So hard to choose

This primary season is going extremely well so far, almost too well. We have so many great candidates, I don't know how I'm going to decide. Of the five major candidates currently remaining, there's a good chance that three or four will still be in contention by our caucus date, February 5. That means high turnout.

I know people get impatient with a long campaign season and wonder why states like Iowa and New Hampshire deserve so much influence. The system is intended to break through the apathy that is so prevalent today, especially in the suburbs. When voters in our Congressional District voted for Tom Tancredo, it wasn't because they favor racist fear-mongering; it was because they weren't willing to spend more than 5 minutes looking at other alternatives, when the media won't do it. The staggered voting of the presidential primary forces the media to take enough time to thoroughly examine each candidate, and to test them under fire. Each major candidate gets time on the rotisserie. No candidate can win Iowa with a pure media campaign, because Iowans want to grill them in person. In a nationwide primary, such a campaign would be impossible. With the concentrated ownership, political bias, and poor quality of news organizations today, a purely media-driven campaign would be disastrous for America.

So the primary season is doing its job, testing the mettle of each candidate and narrowing the field. Already Joe Biden and Chris Dodd have withdrawn. Both men had much to offer, but both proved they are better Senators than presidents. Both are likely to assume leadership posts in the US Senate, and I look forward to that. According to Wikipedia, 21 Democrats have filed with the Federal Elections Commission to run for president. But only five now have a significant base of support:

• Senator Hillary Clinton, the smart and tenacious leader, whose energy and experience inspire confidence. It's easy to imagine this new Clinton in the Oval Office during a crisis, because this is someone who has been tested over and over again, who never, ever, gives up.
• Senator John Edwards, the champion of the middle class, a group that makes up most of the population but has been treated terribly by the Republican rule of the past 26 years. If it's time for the middle class to make a comeback, Edwards is the one to lead it.
• Congressman Dennis Kucinich, a visionary man ahead of his time, who invites us to put aside backwardness and stagnation, to come to grips with a rapidly changing world and take it head-on.
• Senator Barack Obama, the charismatic leader who has awakened an entirely new generation to take charge of its future. I think in all my time in politics, the young voter turnout in Iowa might be the most exciting and hopeful thing I have ever seen.
• Governor Bill Richardson, the most experienced executive in the race, trusted by Republicans and Democrats alike to go anywhere in the world and talk with any leader, friend or foe, to successfully represent the interests of the United States and the cause of Freedom.

Every one of these candidates is a transformative figure, an agent of change. Each would lead us in a distinct direction. I think we can count on any of them to run the government competently, to bring in the best people, to repair our relationships with the rest of the world, to unite the nation, to keep us safe, and to get our economy moving. Yet each has a different point of view, a different leadership style, and different priorities. We have a real choice, and the choice we make on February 5 will change the world for generations.

Comments

[pdt]

I really enjoyed the Democratic debate last night. It looked like a panel of presidents, tackling the big issues of our time.

The Republican debate, in contrast, followed the pattern we've seen all too often in debates over the past few election cycles: a bunch of squabbling over who said what.