Bad liberal

[jianantonic]

You are a Social Liberal (73% permissive) and an... Economic Liberal (16% permissive) You are best described as a: Socialist (16e/73s) Link: The Politics Test on Ok Cupid Also: The OkCupid Dating Persona Test

I'm ashamed to admit this in a way, but I can't decide who I like best in the Democratic primaries.  Let me make one thing clear, though:  I will be happy to vote for whomever the party selects as its candidate.  I supported Howard Dean in 2004, my first presidential election as an of-age voter, but when I cast my vote for John Kerry in the election, I actually cried.  I was so dorkily proud to be helping elect a leader who would bring about change in a much needed way, and I was sure that I would one day within the next few years stop hating America.  So much for that.

But anyway, I may hate the state of the union, but I'm not so pessimistic that I won't vote or care in 2008 or any future election.  Throughout my travels and this campaign season, I've had little access to news and the internet, and in the bridge community, you tend to be surrounded by republicans, so I haven't had much intellectual discourse about the Democrats, either.  So I don't know as much as I should.

I feel like Obama is more in line with my political priorities, though I can't say that with certainty.  Everyone knows I'm as liberal as they come, and social issues are some of the most important to me (though healthcare has leapt from a low priority back in 2004 when I was covered on my parents' AWESOME insurance as a student to top priority as someone who is desperately afraid of dying a slow, painful, and preventable death at the hands of a very fucked up system), and I believe for some reason that is not backed up at all by any research that Obama is more progressive than Hillary, socially speaking.  And yet, even though I am truly uncommitted to either candidate, I find myself pulling for Hillary.  I know she has a past of pushing health care reform, but I also know that she sort of dropped her fight for a while, and I'm not sure if she's sincerely back at it again or not.  But there's also Bill.  I know she's NOT Bill, and that if she gets elected, it won't be a repeat of the 90's, but...Bill was good.  He did great things for the economy, and I think she'd be likely to follow his lead in ways that W has totally abandoned.  But who knows what will work now that the global economy has changed so much in W's tenure.  But I feel like I have more faith in Hillary with regards to the economy than any other candidate, republicans included (especially).  

But again, most of these feelings that I have are mostly out of nowhere.  If I had to cast my vote today, I couldn't.  I actually had a dream that I was voting in the primary and I kept going back and forth between Obama and Hillary and just couldn't effing decide, and every time I started to check one of them, I started feeling guilty for not checking the other.  It's a shame that the two of them don't seem to like each other at all, because I really do like both of them.  But it's also a damn shame that Gore and Warner aren't in the race, because if either of them were, there would be no question where my vote would go (unless BOTH of them were running, in which case, oh shit).  

ANYWAY, I know a lot of you have strong feelings for certain candidates, and many of you have already made your points (which I have read!), but if anyone wants to comment about who they're supporting in the Democratic primaries, I'd love the quick and dirty version.  And I'd be lying if I said I wasn't hoping for a friendly debate among the commenters.  Comment anonymously if you'd like, but don't waste my time with the republicans.  It's not gonna happen.

Peace.

Comments

[quandary87.livejournal.com]

I think you're right on in your analysis, Meg. Obama... nobody knows what he's about. Nobody has any clue on his political priorities, because he never talks about that. It's always "change change change, now now now, establishment sucks, let's bring people together." This of course sounds good, but its unclear how its gonna work. And then also "Hillary is the past, I am the future." But like you said, the past, which was Bill Clinton, was amazing.

I think by the time we get to the Virginia Primaries, the point will be moot, someone will be chosen for the democrats, and you'll probably end up voting for them in November. Beyond that, honestly, there's very little practical difference between what Hillary and Obama say. Materially, its all the same views, expand healthcare (good), cut the Iraq war (good), support the lower class, etc.

[drcheeselog.livejournal.com]

Hello, I'm Goob from Falcon Ridge's boyfriend... we've never met:)

A while back I was looking into the different candidates and discovered that while Hillary supports the creation of a Universal Health Care plan (something I've heard you champion in the past), Obama actually only supports a change to the current system which would make it more affordable for people.

Which is better? I'm not sure, with a universal health care everyone is covered, but it's not free. Our taxes would increase greatly and as a result the young will in some ways be paying for the old or injured. Maybe that's the wrong view, but I pay $68 a month now for catastrophic insurance, which is what I need, and I'm guessing the taxes will end up being more than that, so is this really a win for the average 20-something? Additionally from living in Canada and England I can tell you that Universal Health Care can also mean less choice in treatment and longer waits when it comes to getting doctors.

Alternatively Obama's plan (and I agree, we can't say this is a priority of his, it could all be political rhetoric) makes it mandatory for children to have health insurance (how paid for? I'm not sure but a nice idea) and calls for decreases in the costs for everyone's health care (says by an average of $2500 yearly for an average American family). But what will cause these decreases? I'm not sure. His platform speech says the right things, but doesn't really offer concrete solutions as far as I can tell.


I don't feel this issue has a clean solution, all the democrats are calling for reform because it's what people want to hear. However, if you really want change in this next term, Hillary has the history of being passionate about this subject, so she's your best bet. Even if I'm not thrilled with her as a whole.


Anyway, not sure if this was helpful. I'm a novice in this political stuff so someone very well may correct me or provide more info on Obama's plan.

[tremblingmoon.livejournal.com]

I felt a similar sort of conundrum, but then had to decide today because I'm voting absentee (for whatever that's worth these days). And I hate to say this, but I have a suspicion that the fact that we have both a female and an African American candidate in the same primary is not a complete coincidence or some sign that the world is getting so amazingly progressive. In fact, it's a great way to confuse and split the liberal vote--and I'd be willing to bet at least one campaign adviser thought this through--by forcing us to choose between race and gender as political issues (when it really should be about their policies and plans for the presidency).

Anyway, snarking aside, I'm ultimately for Hillary because I think she has a better political foundation and because I find Obama a bit too heavy on the inspirational/motivational side of things and too light on viable, executable policies. And something about him just rubs me the wrong way. Hillary can be a bit gruff at times, but I think she's incredibly smart and politically savvy (most of the time) and I agree with most of her views (although, like quandary87 said, I'm not sure her and Obama's views are all that dissimilar.

I'd be worried, except....

[(Anonymous)]

"In fact, it's a great way to confuse and split the liberal vote--"

Other then liberals (and some independents, in some states) what vote is there to split in the Democratic primary, except the liberal one? It's somewhat less then shocking that there are multiple candidates, on both sides. Forgive my lack of concern.

Now, if the republicans nominated a black woman in the general election...thankfully, they seem to have found themselves some white men. Actually, two white men. Maybe some politico thought it would be great to split the conservative vote?

P.S-"when it really should be about their policies and plans for the presidency" Agreed.

P.P.S-"I find Obama a bit too heavy on the inspirational/motivational side of things"
Maybe we could use a little inspiration nowadays? Better too motivational then not motivational enough, I say.

Re: I'd be worried, except....

[tremblingmoon.livejournal.com]

Well, clearly the liberal vote is the only vote in the democratic primary, but what I meant was that the race/gender split is to some extent muddling the actual political issues and clouding our ability to judge the strength of the candidates as people. The problem is not the fact that we have two candidates who aren't the usual white males--I think that's great; the problem is that race and gender are becoming huge issues in this race because of both the emphasis placed on them by the press and the way both of the candidates are handling their campaigns.

In regard to your PPS, I'm not against Obama, I'm just not sure I trust him yet because I know so little about him. To me, at least right now, he seems to be all surface motivation and very little action.

[oobermeister.livejournal.com]

as far as i can tell, their positions really aren't all that much different, so all i really care is that they can get elected in the general election. i know it shouldn't be that way, but after 2000 and 2004, it kind of is. i prefer obama at the moment because i think he'd be more likely to get the independent voters than hillary. as far as their ability to perform the duties of president, anything is better than bush (or another republican).

[oobermeister.livejournal.com]

also, i hope you're enjoying the BM. i hope you're finding BM to be relieving.