Friday, February 15, 2008

The Question For Independents & Moderates

I wrote this in a comment over at Donklephant and I thought I'd let my readers here ponder it as well:

I simply dont get it. It strikes me that if one is truly interested in charting a moderate course and one is given a choice between two candidates, one with no track record of working with the opposition and who has been embraced by the most intolerant and ideological wings of his own party, and another candidate with a track record of working with the opposition so extensive that half his own party hates his guts because he’s not “one of them”…I just dont see how the former is preferred over the latter, no matter the “tone” of his rhetoric.

When it comes to words vs. deeds…I’ll take deeds as the better indicator of future behavior every time.

I simply do not see a moderate/independent case to be made for Obama.

What could it possibly be?

2 comments:

Justin Gardner said...

Rich, I've cited how Obama has worked with the other side throughout his entire career over at PoliGazette and at Donklephant. I've also made the case why moderates and independents like Obama, beyond this "empty box" BS you keep pushing. And let's be clear, just because you buy into the Hillary's logically bankrupt argument that somebody can't be both inspiring and substantive doesn't make it true.

So I'm not sure why you continue to keep asking the same questions and ignoring the answers you're being given by me, Alan Stewart Carl, Kevin Sullivan, Michael Reynolds and other Obama supporters. I mean, do you even really want an answer or are you asking rhetorically? Because more and more I really do think it's the latter and it would be helpful to us all if you simply stated that outright.

The Iconic Midwesterner said...

Justin, you do realize that the choice I was putting forward in this post was between Obama and McCain, right?

I've never claimed that Clinton was necessarily any better from a centrist point of view. To my mind there isn't a farthings bit of difference between them.

The "evidence" you bring up fails to establish Obama's bona fides as far as LOTS of people are concerned. Name a single controversial stand that Obama has taken against the Democratic leadership's position.

Just one.

There isn't one.

Name a fight Obama took on in Illinois that went against the Democratic establishment.

Oops. Isn't one of those in existence either.

So, why isn't he just another Democrat? Because he's half black and makes some people feel so squishy and morally righteous?

Ugh.

And don't even try bringing up things like Obama's "support" of gun rights...Democrats have been doing that stunt for over 30 years now, and largely because even few Democrats support gun control anymore. Its real brave to say you support something 70% plus of Americans support.

And BTW, yes I do think looking at policy stands a candidate takes AGAINST his own party is the standard centrists/independents should be measuring by. If you don't, then you should just admit you are a supporter of the Democratic party first and a centrist when it is convienient.