Categories
National politics

Longterm View

I have figured out the best reason to re-elect George Bush this year. I am under no pretense that everybody agrees with this idea, but I think few people have considered the unique opportunity that re-electing our current president provides for the American political system.

If George Bush is re-elected he will not leave any heir-apparent in the Republican party which would give moderate republicans four years to get to work in the effort of taking back their party from the extreme rightists that currently control it by the time that they have to hold a primary election to select their next presidential candidate – someone who is moderate rather than someone who is willing to talk moderate.

Before every presidential election the party that is not in control of the White House holds a presidential primary to choose their guy, but the party in powe rarely does that. If President Bush is re-elected both parties will be holding serious prmary elections – there will be no real incumbant in either party and moderates in both parties can make their voices heard so that we do not end up like this year without a good candidate on the ballot – that includes all the third party candidates.

One of the resons that I find it rather easy to write this before the election is because my vote is already cast based on geography. Because I live in Utah my vote will be counted for President Bush no matter who it is I would like to support. Perhaps I am trying to find a reason to support the vote that will inevitably be recorded for me in the electoral college.

Categories
National politics

Interesting Thought

I just had an interesting thought. I have been looking at our presidential candidates and what they have been saying and I just recognized a difference in the campaigns.

President Bush is running for the office of president of the United States. (Anyone reading that is going to say “Duh, what did you think he was running for?”) The interesting things is that I just realized that Senator Kerry is not running for the office of president of the United States (Now those same people are saying “I thought he was running for president of the United States, what do you think he is running for?”) he is running for the office of “Leader of the Free World.”

Is there a difference? Yes.

Which one should they be running for? That is for the voters to decide.

Categories
National politics

Some Real Issues

I thought this really shows the difference between “politics” and “issues” by highlighting some issues. I would add just one thing – if either candidate can give a simple answer to any of these issues I won’t believe him.

Thanks to David Anderson for bringing this to my attention on his blog.

Categories
National politics

Realistic

I enjoyed reading this editorial but whether it is the right thing to do or not I am sure that it is not realistic to expect president Bush to specifically condemn the attacks on John Kerry.

One of the major differences between those attacks and the ones aimed at the president is that the attacks aimed at the president were happening before John Kerry was even chosen as the Democratic nominee so nobody could say that he is orchestrating them. The complaint that George Bush is behind these attacks is unfounded. He does not need to be behind them to get people to attack John Kerry. The fact of the matter is that radical Republicans don’t like John Kerry any more than radical democrats like George Bush.