|
By Ken Brosky
Monday, Feb 11 2008, 02:24 PM
Here's the scariest part of the 2008 elections: This young man could determine the Democratic presidential candidate. That's right, Jason Rae's vote counts more than yours. In our democratic process, his vote--and the votes of other super delegates--has more sway over who gets elected than yours. It's all a part of complicated system designed by the Democratic party during the middle of the twentieth century in an attempt to make things a little more fair. The problem is, now these super delegates are the make-or-break votes in a close primary process. Barack Obama has more votes and has won more states than Hillary, but she has more support from super delegates whose votes count more than the delegates that Obama is winning through the popular vote. Is this fair? The worst part, in my opinion, is that a lot of super delegates have already pledge support for Hillary Clinton regardless of how the state votes. That means even in states where Barack Obama won a significant majority, there may be a handful of super delegates casting their votes for Clinton. This is not a representative democracy. What's the point in voting if there are others who carry more sway and can shift the entire election? The governor of Maine has chosen a more democratic option: he will cast his vote for whoever wins the Maine caucuses (it ended up to be Obama). That's right--he actually plans on representing his citizens. But this isn't always the case. For more information, read here at the Nation. Contact your representative and tell them to vote democratically. Yours, Ken Brosky
Filed under: liberal, democrats, government, america, barack obama, liberals, congress, campaign lies, presidential race, president, homework, delegates, super delegates
Permalink |
Mail to a friend
|
By Ken Brosky
Friday, Feb 8 2008, 06:49 PM
In the interest of attempting to contribute positively to my community, I'm offering you a list of reading materials to help you exercise your brain during the weekend. Rather than wasting your weekend injecting electric heroin into your brain, here are some articles that are relevant to your life and may even help you learn something (gasp!). Not only that, each article only takes about ten minutes to read. Go ahead. I know, it's scary at first, learning on the weekend ... but maybe that kind of mindset is exactly why we're in so much trouble in the first place ... "Guns Beat Green," by Naomi Klein. Why the security bubble is gaining more investments than green initiatives. "The Democrats' Class War," by David Sirota. "The Cost of Toppling Saddam," by Robert Shapiro. Even in 2002, economists predicted a recession related to the war in Iraq and the rising cost of oil. "You're **** right I would," Cheney says in answer to whether he would attack Iraq. Of course he would ... he's made a handsome profit for himself and his friends. Cheers, Ken Brosky
Filed under: tax stimulus, conservative, democrats, taxes, Bush, corporate, corporations, america, republican, authoritarian, signing statement, barack obama, conservatives, tax cuts, congress, reagan, smear tactics, right wing, presidential race, president, muslim, health insurance, market-based, neoliberals, neoconservatives, halliburton, dick cheney, naomi klein, homework, david sirota
Permalink |
Mail to a friend
|
By Ken Brosky
Thursday, Jan 31 2008, 08:39 AM
John Edwards has officially dropped out of the race. It's a disappointment because this was without a doubt the most progressive candidate we've had in a long time, and the only one with the guts to literally stand up against our corporate elite. As a result, the corporate elite--especially the corporate media--did little to promote his presidency in the way they do with Obama and Clinton. I know Russ Feingold and others have criticized Edwards for a number of votes he made while senator, but--and it pains me to say this because I have nothing but respect for Feingold--I disagree with such criticism. Edwards voted poorly a few times, but he has since demonstrated that he's learned from those mistakes, and understands why those were mistakes. Worse, Edwards was the only Democratic candidate who overwhelmingly defeated every single Republican in a mock-presidential poll. What does this mean? It means Obama and Clinton both have a long, long road ahead of them. But this isn't all bad news. There is a silver lining here, and that is Edwards literally commanded close to 15% of the popular vote in every single state. His support can literally change the outcome of the Democratic race. And he has stated repeatedly that he wants both Obama and Clinton to essentially take more progressive issues. What does this mean? It means both Obama and Clinton will have to step it up. No more skirting around the corporatism issue. No more dancing around the idea of combating poverty or half-cocked health care solutions or even waffling on the war in Iraq. Now, with Edwards' support up in the air, both Obama and Clinton will have to take a harsher stance on the issues that so many Americans care passionately about. May the best candidate win. Yours, Ken Brosky
|
More Posts
|
|