Views
279
Comments
4

It isn't yet the middle of January and we have already seen three states -- Iowa, New Hampshire, and the oft-overlooked Wyoming (Republican caucus only) -- cast their choices for party presidential candidates. Before we reach February, seven of the fifty states will have already decided their delegations to at least one party convention. And, in an absurd clogging of the calendar, February 5 has become the new Super Tuesday date, supplanting March as the month where seemingly every state wishes to cast ballots... 

The independent thinking man's candidate of choice for change in 2008?Here in Oregon the state party machinery on both sides has deemed it more important to remain true to tradition. It seems mindboggling that much of the American electorate is being asked to declare their intentions before New Year's hangovers have dissipated. Because people are being asked to make such a momentous decision so soon into the election year, we are seeing opinion polls rendered essentially useless as a predictive source... and we are seeing more undecided and swing voters closer to polling days than ever before.

While all of the rest of the country is jumping to conclusions before allowing sufficient time to get a clearer read on each of these candidates, we here in Oregon bide our time -- I've got four months to ruminate on my choices...

The election, to date, has centered around this abstract and ethereal concept of bringing "change" to the presidency. What really frustrates me with such inane rhetoric is that basically any of the candidates in the contest would be a change of the status quo. It isn't mere change that we as a public need to consider when we go to our polling stations; we must consider which change is the RIGHT change to get our nation back on course -- fiscally, diplomatically and militarily...

One thing you never hear this current crop of candidates speak of while stumping on the campaign trail is a demand for greater accountability from the executive branch. But, then again, so many of these candidates are either active senators (Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John McCain) or representatives (Duncan Hunter, Dennis Kucinich, Ron Paul) who have eschewed their elective duties to pander for a "better" job... they have forsaken their opportunity to affect real change with their legislative efforts to talk about theoretical "change" to skeptical audiences...

So what was Iowa really voting for when it gave Obama and Huckabee the victory? What were Granite Staters thinking as they gave Clinton and McCain the nod? We cannot allow conjecture and style-heavy, substance-deficient oratory define our choices as a society. As for me, I won't jump into the fray and declare my intentions. As I said, I don't have to make the final call until May 20. Enough people here are all too happy to give up their neutrality...

Until the sunshine of late spring descends upon Eugene, I will rock the Alfred E. Neuman avatar as my "choice" for president. After all, he represents change as much as anyone else in this contest right now...

January 13, 2008  02:27 AM ET

Hey, the late Oregon Primaries allow me to vote in the Primaries this year. That's the only good thing I have to say about the words "Late May".

January 13, 2008  02:35 AM ET

LA's primary is fast approaching- I have no idea who to go for.

and I thought you were going to bump a few of us for blogging?

I have a pretty good idea for a series

January 13, 2008  04:19 AM ET

Yes the states moving their primaries up to "one up" each other in supposed importance is annoying, but so is the candidates running officially or otherwise two year before the election.

Didn't Hillary just win another 6 year term a little more than a year ago? While almost actively ramping up a Presidential run simultaneously. Didn't Joe Lieberman run for Congress and V.P. on the SAME ballot in 2000?

As long as the politicians insist on starting their campaigns earlier, the states are going to keep moving their primaries up. Every state wants to feel like it actually has a say in the process and unless/until there are firm rules put in place this phenomenon will continue.

 
January 13, 2008  04:49 PM ET

Well, signs of change, Bigalke, are clear if you look for them. The fact is that Barack Obama rejects coroporate influence in Washington. He has proved that by never accepting a dime of lobbyist money. He is also the most non-partisan major party contender since Eisenhower. If that doesn't spell change to you, I don't know what will.

I'm not even eligible to vote and won't be 18 until December of this year. But that doesn't stop me from being active in the political process. I will campaign for Senator Obama by telling everyone one I know that he is the best choice for our leader and the president that will get things done in Washington and give a VOICE to Americans like you and me.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Start Your Own Blog

Start Now
Send us feedback about the new site here Send us feedback about the new site here

Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Jerry tries to pep up sulking T.O.
    Views
    9142
    Comments
    1129
  2. 2
    Plaxico shows no remorse
    Views
    3050
    Comments
    859
  3. 3
    Teixeira good fit for Yankees?
    Views
    6653
    Comments
    614
  4. 4
    Brewers considering run at Sabathia
    Views
    4067
    Comments
    504
  5. 5
    Burnett won't be on market long
    Views
    4737
    Comments
    142

Weekly Most Active Users

Comments + Blog Posts + Throwdowns

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5

Message Boards

  1. MMA > Fight Club

    Who will be the new 'face of…
    Views
    659
    Replies
    3
  2. NFL > General NFL

    Ed Hochuli needs to be FIRED!!
    Views
    245
    Replies
    19
  3. MLB > General MLB

    Manny returns to Fenway!! In a…
    Views
    99
    Replies
    2

Blogs