Couple of things
- Apologies loyal readers as I've been away setting up Front Porch Consulting which has proven to occupy almost all of my time. Got two clients and three possible others, which is very, very good since Daddy needs to get paid. Hopefully I can get the web site up in the next week.
- I'm glad to see that Buddy Allen will remain as the chair of the LRA since his quiet work as that authority's head is one of the unsung success stories of the community. He's been able to turn a positive - the move of the Navy School - to a positive by securing land for UGA to expand and guarantee some reserved space for private development. All the while he and the rest of the LRA stubbornly stuck the premise that this move serve those residents most in need, and the result was a deal to pay five area non-profits to build expanded services for low-income citizens.
- While I'm all for a limited playoff too, does anyone think this will do much good?
- You know, Charles Platter kinda makes sense ... and I hope people heed his word. The Clarke County Board of Education is comprised of entrenched, albeit dedicated, individuals. The chance for someone to actually challenge them in a race would inject new ideas into our local discussion on education. The money's terrible, of course, and the hours are long, but it's arguably a noble cause.
- This state-by-state look for the Democrats on Super Tuesday is interesting, and it shows real movement for Barack Obama. Granted, I still think it's a long shot he can pull this thing out (though I'm still optimistic), but if he can make it close and survive afterward the primary calendar sets up nicely for him. And the longer he hangs in, the better for his campaign. As an aside, whoever thought the Democrats would be the ones headed toward the brokered convention? Also, the GOP glance is here, and it looks like John McCain is going to coast.
- I'm glad to see that Buddy Allen will remain as the chair of the LRA since his quiet work as that authority's head is one of the unsung success stories of the community. He's been able to turn a positive - the move of the Navy School - to a positive by securing land for UGA to expand and guarantee some reserved space for private development. All the while he and the rest of the LRA stubbornly stuck the premise that this move serve those residents most in need, and the result was a deal to pay five area non-profits to build expanded services for low-income citizens.
- While I'm all for a limited playoff too, does anyone think this will do much good?
- You know, Charles Platter kinda makes sense ... and I hope people heed his word. The Clarke County Board of Education is comprised of entrenched, albeit dedicated, individuals. The chance for someone to actually challenge them in a race would inject new ideas into our local discussion on education. The money's terrible, of course, and the hours are long, but it's arguably a noble cause.
- This state-by-state look for the Democrats on Super Tuesday is interesting, and it shows real movement for Barack Obama. Granted, I still think it's a long shot he can pull this thing out (though I'm still optimistic), but if he can make it close and survive afterward the primary calendar sets up nicely for him. And the longer he hangs in, the better for his campaign. As an aside, whoever thought the Democrats would be the ones headed toward the brokered convention? Also, the GOP glance is here, and it looks like John McCain is going to coast.
posted by Jmac at 8:14 AM
19 Comments:
I think you meant Buddy Allen turned a "negative" into a "postive"
For what it's worth, I voted in advance for Obama
Expect Romney to have a much better-than-expected showing on Tuesday. Or maybe that's only my hope talking (if McCain is the nominee, I won't be voting for either of the major parties).
Oh, and I'm glad the Georgia lawmakers have solved every other problem.
Hillary Clinton will be president. Obama has no chance with a non-stacked turnout. The republicans don't have a candidate worth shooting. I will be abstaining from voting as usual.
-Matt
Then Matt - you are not allowed to comment. Politics 101 - you can't complain if you don't vote.
JMac -
Of course the action (urging a national playoff) of the state legislature doesn't do anything - but it is not like they really do anything in the first place. I mean come on - if they have truly addressed one of the many pressing issues, I could lukewarm support the effort behind this bill. But I for one am frustrated that they wasted my tax dollars drafting, debating, and voting on this when they have much, much bigger fish to fry.
Congrats, JMac!
Sorry, but I don't agree with the vote-or-shut-up comments until the day arrives that we can vote "none of the above."
I will be voting on the 5th, though.
--Nicki
I agree with Nicki. "Vote or shut up" is not how it works, dude. We have these things called rights, supposedly (once upon a time...), and they are not contingent upon our voting. I have the right to free speech whether or not I voted. And, as Nicki more specifically pointed out, the whole idea that you HAVE to vote in order to 'earn' your right to an opinion assumes that at least one of the candidates who make it onto the ballot are indeed acceptable. What if you believe that is not the case? You have to march down to the voting booth and pull the lever for someone you wouldn't trust with toothpaste or else you don't get to espouse political opinions any more? Just silly. A platitude taught to middle schoolers. Sorry to be so blunt, but that claim is a pet peeve of mine.
If you say that a person could take the time to show up and write in some candidate they would prefer, then what is the REAL difference between doing that and not voting at all? Just imagine if everybody stayed home and there was only 5% turnout for a major election. That would expose the whole facade of our current Tweedle Dum-Tweedle Dee political spectrum. Not voting is a political action too. That's Politics 101, the college version. :-)
Early voting lesson #1: do it based on unforeseen circumstances.
I have insisted on voting on the day of the election becuase I like the ritual of it. I found out this morning, however, that I have to go out of town for work tonight, and will in all likelihood not make it back before the polls close tomorrow night. Early voting runs the week before, but mysteriously, NOT the day before, so I'm hosed.
So, I guess, ritual be damned.
You can vote "none of the above" in Georgia- it is called casting a blank ballot. I did that last year in the Broun/Whitehead run-off.
There will always something that will be wrong the system (just like the football system - oops, wrong thread). Saying that you won't vote until it is perfect is just childish and immature since it probably is just an excuse masking the real reason - laziness.
I actually have no idea who I'm going to vote for since John Edwards took a powder. But I dislike the notion that I am required to vote for the least of many evils rather than a good (as one potential outcome) as a condition of my citizenship.
And I am taking candidates, folks. I was set to vote tomorrow for John Edwards originally. Then I planned to vote for Ron Paul in this next vote out of a general appreciation for his ideological consistency. But I don't think I can vote for anyone who supports a ban on abortion, and in Paul's case I find it inconsistent as well. So I'm pretty much limited from voting for anyone on the Republican side of the ticket except Romney on that score, and I can't vote for him due to his position on same-sex marriage, as well as his sneakiness and ideological inconsistency.
This leaves me choosing between Clinton and Obama. Most of their positions are close enough to those I'd find acceptable. But at the moment Clinton is leading due to her support for a more comprehensive form of universal healthcare.
Seriously, I'm all for being advised more fully.
As long as the government continues to take a third of my paycheck, I'm gonna complain all I want.
It's not about anything being perfect. Ron Paul isn't perfect, but I could cast a vote in his direction. The contenders in this election are so abysmal the only thing I'd give any of them is a kick out the door. How do you vote for the lesser of two, or three or four evils when you can make an equal case for keeping any of the candidates out of office?
-Matt
You can vote "none of the above" in Georgia- it is called casting a blank ballot.
You can, but there's no point to it. A blank ballot is considered equal to a hanging chad, and not an equiovalent to a "hell, no." I've cast them occasionally, but I didn't nurse the delusion that such a vote was being interpreted the way I intended it.
But Clinton's health care plan doesn't really seem to be very well laid out, at least not according to the extensive charts I've seen. For example, she hasn't said specifically how she'll pay for it. I thought Edwards's health care plan was the best of the three, but, that not being an option any more, I think it's a choice between unclear and idealistic versus nailed down and plausible. Sometimes I prefer the first option. I'm not sure why I prefer the latter in this case.
But that's not what makes the difference for me. I simply think that Clinton's more militaristic, and I would prefer not to get into more wars.
Yeah...here's the thing, though. I don't agree with the basic core of Obama's plan, which is providing healthcare to all children .
a) most children are eligibile for coverage already, which suggests to me that there's a bigger/different problem than accessibility within that population, b) pandering! and c) our problem isn't children -- it's an entire population with varying access to healthcare who we as a society aren't willing to not treat when the situation is dire. Which is how we end up with individual providers (mainly community hospitals) taking on huge amounts of indigent treatment costs. So, from my perspective, nothing but a comprehensive solution offers any meaningful change. Which makes me, if anything, inclined to like a plan like John McCain's. It is at least comprehensive.
Yes, but...
1. Health care, while an important issue to me, isn't as important as some other stuff. Like not getting into wars.
2. Yes, the obsession with children is dumb, especially in this case, but his plan also provides options for adults. Realistic options for adults.
Well, more important to me are issues upon which Obama and Clinto agree: same-sex marriage and abortion. I don't see a huge difference in their position on the war, and wouldn't make that my top issue, regardless. And they agree on most issues I feel most strongly about. So that leaves healthcare.
"Position," shmosition.
One voted for it. The other didn't.
I don't think you characterized either healthcare plan correctly. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/opinion/04krugman.html?em&ex=1202274000&en=15e3ef55ea8cce37&ei=5087%0A
Post a Comment
<< Home