Can This Person Run, Please?

Same question? Here's my guess. Because on policy, Clinton & Obama are pretty close together, sp there's not much to talk about.

 

Why do I get the feeling that at least once a week Liz Edwards reaches across the dinner table, slaps the shit out of her husband and screams, "Why the fuck did you drop out so early?!!!!"

 

Wrong. But thanks for playing anyway. You perfectly illustrated the point Liz Edwards was trying to make. Differences in policy ... and there are differences ... are definitely worthy subjects. But real analysis of the issues takes too much time and brainpower, things far too many Americans and media members want to offer.

One of the best real analysis shows I saw in the 1990s was a town hall meeting for teens in which Peter Jennings (I think) took the Bosnia situation, opened it up to the ancient past to highlight where the different paths of people began branching off, and bringing it back to how we got to where we were. And as good a piece as it was, the damn thing aired at 9 a.m. on a Saturday.

Yeah, that's the way to educate people.

 

And you analyze by unilaterally declaring someone wrong. The differences are almost all historical, posturing or minute. And, they have all been discussed in pretty great detail early in the debating season. The media at the time overanalyzed to make it seem as though there were grand differences between them, and eventually reached the point where even they couldn't make this stuff up anymore.

BTW, what are they?

 

Not sure that I've uniltarerally declared someone wrong, but if that's the way you want to go with it, so be it. The fact is you've declared there to be very few differences in real policy and I called B.S. Not sure, then, that it's incumbent upon me to show that there really are differences. Do your own leg work, if you need to be convinced, because I'm not going to try and convert you.

And the process has been marginalized, whether it's one candidate being criticized for their bowling scores or choice of drink at a diner, to others equally snarky and useless against the GOP side.

But if you're convinced that the press has done a GOOD job of really analyzing the issues, then you have an advantage I'd say a huge majority of Americans don't. Good for you.

 

That's what the media likes to do. They seize upon a small difference, and blow it out of proportion.

I read an interview with my local congressman (a very liberal Dem), who said that the media loves to harp upon how the Dems and Reps are battling all the time, but in reality, 90-95 percent of the time, the two sides are working together on different issues affecting their constituents on a day-to-day basis.

 

I'm not trying to make it about Biden. Just throwing in my two cents that I would likely have voted for him.

 

I probably would've, too.

 

I did my leg work, and reported my findings. If you are going to declare them BS, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that you explain yourself, but that's up to you.

 

Actually having primaries and caucuses trump the results of the proverbial smoke-filled room when picking a presidential nominee is still a recent phenomenon. As late as 1968, Rockefeller was trying to make a charge at the Miami Beach convention after having publicly campaigned all of zero days to that point.