and am iffy on Edwards doing so, but I will take the devil I don't know versus the devil I know because the devil I know is going the wrong way.


  
RE: Edwards focuses on electability argument - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Boston Globe - Political Intelligence
by k at 12:54 am EDT, Oct 22, 2007

Mike the Usurper wrote:
The democrats are turning into a train wreck by being too polite. They don't want to piss people off.

Hear hear.


 
 
Powered By Industrial Memetics