After Iowa
January 8th 2008 03:27
Biden's out.
I'm really disappointed. I hadn't decided for sure I was going to vote for him, but he was high on my list of hopefuls. I don't see why anyone would drop out after one state! What's the point of spending all that time and money campaigning if you're going to drop out after one state? It just makes no sense to me.
I understand it takes a lot of money to run a campaign, but face it, there are 49 states left. Maybe he'd do better in some of the others.
Our entire election process, in my opinion, stinks! The way things are set up, it's nearly impossible for an Independent to make any kind of showing. Even the ones who are affiliated seem to have a hard time - seeing as they can't stick with it after Iowa if they're not in the top few. Then - when we do manage to narrow it down to just two - and whatever Independents have stuck it out - we still have the ELECTORAL COLLEGE.
Now, I can understand the need for the electoral college way back when we didn't have the technology to count votes quickly, and pass the information along. And politically smarter people than I have explained that it is supposed to be more fair. I don't see it that way.
I think it should be one person, one vote. The one with the most votes wins. I don't even think we should have parties. I know, I know - if there were more people on the ballot, there moight not be anyone with a majority of votes. That brings me back to the one with the most votes wins. I say, put 'em all on the ballot, and see who wins.
Because I know that isn't going to happen, I guess I'll have to keep watching and choose from the leftovers, once we get around to the Texas primary. I really hope there's more to choose from than just Clinton and Obama. I'm not saying I won't vote for either of them, but so far, I'd choose someone else first. Kucinich is still in it, so far. Maybe he'll stick it out.
I'm really disappointed. I hadn't decided for sure I was going to vote for him, but he was high on my list of hopefuls. I don't see why anyone would drop out after one state! What's the point of spending all that time and money campaigning if you're going to drop out after one state? It just makes no sense to me.
I understand it takes a lot of money to run a campaign, but face it, there are 49 states left. Maybe he'd do better in some of the others.
Our entire election process, in my opinion, stinks! The way things are set up, it's nearly impossible for an Independent to make any kind of showing. Even the ones who are affiliated seem to have a hard time - seeing as they can't stick with it after Iowa if they're not in the top few. Then - when we do manage to narrow it down to just two - and whatever Independents have stuck it out - we still have the ELECTORAL COLLEGE.
Now, I can understand the need for the electoral college way back when we didn't have the technology to count votes quickly, and pass the information along. And politically smarter people than I have explained that it is supposed to be more fair. I don't see it that way.
I think it should be one person, one vote. The one with the most votes wins. I don't even think we should have parties. I know, I know - if there were more people on the ballot, there moight not be anyone with a majority of votes. That brings me back to the one with the most votes wins. I say, put 'em all on the ballot, and see who wins.
Because I know that isn't going to happen, I guess I'll have to keep watching and choose from the leftovers, once we get around to the Texas primary. I really hope there's more to choose from than just Clinton and Obama. I'm not saying I won't vote for either of them, but so far, I'd choose someone else first. Kucinich is still in it, so far. Maybe he'll stick it out.
| 79 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
