Saturday, October 20, 2007

Very Scary

So my third posting is a little soon for politics, I thought, but then I read this this afternoon. Now while I am very enthusiastic about my right and RESPONSIBILITY to vote, I have to admit that I find the whole election thing frustrating. Maybe it's because I feel that I don't know enough about all of the issues. Or maybe it's because I start to get interested in a candidate because of the few things I do know and/or understand about their stand on issues, and then I'm waiting for them to make me look like an idiot because of something I didn't know or correctly understand about them. Am I making any sense? I am trying very hard to stay up on this particular election with news coverage, visiting websites, and watching debates, but I also feel that candidates only put what they want you to see out there and we don't always get the whole story. And I don't know where to look to get the whole story. I'd love to have a good discussion on this, but those who are already stubbornly decided are usually difficult and annoying to talk to and those that aren't 100% decided are not confident enough to share their feelings (like me).

So here's the deal. For any of you reading this, post a comment with the name of the candidate you are currently supporting (I don't have a problem if you change your mind, that's kind of what this discussion is for) and 3 to 5 CONCISE reasons, any reasons, why you are in favor of said candidate. For example:
Candidate X: Pro-Life - great tax policy - has blonde hair - I know their brother

Keep it simple for those of us in the lowest common denominator of politics. I have a feeling we will be discussing specifics issues more in depth at a future time, hopefully not hair color, but you never know. Let's take baby steps here people. Let's also keep the passion to a minimum as this can be a very hot topic. I will respect everyone's opinion, even if you're wrong (ha!), as long as you are respectful as well. Happy debating!


Eileen said...

Hi, Kristina!
First, congrats on "going for it" with this blog. You are an ambitious woman!

As for the politics the moment I'm not supporting anyone. I think you've hit on something when you worry that we're not getting the whole story about these people. Growing up in D.C. also has made me a bit of a cynic! To add to my jadedness, I have several friends who have worked in various administrations (both democratic & republican), and I get the general sense that politics is more of a game than a public service.

Which, frankly, irritates the heck out of me. My requirements (or should I say "desperate wishes") for a solid candidate include having a solidly formed conscience that can't be bought by lobbyists or other groups, genuinely striving for solidarity with the poor, and respecting the sanctity of ALL life (yes, this includes the unborn as well as those on death row). So that's only 3 requirements, but I think they're pretty huge. oh, wait! A fourth: the candidate must inspire the citizens of this country to participate in the functioning of their government - even if it's through peaceful protests!

I've told myself that I won't think too hard on the 2008 election until January, mainly because I don't think this much airtime should be given to the candidates this far out. So, I suppose I will check back in then when I feel more free to name a favorite.

How about you? I'm curious!

Kristina said...

Okay, ummmm. I know which candidates I DON'T like. Does that count? The problem is that I see so much out there that I don't like. So, here goes.

Right now, I'm supporting Rudy Giuliani. great tax policy - great crime history - great military policy (my number 1 priority and deal breaker)

From another Kristina

Kristina said...

Oh, Eileen, the only problem I see with not getting involved until January is that, frequently, the candidates start to water down their message about that time. So, sometimes, you don't get the whole story.
(Again, not Stina)

Stina said...


Thanks for your comment. Even though you didn't name a candidate, you did get your thoughts out which was what I was basically hoping for. The motivation of this post was to open up a discussion because I find that when I try in the real world (as opposed to the blog world) people, myself included, get uncomfortable quickly.

My problem with not getting involved until January is that I'm afraid that people will only be looking at the "front runners" and won't even look beyond. I think I'm currently leaning more toward candidates who are not considered front runners, like Giuliani and Romney. That's why I'm trying to bring the election subject out in the open, so people will realize there are more than a couple of people to consider. I believe in the American people to do the right thing, but they have to be informed to do that. If the majority votes differently than I do, so be it, but I want them to vote differently because that's what they believe is right, not because they recognize a name.


Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I am with you on the seeing more things we don't like than do like thought. My problem with Guiliani off the bat, of course, is his Pro-Choice stand. However, his current popularity brings up the other question of voting for the lesser of two evils...

Kristina said...

I think that many pro-life voters have a problem with Giuliani for that very reason.

Here's my personal take on it. I think that electing a president that is pro-life will not definitely make a difference in the movement. After all, the president cannot change the rulings of the Supreme Court.

However, the president CAN appoint the Supreme Court Justices. The reason I like Guiliani is because he sees the problem with the pro-life movement. Please, understand, I am pro-life. However, in the society we live in today, I see a lot of problems with trying to make abortion illegal suddenly.

Guiliani has said that he will appoint strictly constructionist judges. The Supreme Court Justices are the only ones who can overturn Roe v. Wade.

While there are other candidates who are more pro-life, some of them I don't like for other reasons. So, for me, I guess that abortion is not the deciding factor.

And yes, I will show up at the polls no matter which Republican gets the nomination because I believe that most of them will be better than Hillary Clinton on the issues that matter to me.

Stina said...


I REALLY appreciate your thoughts. I am desperately trying to understand the possible outcomes, remember, I'm not the greatest political mind. Although I think it is sad that we have to somewhat "strategize" over voting for president, I do have a little bit of a realist streak in me and understand that there will never be a "perfect" candidate and that we have to look at the whole package. I think you gave a very good explanation on your views of this particular issue without getting too deep. I think I just get so frustrated over the idea that someone could be pro-choice that it hinders me from seeing the big picture. We have to win battles first, before we can win the war right? I just wish we didn't have to worry about who can beat Hillary.

The baby just went down, hopefuuly for the rest of the night, so I am off to bed...good night.

TheTutor said...

I'm supporting Ron Paul because:

1. He's a strict Constitutionalist (if it's not in the Constitution, the federal government should leave it alone)

2. He's pro-life

3. He wants to support our military by bringing them home.

4. He supports the defense of our country by bringing our troops home to protect our borders.

5. He has a consistent voting record.

6. He's predictable (if you've read the Constitution, you know what he's going to do)

7. He's a flesh and blood conservative Republican (they are a dying breed, sadly)

You can read more about him at

Oh, and the earlier you get involved, the better. The media has great influence over who the "to tier" candidates are just by declaring them top tier. You may not hear about alternatives if you wait until just before the primaries.

I'm glad I found your blog. I'm enjoying it.