Even years are better
So today's the start of a new year. My sister's wisdom is that even years are better than odd ones. She may be right. I was born in an even year.
Christmas was nice. Got to see the family and drink wine. I made German bread dumplings (Semmelknödeln), which inspired song and merriment. Last night I rang in the New Year's with friend I hadn't seen since the last New Year's eve.
Otherwise my break has been pretty quiet. Except for all the politics of course. As you may know, the Iowa Caucuses are in two days. The phones have been ringing off the hook, and brave Edwards supports have been knocking on the door, setting the crazy dog off on a fit of barking.
I've been taking advantage of all this free time to get out and see the candidates. So far I've seen Gov. Richardson twice and Senators Obama and Edwards once and shook all three of their hands. I don't usually get political in my blog, but here are my thoughts on the Democratic race.
For the last several months my favorites have been Gov. Richardson and Senator Obama. Richardson caught my attention because he has, by far, the most impressive resume and most experience of any of the democratic candidates. I also like his policies. But he looses points with me when I see him speak, and in particular answer questions. I feel a person's ability to answer questions well shows that they are intelligent and can think on their feet. Richardson seems to have his spiel, and if he gets a new question, he simply gives which ever spiel is most closely related.
So in the end Senator Obama is my first choice (though I have two days to change my mind). In short, because I feel he is the most rational and articulate candidate. When explaining his position on an issue, he does so using reason and facts. Often first enumerating what's wrong than then explaining what he intends to do to solve the problem. And no other candidate is as deft at public speaking as he is (although Edwards comes close). As someone who values intelligence and learning, he appeals to my often overly-rational mind.
So what about the other two? I have admittedly not given Senator Clinton due research, but I can see that she is a polarizing candidate. I think she's qualified, and if she does win the nomination I'll vote for her, but she will have a difficult time bringing Republicans to the table. Edwards is my third choice and probably the safest candidate. But he turned me off when I saw him speak because of his reliance on emotional appeal. Where Obama uses facts and reason supported by rhetoric of vision and change, Edwards pulls out the "my father worked in the mill" and "companies are evil" card. It's all very moving, but I am not going to vote based off which candidate brings me closest to tears.
Caucus and election years are also even years. I am really looking forward to caucusing. As ridiculous as the system may be, it is a lot of fun. Hopefully this political year will go well.
My resolution: pronounce "nuclear" properly... :-)
Happy New Year everyone.
Christmas was nice. Got to see the family and drink wine. I made German bread dumplings (Semmelknödeln), which inspired song and merriment. Last night I rang in the New Year's with friend I hadn't seen since the last New Year's eve.
Otherwise my break has been pretty quiet. Except for all the politics of course. As you may know, the Iowa Caucuses are in two days. The phones have been ringing off the hook, and brave Edwards supports have been knocking on the door, setting the crazy dog off on a fit of barking.
I've been taking advantage of all this free time to get out and see the candidates. So far I've seen Gov. Richardson twice and Senators Obama and Edwards once and shook all three of their hands. I don't usually get political in my blog, but here are my thoughts on the Democratic race.
For the last several months my favorites have been Gov. Richardson and Senator Obama. Richardson caught my attention because he has, by far, the most impressive resume and most experience of any of the democratic candidates. I also like his policies. But he looses points with me when I see him speak, and in particular answer questions. I feel a person's ability to answer questions well shows that they are intelligent and can think on their feet. Richardson seems to have his spiel, and if he gets a new question, he simply gives which ever spiel is most closely related.
So in the end Senator Obama is my first choice (though I have two days to change my mind). In short, because I feel he is the most rational and articulate candidate. When explaining his position on an issue, he does so using reason and facts. Often first enumerating what's wrong than then explaining what he intends to do to solve the problem. And no other candidate is as deft at public speaking as he is (although Edwards comes close). As someone who values intelligence and learning, he appeals to my often overly-rational mind.
So what about the other two? I have admittedly not given Senator Clinton due research, but I can see that she is a polarizing candidate. I think she's qualified, and if she does win the nomination I'll vote for her, but she will have a difficult time bringing Republicans to the table. Edwards is my third choice and probably the safest candidate. But he turned me off when I saw him speak because of his reliance on emotional appeal. Where Obama uses facts and reason supported by rhetoric of vision and change, Edwards pulls out the "my father worked in the mill" and "companies are evil" card. It's all very moving, but I am not going to vote based off which candidate brings me closest to tears.
Caucus and election years are also even years. I am really looking forward to caucusing. As ridiculous as the system may be, it is a lot of fun. Hopefully this political year will go well.
My resolution: pronounce "nuclear" properly... :-)
Happy New Year everyone.
posted by laura s at 5:35 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home