|
I decided yesterday. I have been pretty much satisfied with all and any of the announced Democratic Party candidates (my favorite, of course, would have been Al Gore, had he chosen to run; I'm disappointed that he didn't, although I can understand and do respect his decision not to). I wasn't going to make a decision, because I could easily support whichever candidate gets the nomination.
But the more I've been thinking and reading, the more I've decided that John Edwards is the most radical of the principal Democratic candidates, in that he alone seems to understand that no Democratic President can any longer get anything done in Washington without breaking the existing power structure of lobbyists and "Villagers" (the inside-the-Beltway community that thinks it has some near divine right to tell everyone else what they should think and support). Hillary Clinton is brilliant, tough, and experienced; but she has too many ties to the power structure. Barack Obama is passionate and visionary; but he seems to think if he just plays nice with the GOP, they will be nice and let him do what he wants.
Only Edwards realizes that bi-partisanship and non-partisanship may sound good, especially to the Villagers (who object to partisanship only when it is practiced by the Democrats), but that there is no way in hell that the GOP will ever just sit back and let him govern, even if he were to win 60% of the vote in the general election and have a whopping Democratic majority in both Houses of Congress.
This isn't about policy; all the major candidates are pretty close on the issues. It's about understanding the toxicity of DC politics/media/lobbying and that the only way to break that spell is to speak its name unafraid, to challenge it fearlessly, and to summon the American people to take back their government. I think Edwards is the Democrat most aware of this crisis and most willing to try to fight back.
I don't know that he can get the nomination. But the more support he gains, even from those of us in states (such as New Jersey, where I live) that have little chance of influencing the primary process, the louder his voice can and will sound in articulating the major challenge facing the Democrats - not to give in, not to try to appease the Villagers, not to accept politics-as-usual.
Edwards isn't perfect. His healthcare proposals, like all the Democratic candidates', is too much of a hodgepodge caused by nobody being willing to come right out and say that only a single-payer system will cure the problem. He could be even more forthright in explaining why the Democrats have to end the power of the lobbyists and Villagers if they are to have any chance of bringing about the changes we all support. But he's the only one even mentioning the need for this fight. And that's why he has my support.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
