News and Politics

Another endorsement for Obama

by

Dave Matthews endorses Barack Obama.

Dear Friends,

I hope this finds you well.

A question, a reflection, and an endorsement.

Why is our country divided?
Why has this division been growing?

Can we not all agree that we are a country that supports its families, that protects its citizens and respects its neighbors?
A country that educates its children?
Are we not a country that can lead by example rather than by force?
Is ours a government of the people, by the people, for the people?

I would like to think so.
But I believe that corporate greed and its involvement in policy making, along with political cronyism have made it nearly impossible for the people to govern.
So we fight amongst ourselves over the spin of political slogans and half truths.
And so we are divided.

It is time for a change and that is why I support Barack Obama for President.

Respectfully,

Dave Matthews

Spectacular Failure

by

From now on “Giuliani” will be synonymous with “to fail sail spectacularly despite high expectations”.

Hopefully Obama can still get the nomination, despite Hillary’s big win.

A McCain nomination for the republicans would be difficult for the Democrats, since people mistakenly believe he’s a moderate. McCain is anti-choice and a strong supporter of Bush’s war in Iraq. He also wants to attack Iran. We don’t need another war president. We need a new foreign policy based on respect and diplomacy.

url.jpg

My vote counted?

by

Instead of the usual “I Voted” sticker, they gave out stickers saying “My Vote Counted”. However, I know for a fact that my vote most likely *won’t* count, thanks to the Democratic party’s infighting over a stupid rule the state party had no control over. I wonder if Hillary will still be pushing to restore Florida’s delegates if she loses? Still it felt good to see Obama’s name on the ballot and vote for him, even if it won’t make any difference.

photo.jpg

Caroline Kennedy endorses Obama

by

Caroline Kennedy, the daughter of president John F. Kennedy, endorsed Barack Obama in the New York Times:

Most of us would prefer to base our voting decision on policy differences. However, the candidates’ goals are similar. ,,, So qualities of leadership, character and judgment play a larger role than usual. …
And when it comes to judgment, Barack Obama made the right call on the most important issue of our time by opposing the war in Iraq from the beginning….

I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them. But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president — not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans.

Tags:

Obama for President

by

Dave Winer posted a link to this site with one of the best Obama graphics I’ve seen.

progress.gif

I like Obama because I think he’s the candidate most likely to bring real change.

Hillary is not the least bit progressive. She simply goes along with the Republicans on almost everything. She’s also an insider yet has very little real experience. Being married to a former president doesn’t count as experience.

Obama, on the other hand, will bring a fresh perspective and will do more to improve the world’s opinion of us than anyone else.

Bad news from New Hampshire

by

Hillary Clinton is projected to win the New Hampshire primary, although the race is still very close.

I oppose her very strongly, not only because of all the baggage she brings, but for her anti-progressive record.

To really move on, we need to elect someone NOT named Bush or Clinton. Since 1981 there has been someone in the White House, either as President or Vice President named Bush or Clinton. It’s time to throw out the past and look to the future. There’s too much baggage associated with her, and I’m sure the Republicans would just love to have Bill in the white house again.

Aside from that, there’s nothing progressive about her policies. She always goes along with the Republicans on most things. She voted for the war, and she voted for the Patriot Act twice. My biggest objection to Hillary is for her support of Jack Thompson‘s video game censorship campaign.

Yet another reason Canada doesn't suck

by

Cringely points out one more thing Canada does right that we got wrong:

My model for smart voting is Canada. The Canadians are watching our election problems and laughing their butts off. They think we are crazy, and they are right.

Forget touch screens and electronic voting. In Canadian Federal elections, two barely-paid representatives of each party, known as “scrutineers,” are present all day at the voting place. If there are more political parties, there are more scrutineers. To vote, you write an “X” with a pencil in a one centimeter circle beside the candidate’s name, fold the ballot up and stuff it into a box. Later, the scrutineers AND ANY VOTER WHO WANTS TO WATCH all sit at a table for about half an hour and count every ballot, keeping a tally for each candidate. If the counts agree at the end of the process, the results are phoned-in and everyone goes home. If they don’t, you do it again. Fairness is achieved by balanced self-interest, not by technology. The population of Canada is about the same as California, so the elections are of comparable scale. In the last Canadian Federal election the entire vote was counted in four hours. Why does it take us 30 days or more?

The 2002-2003 budget for Elections Canada is just over $57 million U.S. dollars, or $1.81 per Canadian citizen. It is extremely hard to get an equivalent per-citizen figure for U.S. elections, but trust me, it is a LOT higher. This week, San Francisco held a runoff mayoral election that cost $2.5 million, or $3.27 per citizen of the city. And this was for just one election, not a whole year of them.

We are spending $3.9 billion or $10 per citizen for new voting machines. Canada just prints ballots.

(via Daring Fireball)