Dean picks up a HUGE endorsement.....Me. (ha-ha)

Armstead

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Dec-04-03 01:35 PM
Original message

Dean picks up a HUGE endorsement.....Me. (ha-ha)

Edited on Thu Dec-04-03 01:39 PM by Armstead

Okay, not huge. Not even big. In fact, tinier than tiny in the scheme of things. But, hey if you can't exercise your ego and inflate your sense of self-importance on a message board...

Anyway, just thought I go on the DU record as deciding to place myself firmly in the Dean column.

I was lukewarm about him at first, and I've been vacillating in my own mind for a variety of reasons. Before I say why Dean, here's a few words about the others. I will support whichever gets the nomination. I think they all have certain strenghts, and I'm not gonna bash any of them (except Joe). And any of them would be a real asset as VP or member of the cabinet.

I'm in the left wing of things. and I agree with Kucinich philisophically, and I think he's a good politician on certain levels. But at this point, his campaign is more about sending a message to the Democrats. And he hasn't really been a great messenger in forums like the debates, I hate to say. I also like the politics of Braun and Sharpton, but they are not serious contenders for a prsidential run.

Kerry is my senator and I admire him in many ways. Initially I thought he'd be a great candidate, but I think he's blown in in this campaign. And his style is to remote and dry....He's gotten a little better lately, but it seems like too little too late to me.

Gephardt is a good man too. He'd make a really good president, and I still think we could do a lot worse than him as the nominee. But he doesn't have the fire and seems like a bit worn at the sleeves at this point to excite people.

Edwards is also a good man, but has the opposite problem than Gephardt. He doesn't seem experienced enough in the ways of politics. And, in superficial terms, he's too fresh and good looking for a presidential candidate. I wish he'd focused on his senate seat and perhaps angle for a later run (or the vp slot.)

Clark...I like him and some of his politics. And he certainly has foreign policy creds. But I think he's too tied to the military industrial complex. I also don't think he's being taken seriously enough to capitalize on his ex-general status eitehr. And his persona seems too remote for the image side of presidential politics.

Holy Joe. Fergedit. No more needs to be said.

As for Dean, the more I see of him, the more impressed with him. I hate to say it, but a lot of it is that mysterious "it factor." he just comes across as strong and tough and passionate. he's also decent but mean enough to hold his own.

He also is bringing a new form of politics, both in his personal style and straightforward language and the nature of his campaign. I agree with him that his campaign IS campaign finance reform. Would be nice of he'd stuck to public money limits, but ya gotta fight fire with fire when going up against the Bush Machine.

He's a moderate, but I like the fact that he listens to the left. He "gets it" as far as our concerns, and he is incorporating that in his campaign message. I get a little nervous that he'll slide into the centrist mold eventually. But I think the nature of his campaign means that he'll be accountale to us, rather than to the big corporate backers.

I also think that is an asset. I'm a neighbor of Vermont, and I am somewhat familiar with his governming style there. He's a pragmatist in a good sense. And I think when people realize that, he'll have a lot of appeal to those "swing voters."

Anyway, that's why I've decided to give my totally irrelevant support to Dean.