terratogen wrote:
] inignoct wrote:
] ]sweet lord, she better not.
]
] Between her and Bush... Choice.. It's supposed to be a good
] thing, right?

well, that assumes that she's the most likely candidate to beat bush. i'm not so sure... she's still seen negatively by a lot of people and unless she can motivate *all* the female voters, i'm unconvinced that she's the best choice. but, my primary issue with it is that after saying many, many times that she wouldn't run, doing so now would demolish her credibility, not to mention undermine the party. the more a candidate says one thing and does another, the less i'm going to like them.

that being said, if she decides to run, and wins the primary, i'll certainly vote for her, but i won't be as happy about it.

inignoct wrote:
] terratogen wrote:
] ] inignoct wrote:
] ] ]sweet lord, she better not.
] ]
] ] Between her and Bush... Choice.. It's supposed to be a good
]
] ] thing, right?
]
] well, that assumes that she's the most likely candidate to
] beat bush. i'm not so sure... she's still seen negatively by
] a lot of people and unless she can motivate *all* the female
] voters, i'm unconvinced that she's the best choice. but, my
] primary issue with it is that after saying many, many times
] that she wouldn't run, doing so now would demolish her
] credibility, not to mention undermine the party. the more a
] candidate says one thing and does another, the less i'm going
] to like them.
]
] that being said, if she decides to run, and wins the primary,
] i'll certainly vote for her, but i won't be as happy about it.

All I have to say, is that I voted for Nader last time...None of this is my fault. We've been stuck in a one party system with two factions for far too long.

terratogen wrote:
] inignoct wrote:
] ] terratogen wrote:
] ] ] inignoct wrote:
] ] ] ]sweet lord, she better not.
] ] ]
] ] ] Between her and Bush... Choice.. It's supposed to be a
] good
] ]
] ] ] thing, right?
] ]
] ] well, that assumes that she's the most likely candidate to
] ] beat bush. i'm not so sure... she's still seen negatively
] by
] ] a lot of people and unless she can motivate *all* the female
]
] ] voters, i'm unconvinced that she's the best choice. but, my
]
] ] primary issue with it is that after saying many, many times
] ] that she wouldn't run, doing so now would demolish her
] ] credibility, not to mention undermine the party. the more a
]
] ] candidate says one thing and does another, the less i'm
] going
] ] to like them.
] ]
] ] that being said, if she decides to run, and wins the
] primary,
] ] i'll certainly vote for her, but i won't be as happy about
] it.
]
] All I have to say, is that I voted for Nader last time...None
] of this is my fault. We've been stuck in a one party system
] with two factions for far too long.

heh, yeah. i voted for nader too. i strongly agree that there's not enough diversity of stance taken into account in our system. in the last election, i voted with my ethics for the person i most agreed with, regardless of his ability to win.

however, given what the Bush administration has done to this country and the world, i can no longer comfortably do so. My philosophical ideals must come second to helping ensure that we don't suffer through four more years of bush. given that i live in georgia, i'm not sure it's likely to matter, of course.

anyway, everyone's gotta choose their own road, and i know who i support at this point in the rece, but i also know that i'll be voting for whichever candidate is best positioned to beat bush, regardless of other factors.