Theresa For President

The Presidential Race is truly underway now. Voters in Iowa are making it known today who they want as the Democratic candidate for President. It's supposedly going to be a tight race.
While that could be interpreted as meaning that the Democrats have a number of strong candidates in the running, I think it means that the Democrats are lacking a standout candidate - a candidate who stands a snowballs chance in hell of beating Bush.

I hate writing that. God knows, I don't want Bush to be reelected. At this point, I'll vote for whoever is running against Bush. I'd really like it though if that candidate was someone I actually liked. It's like watching the World Series and cheering for the Marlins, just because you hate the Yankees more. What you really want is for the Dodgers to win, but since they're not there, you have to cheer for the Marlins just to try to prevent the Yankees from winning. A no-win situation.

The Democrats really are like the Dodgers. They do okay for a while, make you think for a moment that they really have a shot this year, and then when it comes down to the wire, they fall apart, crumble under pressure, shoot themselves in the foot. How do the Democrats think that they can put up a good fight against a President that a ridiculously high percentage of Americans support when they let ever Tom, Dick and Harry have a shot at the nomination? I don't think they understand that you aren't supposed to divide and conquer yourself.

It's a confusing race that's for sure. If you're not sure which candidate lines up best with your beliefs, you ought to check out this website: www.selectsmart.com/president/
You can take a brief survey, choosing your position on a number of important issues in the upcoming election, and the candidates will then be ranked based on how closely they line up with your beliefs. It's not a perfect indicator. Of course, not all the issues are covered, and you can't always answer the question just the way you want to. But it's a start. And once you get your results, you can click on links attached to each candidate to get a pretty good summary of where they stand on each of the points.

Here are my results:

1. Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%)
2. Socialist Candidate (85%)
3. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (79%)
4. Kucinich, Rep. Dennis, OH - Democrat (78%)
5. Clark, Retired General Wesley K., AR - Democrat (73%)
6. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (73%)
7. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (63%)
8. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (63%)
9. Gephardt, Rep. Dick, MO - Democrat (61%)
10. Lieberman, Senator Joe, CT - Democrat (37%)
11. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat (36%)
12. Libertarian Candidate (25%)
13. Phillips, Howard - Constitution (9%)
14. Bush, President George W. - Republican (5%)

Interesting, huh? Bet none of you knew that I'm really a Socialist. And how the hell did Al Sharpton creep in there? He keeps ending up toward the top of the list of everyone I tell to do this program. A bit suspicious, but I don't think there's too many people who would seriously consider voting for him, so not too much of a problem.

As for what I think about my results. Well Bush definitely belongs at the bottom. And as far as issues go, I do line up most closely with Dean. But I'm still leery of voting for him. Let me tell you why. Dean rubs me the wrong way. I think he's an angry man who talks without thinking and is divisive. As much as he likes to present himself as Bush's opposite, I find that there are a lot of eery similarities. They might be worlds apart as far as where they stand on issues, but the way in which they approach things is much too similar. They attack opponents unmercifully, they make sweeping statements that they can't always support with evidence, and they generally talk out of their asses. I also think that Dean is a typical elite Northeasterner...He's not really connected to the common man and has an ungrounded superiority complex. Additionally, I'm not convinced that his experience is enough for the job. Sure, he's all for social justice and such...but isn't it easy to be so when 90% of the state you govern is white. Sure, he would have never voted for war...but isn't that easy to say when you didn't have to vote...when you didn't have to face a nation that was wounded, desperate and ready to attack. I hope he is for social justice. I hope he is against the war. I'm just not sure I'm ready to put all my faith in words that aren't necessarily backed up by actions.

I would really like to be wrong about Dean. I'd like to be able to throw my full support behind him. We line up well on the issues. But I've got that feeling, the one you just can't shake and you can't really rationally explain, but is there nonetheless, nagging at me. Fortunately, I still have some time before I have to make up my mind. Hopefully, by that time, someone will stand up and convince me that they have what it takes to be my President.