![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Whooo should you vote for? Who who? Who who?
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
hatmandu and friends has certainly fulfilled its stated goal of making me want to find out more. I don't know nearly enough about Kucinich, or indeed Gravel. Who should you vote for?
| Dennis Kucinich |  | 120 | ||
| Mike Gravel |  | 108 | ||
| Barack Obama | | 101 | ||
| John Edwards | | 91 | ||
| Hillary Clinton | | 87 | ||
| Rudy Giuliani | -15 | | ||
| Ron Paul | -27 | | ||
| John McCain | -36 | | ||
| Fred Thompson | -72 | | ||
| Mitt Romney | -117 | | ||
| Duncan Hunter | -132 | | ||
| Mike Huckabee | -138 | |
Your recommendation: Dennis Kucinich
Party: Democratic
Born: 1946, Cleveland, Ohio
Family: Married three times; one daughter
Career: Radio talk-show host, lecturer, consultant
Political career: Cleveland City Council (1969); Mayor of Cleveland (1977-79); Incumbent Member of the US House of Representatives from Ohio's 10th district
Hot topic: Federally funded healthcare to all citizens
Did you know? When Kucinich refused to sell Muni Light, Cleveland's publicly owned electric utility, the Cleveland mafia put a hit on him. A hitman from Maryland planned to shoot him in the head during the Columbus Day Parade, but the plot fell apart when Kucinich was hospitalized and missed the event.
Supported by: Viggo Mortensen, Sean Penn
***
There are Obama posters popping up in Oxford already and it isn't even our election. Last night Dan and I found ourselves watching The Manchurian Candidate - the remake, that is - which I'd somehow thought was a running-and-shouting-and-exploding standard thriller. Instead it was a paranoia-filled conspiracy theory drama happening around a US election, clearly scripted by people who'd watched an awful lot of The West Wing. All the fake news footage with its clunky graphic design took me back to our all-night election party of 2004. Hey, party round mine this November! With donuts! And hopefully this one won't end in despair!
no subject
Meanwhile, you're getting election posters in Oxford because there are expatriate American voters resident in Oxford. One of the highest civilian concentrations outside London. Unlike the bankers here in London, they tend to be politically-engaged... Although, being academics, somewhat liberal-leaning.
Also, the parties will spend a great deal on campaigning with the Rhodes scholars and may even go to the lengths of canvassing them individually: these people are an important constituency of future opinion-formers. Those that aren't already party members and attached to one of the candidates' personal retinues, of course: Rhodes scholars tend to be very, very politically engaged. Outside that meritocratic elite, the American students we see in Oxford are likely to come from backgrounds so priveleged as to be effectively an aristocracy; a vote's a vote, and getting in there early may well secure a lifetime of substantial campaign donations.
Then there's the tourists: never give 'em a moment's peace - visiting voters can still be bombarded with campaign material.
no subject
no subject
I have a particular concern over the 'Do you think wealthy families should pay more tax' question. It's the only substantive economics question, and it divides the tax-and-spend liberals from the caricatural 'I want to pay less tax and to hell with the roads and schools' Republican.
Unfortunately, answering 'No' lumps together the tax-and-spend populists with fiscal conservatives on both sides of the political divide who are horrified by the flood of irresponsible and unsustainable tax cuts from the current Washington regime.
no subject
Interesting I got Mike Gravel. Both him and Kucinich are pretty much out of the running, but as pointed out by a few people here, running is often to a) gain experience b) push an agenda c) make some waves.
Merely mentioning universal health care and reformation of tax structures brings a debate in that wouldn't have otherwise existed. Same with Ron Paul. He'd not win, but he's creating enough of stir to be taken notice off.
Bateleur's argument is specious in a primary election. It's not about voting for who you like best who you think might win. In fact that's a daft way to decide your vote in any election. You don't get a prize for picking the winning or second placed candidate....