The political calculus:
Dennis Kucinich or Obama
or
Ralph Nader or Edwards
Nader / Bloomberg?
[Update or more of a sort: see comments in bottom brackets 1-3-07]
I was originally going to spin off on the first three words, but breaking commentary and news tweaked these lines.
More later. Maybe.
But these tangents are not really so wild, they revolve around the council one takes and that [**] one gives. Kucinich "the principled" or "the calculator". Nader "the idealist" or "the realist".
Standing up or compromising.
All are more than semantics.
Thanks to Brie Walker* and Thom Hartmann.
*Sitting in for Stephanie Miller.
[**] or which
[1-3-07: a straw poll was just distributed by the Democratic Party of Washington State so I will now add LOCAL to the LABELS for this post. I was going to make a comment but unfortunately I am making progress and asked a few preemptive questions which fine-tuned my course. They will do that. Questions that is. My original thought had to do with who the poll was distributed to, but it was broadly distributed and the best comment is on that site. "Congratulations to Kucinich supporters on their great organizing efforts." Not to take anything away from this comment, but Kucinich's comments in Iowa were the kernel of my original post and its Ramble and subsequent flip-flop. But strategy aside(or maybe I just can't or will not articulate it) I may stick my neck out for Edwards. I have too many theories but I will refrain from rationalizing this as one. But my alternate perspective given the latest input, is that Senators Dodd and Biden are pretty good guys or as the latter would say, "I really like" them, but the political calculus is not just from the base.
[UPDATE: 1-7-08 "strategy aside" link added ]
3 comments:
I hate to say through all this fuzzy math and fuzzy English, that this pushes me toward Edwards. If we are looking for a balance between competition and cooperation mabye Bloomberg and Nader would be able to work something out. And from the really out there (but prior to these comments unfolding) it was Kucinich and Ron Paul, now it may need to be LaRouche and Ron Paul to be cutting edge balance. I don't know which branch of math or significs this would be, but maybe a cross between history and debate. No fuzz intended. Nor really an attempt to be out of the mainstream.
As comments are still unfolding or actually being replayed on the air, I will note that Unions do not seem to be special interest groups per se in that they represent workers and their impact is distributed to even those that do not belong either to a union or the category of worker.
Full disclosure: Well who could really be full? I am a Democratic PCO in a caucus state who is still open to change as to who I will sign in for. I was going to express my leanings for Edwards, but that was before all these words and the Kucinich interview Thom Hartmann just replayed. My just recent interpretation is not done flip-flopping. Kucinich was impressive, and for that matter so was Thom Hartmann's quick adjustment in semantics.
Post a Comment