Clinton Speech Hits Home
It goes without saying that the speech Hillary Clinton gave Tuesday night was one of the most selfless speeches any defeated candidate has given.
Barack Obama is the king of speeches. The rabbit Hillary Clinton pulled out of her pantsuit Tuesday night was as riveting as one of Obama’s classics, and certainly gave the Democratic nominee a boost.
Hillary Clinton’s speech is important because of its underlying message. Party is far important than personality. I didn’t support Hillary for who she was. I supported her for what she stood for. I can never support John McCain knowing that he would do everything in his power to prevent Hillary’s policies from being passed.
Hillary Clinton didn’t convince all her supporters to vote for Obama in November. But she convinced them not to vote for McCain. The rest is up to Obama.
I toyed with the idea of voting Conservative in the upcoming (maybe tomorrow?) election. I still believe Stephane Dion is a terrible leader and frankly, he has done absolutely nothing in the past 2 years to show me he was the best candidate, or second-best, or possible third-best candidate for the job.
People may argue with me on this point. I always found it interesting to see my friends twist themselves into knots defending Dion. After abstaining on just about every pillar the Liberal party was founded on, I think leadership is definitely not the word I would to describe the 2 year tenure of Stephane Dion. I simply cannot cast a vote for this man to be Prime Minister.
On the other hand, the Conservatives stand for so many things that make my skin crawl. They scare people into thinking Canada is a crime-filled country. They believe immigration should be limited to countries who only send skilled workers and limit the rest. They lead a foreign policy of isolationism and insult towards many allies. They refuse to silence those in their party that would limit my right to marry.
So many of the things I stand for as a liberal, prosperity, equality of opportunity, social justice will not be top priorities of any Conservative government, as we have seen in the past 3 years. Voting Conservative out of spite would be a betrayal of my values. Most importantly, it would give Stephen Harper a vote he clearly didn’t earn.
I cannot vote NDP, BQ, or Green for the simple reason that by never being able to win, and implement all their wonderful bright ideas, these parties get a free pass. Voting for a platform that will never be implemented might as well be voting for nothing to get done. I cannot do that in good conscience.
So there you have it, Hillary Clinton has put me in the undecided column. It is now up to Harper and Dion to earn my vote. They need to convince me that they will effectively lead the country in a direction that suits my values. If neither can do that, I will still go cast a ballot on election day, but it will probably be blank.
Barack Obama is the king of speeches. The rabbit Hillary Clinton pulled out of her pantsuit Tuesday night was as riveting as one of Obama’s classics, and certainly gave the Democratic nominee a boost.
Hillary Clinton’s speech is important because of its underlying message. Party is far important than personality. I didn’t support Hillary for who she was. I supported her for what she stood for. I can never support John McCain knowing that he would do everything in his power to prevent Hillary’s policies from being passed.
Hillary Clinton didn’t convince all her supporters to vote for Obama in November. But she convinced them not to vote for McCain. The rest is up to Obama.
I toyed with the idea of voting Conservative in the upcoming (maybe tomorrow?) election. I still believe Stephane Dion is a terrible leader and frankly, he has done absolutely nothing in the past 2 years to show me he was the best candidate, or second-best, or possible third-best candidate for the job.
People may argue with me on this point. I always found it interesting to see my friends twist themselves into knots defending Dion. After abstaining on just about every pillar the Liberal party was founded on, I think leadership is definitely not the word I would to describe the 2 year tenure of Stephane Dion. I simply cannot cast a vote for this man to be Prime Minister.
On the other hand, the Conservatives stand for so many things that make my skin crawl. They scare people into thinking Canada is a crime-filled country. They believe immigration should be limited to countries who only send skilled workers and limit the rest. They lead a foreign policy of isolationism and insult towards many allies. They refuse to silence those in their party that would limit my right to marry.
So many of the things I stand for as a liberal, prosperity, equality of opportunity, social justice will not be top priorities of any Conservative government, as we have seen in the past 3 years. Voting Conservative out of spite would be a betrayal of my values. Most importantly, it would give Stephen Harper a vote he clearly didn’t earn.
I cannot vote NDP, BQ, or Green for the simple reason that by never being able to win, and implement all their wonderful bright ideas, these parties get a free pass. Voting for a platform that will never be implemented might as well be voting for nothing to get done. I cannot do that in good conscience.
So there you have it, Hillary Clinton has put me in the undecided column. It is now up to Harper and Dion to earn my vote. They need to convince me that they will effectively lead the country in a direction that suits my values. If neither can do that, I will still go cast a ballot on election day, but it will probably be blank.
Labels: maybe ill cast a write-in vote for Hillary Clinton...
par / by Anthony à / at 10:16 a.m.
7 Commentaires:
Vote for the candidate in your riding that you feel will best represnt your particular views in Parliament.
That's what we should all be doing in every election. When we vote strategically, we rob not only ourselves, but our government, of the opportunity to actually become the thing we want most.
Why are all parties dealing with environmental issues? Because enough people are voting Green, even though we all realize that the Greens are unlikely to win, to make the other parties sit up and go, "You know, if we make policies closer to theirs, we could get some of those voters." So vote for who best represents you, if only to help convince the other parties that there's a market for those type of policies.
And you're going to vote blank before voting for a party that has no chance of winning, even if they represent your views? Good grief, no wonder you're completely disappointed in the front-runners -- you won't even do that little part to help the people you do want become front-runners.
I could not agree with kwil more.
Well the good news I guess is that you dont consider voting for the NDP... Blech!
Hey Antonio,
Sorry to stalk you back to your own blog ; ), but I wasn't sure you'd check FarNWide again.
I wanted to offer an apology and an explanation for being such a dick about your comments there so thought I'd just post it for you here. Cheers!
________________
If you read this Antonio, I had a a great hike. Heading home, I actually thought about my reaction to you - which is sorta weird considering I don't actually know you except from reading your blog comments.
But I was trying to figure out why I tend to react so strongly when I see your comments. In general, I enjoy checking out the blogs to hear other people's thoughts and even have a little fun sharing and sometimes debating a bit. Yet even when I don't respond to your comments, I often find myself peeved (for lack of a better word) when I see you commenting on various things.
I think I figured out why. In your comments, I can never tell if you are arguing a personal opinion (Palin is the best choice for the Vice Presidency) or if you are arguing strategy (McCain made a terrifically cunning strategic choice). And while I can get a kick out of some of the political strategy that goes on in any election, I care very deeply that politicians make good fundamental decisions.
As I read your comments, it appears to me you mix the two. I can never categorize them as "he's making a comment on strategy" or "he's offering a personal opinion about the issue." That, coupled with the fact that I cannot recall ever seeing you acknowledge someone else has made a good point unless it coincides with yours, and it just makes me want to counter you.
That is a bit unfair, and more about how I'm reading or feeling about the issue that about you. So, long story short, I apologize for being snitty. Not that I think you've been too concerned about it, but I thought I'd offer anyway ; ).
Finally, on this issue itself, what bothers me - personally - about McCain is that I do believe he has the ability to be a true moderate and seek compromise. So it pains me to see him slowly morphing into this Rovian creature (can we start use Rove as an adjective now?) who feels it is all about the strategy. Simplifying issues to absurd extremes, Dicing up the population with wedge issues, and basing decisions SOLELY on political strategy - even those decisions that really warrant forethought and can have real consequences.
I tend to be more realist than idealist these days, but I am still extremely disappointed when I see someone I consider a "good" politician morph into some ever-calculating caricature where strategic brilliance is valued over wisdom.
McCain, in my opinion, has seen enough in his life experience to be wise, so it pains me to see him toss that out in a mad push to be cunning. I don't think he needed to do that to win this election, and it disturbs me for what that will mean if he actually wins on that basis.
In my opinion, this Palin decision reeks of pure politics on an issue that should have been about making a wise decision.
He met her once. One time. She may be a talented and even nice person. But that is hardly the grounds for him to have made this decision - no matter how "brilliant" the choice might be politically - in my humble opinion anyway.
I think the Libs are in a better position to fight the election today than a year ago so, in that vein, it's hard to be overly critical of the abstention strategy.
Joseph
I love playing the devil's advocate. I have always enjoyed doing so.
Partly, it is because im an asshole and a contrarian.
Also, I believe that discussing both sides is essential to coming up with a correct decision.
You are right in that I rarely comment on things that I agree with, partly because im lazy, and partly because I dont believe that patting other people on the back over the internet is a valuable exercise. (see above where I am an asshole)
as for palin
im writing up a post as to why I think it is potentially brilliant and an all or nothing gamble.
it might fail miserably too, but if it pays off, Obama cant win the election.
sounds like a gamble that is at least worth considerable consideration
and about the abstentions
may look great now
but was definitely disheartening at the time.
Post a Comment
<< Home