What should I do with my primary vote?

I am a JRE supporter. I do think he remade himself, but I like his positions, his policies and although I think his Iraq vote was an egregious and almost unforgivable error, I did cut him some slack. In an ordinary year I would vote for him in the CT primary Feb 5. Just like I did with Dr. Dean, my all time favorite candidate. I worked for Dr. Dean, gave him as much $ as I could.... blah blah.

But this year is vastly different. I think my primary vote this time might be very important and I want it to matter. I'm not interested in making a statement with my vote: a statement that's anyway just private.

I think both Senators Clinton and Obama are strong candidates. I have visceral reactions to both, which I doubt will sway my vote, b/c I'm too old to let that happen. I'm an m.d. by profession, no longer in practice. I am just a little younger than Senator Clinton and the only thing that pissed me off recently was the media hype about her tears. I also agreed strongly with the substance of Gloria Steinem's op-ed piece in the NYTimes past Monday.

Please help me below:

It doesn't matter to me if I like either candidate. I don't actually. What matters to me is their positions and policies. They are both egomaniacal and they HAVE to be to do this. But that's not all bad. And any how it doesn't matter.

There are a number of real concerns I have:
I think a Clinton nomination will bring out the other party in droves. They hate her with a passion and I worry that her candidacy will be a driving force behind a Republican GOTV which otherwise might be paltry or at least slim. I have somewhat the same concern about an Obama candidacy only in his case the driving force would be the issue of  race although I think that will matter less than Clinton hatred.

I do not trust Senator Clinton, Not at all. I think the Clinton's play rough and will do anything they can to win this. Her tactics will get ugly. I trust Senator Obama more, but his homo-aversion is off-putting. I think his signals are more deft than Senator Clintons, but I have concerns about him also.

Policy: I know where Senator Clinton stands on a lot of issues and she elucidates her positions well. I don't hear the same from Senator Obama. I think that his heart is in the right place, but I don't know what his policy positions are. PLEASE don't tell me to go to his website to read about them. It's HIS JOB to TELL ME where he stands: in details not in platitudes. Or his supporters here can tell me. I don't have to go to JRE's site to hear his policy positions and I don't have to do that for Clinton either.

Toughness: JRE is tougher (or talks tougher) about dealing with the other party and especially corporate interests than either of the 'front runners'. I fear that both of them have more concern about making nice with the other party  and especially corporate donors/interests than advancing a democratic agenda. I didn't use the term "progressive" agenda for a reason, b/c I don't think Senator Clinton's agenda is particularly progressive and I'm not sure what Senator Obama's agenda is.

I think the biggest threat to our democracy is the Corporate Agenda. I think we have been sold down the river by both parties and are at risk, great risk for this reason. If I thought JRE would stay in for the long haul and could have some sway at a brokered convention I would vote for him. But I don't see that as happening, unfortunately.

I remember hearing Senator Obama 4 years ago and thinking and stating aloud that he would be our first Black President. I still believe that. The issue is when.

The saddest thing for me is that we have 2 front runners who will make history if either is elected and I'm not enthusiastic about either one.

•  The statement your vote makes is not private

  Your vote expresses your views.  It sounds like you and I are of like minds.  I plan to vote for John Edwards on Feb. 5th unless Hillary Clinton is pulling back into the lead.  I don't trust Obama as much as Edwards to represent my views, but I do trust him more than Clinton.  So if I can, I'll express my support for Edwards' position.  I'll vote for Obama only if every vote is needed to stop a Clinton runaway train.

  by Dallasdoc on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 05:59:43 AM PDT

•  I'm voting for John Edwards in CT

  I don't buy the media narrative about it being a two person race.  Sure, if they can convince enough people of that, it may become a self fulfilling prediction, but most of the pundits were wrong about Iowa, they were wrong about New Hampshire, and there is little reason to believe that they will be right about any of the coming elections, especially if people vote for what they believe in, instead of vote out of expediency based on stories they are hearing from the corporately owned mainstream media.

  by aldon on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:00:04 AM PDT

  •  JRE...

    The more delegates he has at the convention, the better, no?

    by mudslide on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:01:28 AM PDT

    •  maybe i'll stick with jre afterall.

      i really am up in the air right now.

      by hester on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:03:04 AM PDT

      •  This is the question many have

        And it's important to remember that we'll be voting for delegates.  Those delegates have their votes at the Convention.  It may well be that one candidate will have the 2,025 votes necessary for nomination in hand at the end of the Primaries, but it may be that that will not be so.  Then pledged votes become important in bargaining.

        Also, there is little info on how the Super Tuesday Primaries are shaping up.  The polls (Big Grains of Salt) haven't been done for those States.  

        by Rolfyboy6 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:18:13 AM PDT

        •  Convention math

          According to reports I'm hearing, Clinton spent between $15 and $25 million to get approximately 15 delegates in Iowa.  At that rate, her primary campaign would cost over $2 billion to get enough delegates to win the nomination.  The math is similar for Obama.

          Edwards cost/delegate is much lower.

          by aldon on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:35:45 AM PDT

      •  Vote

        with your heart. ALWAYS.

        You know what is good for you and if that is John and his policies. You will regret not giving him a chance and your word will go unheard.

        by ScrewJack on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:31:52 AM PDT

      •  Obama is no change.

        I started to do a little research to convince myself that he is an acceptable choice. I got less comfortable with his ways in Chicago.

        Check out blackagendareports

        He never takes any real risks. This article about his endorsement of Duckworth and his resistance to endorse Claypool are indicative of his go along approach.

        Another "Just another pol" day for Senator Obama.

        Obama makes an anti-war speech at an anti-war rally.  He votes to keep the war going in a pro-war senate. He never makes a speech against the war in the senate.  

        Edwards votes for the AUMF in a prowar senate.  Then sees the mess and votes against the funding in a prowar senate.  That take backbone.  

        So I don't buy that he was anti-war from the beginning.   He reads his audience and venue well.

        Ultimately the most good we can do for the Democratic Party is have a long debate about our values.  If Edwards keeps getting delegates they the debates will have substance in them.  I think we need the primary to be democratic and not be settled by party establishment pressure.

        Interesting that the msm has no problem with six Republican candidates but is picking up the Democratic call for Edwards to possibly drop out.  I think this is really foolish.

        Also I think as Edwards gets more real exposure int he debates his poll numbers and votes will go up.  

        If you are enthusiastic about Obama vote for him, but otherwise stay with Edwards.  I myself think Obama may be worse than Clinton because he has an aura of being different, but he will disappoint just like Pelosi and other corporate Democrats.  

        If you want Edwards voice to be heard on behalf of people, vote for him.  He needs an average of 20% of the delegates.  The establishment will go crazy with the idea that he would have power at a brokered convention.

        Final thought from a comment by DemocracyLover in NYC

        We can't call for backbone if we don't get one ourselves.

        I love Edwards and Edwards supporters because they have real backbone.  

        by pioneer111 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:45:01 AM PDT

    •  Elections Have Consequences

      Remember Howard Dean? Because he kept on running past the time it was certain he wouldn't get the nomination, he gathered a lot of delegates -- enough that he later had enough clout to get the job of DNC Chair.

      Because we kept voting for Dean in the primaries, he got the Chairmanship, instituted his 50-state plan, and we got a big majority in the house and a 'majority' in the senate.

      If he had dropped out of the primaries too early we would have been left with a DLC type in the chairmanship and much worse results in 2006.

      by GW Chimpzilla on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 08:32:59 AM PDT

  •  I wish I thought you were right

    it's not the media narrative I buy. It's JRE's NH showing. Wasn't good. imho

    by hester on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:02:16 AM PDT

    •  I have a different take on NH

      I was on the ground in New Hampshire campaigning for John Edwards.  In 2004, he got 12% of the vote in New Hampshire.  In 2008, with many more people voting in a hotly contested race he got 17% of the vote.

      And even with the high voter turnout, we are talking about a very small difference.  In terms of the number of people that voted in the general election in 2004, Hillary got .052% more votes in the New Hampshire primary than Edwards did.  That is a much smaller story than the corporate owned mainstream media wants you to think.

      by aldon on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:13:29 AM PDT

  •  Another thought

    As it stands right now, neither Clinton nor Obama are getting a majority of the votes.  As long as that happens, the votes that Edwards brings with him to the convention could decide who gets to be the nominee.  I  trust John Edwards and his supporters to make the right decision when that time comes, but I don't think that time is when you are voting in the superduper Tuesday primaries.

    by aldon on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:03:25 AM PDT

    •  I'm with aldon on this

      A vote for JRE is not wasted under this scenario. I don't believe either Clinton or Obama will get the majority of Edwards supporters' votes -- so a vote for your second choice is more a vote wasted than a vote for JRE.

      by musicsleuth on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:36:30 AM PDT

      •  That is the best statement I have heard

        If the vote is split between the celebrities your vote has less impact than voting your conscience. Also since there is less than a hair of difference between the two, and all the candidates are decent it makes our vote count even more.

        Thanks

        by LaEscapee on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:01:32 AM PDT

  •  We should all vote the issues and our

    conscience. Which is why even tho our primary is late, I am still voting for Kucinich.

    by snackdoodle on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:41:59 AM PDT

    •  Yes indeed

      Our primary is not until May, but I will vote for John Edwards no matter where the horse race stands.  Keeping John in the race keeps the issues he is pushing in the debate.

      by bear83 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:52:09 AM PDT

      •  A great many people lose sight of that,

        primaries are our way to have our voices heard and hopefully see changes in the final platform.

        by snackdoodle on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:05:15 AM PDT

•  When in doubt, vote Obama

  I just can't get enthusiastic about our front runners either

  Looks like my first choices are almost all gone but it will all have been decided by the time Oregon gets a chance to vote anyway.  I may not even vote in the primary, at least on a national level. ( I want to decide who runs against Gorden Smith tho)

  I'll be there in November tho, supporting whoever the Democratic candidate is.. 2000 and 2004 taught us that every vote can count.

  I'll probly vote for Obama because he's at least the hope for change. Hilary is just going to be more of the same. I rweally don't want another Clinton in the White House untiil Chelsea is ready to run

  by exlrrp on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:00:17 AM PDT

  •  Note to self

    Be glad you didn't change your last name when you got married otherwise people might confuse you with your husband.

    by Fabian on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:09:19 AM PDT

•  I'm not sure why Edwards would drop out.

  He could end up having a lot of influence at the convention, at the very least. That fact alone should only increase, not decrease, his coverage in the media. I see no reason why he would drop out.

  Good luck with your decision, hester :)

  by MeanBoneII on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:07:15 AM PDT

•  I've always been a firm believer in voting...

  for the candidate I believe in the most.

  by CAL11 voter on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:13:17 AM PDT

•  Vote with your heart and mind

  My recommendation is if you like JRE, vote for him regardless of what the other candidates are doing.  If you feel your vote is best spent on Obama, vote that way.  I don't think a vote for Obama will ever be a mistake.

  The best thing for you to do is for you to vote for the candidate you believe best represents your views. I am in a similar postion, I personally feel that JRE best represents my views and I plan to vote for him regardless of what the other 2 candidates are doing if he is still in the race.  If JRE drops out before Feb. 5, then I will reexamine the candidates at that time and make my choice based upon the remaining choices.

  by HermesTrismegistus on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:14:32 AM PDT

•  Tough decision

  Stick with your instincts, and keep asking the question; 'Why are they running?'

  Malcolm

  by malc19ken on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:16:00 AM PDT

  •  Good point n/t

    by HermesTrismegistus on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:17:09 AM PDT

•  Hey thanks for the diary, you wlll...

  figure this out of course with your great analytical mind.  You do not have to decide anything right now.  I am an original Gore supporter, turned Obama now.  I just think HRC is DLC same ole, same ole.  I do think Obama has a shot, I love Edwards too, but do not think he has the money to stay in, that's why I went with Obama.  I am also from Illinois, so I guess I am partial to him.  Voting is very personal to me, I have always taken this seriously.  You will be fine, let the cards fall where they may and reveal themselves.  I do not buy into any of the Clinton stuff and I have no personal axe to grind against HRC.  I just think enough!  It is too bad both are splitting the ticket in two, they really should team up and go forth, they together would be unstoppable.  JRE is my second choice.  Just opining in case you are interested?

  by jdmorg on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:16:43 AM PDT

•  Thank you ALL. You really did help.

  Gonna stick with my main frame this year; JOHN EDWARDS

  by hester on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:17:36 AM PDT

  •  Thank you

    Thank you and I'm sure John thanks you. Now make some penance

    ;-)

    by ScrewJack on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:41:59 AM PDT

    •  We Yids don't do penance :-) besides he's the

      only one i have given bucks to. but i will again.

      by hester on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:07:44 AM PDT

      •  Neither

        do we atheists ;-)

        by ScrewJack on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 08:02:55 AM PDT

      •  Neither

        do we atheists ;-)

        by ScrewJack on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 08:04:52 AM PDT

  •  That's OK

    I write as an Obama supporter who understands your quandry.

    That being said you need to know the situation in my part of the country: Missouri.

    I live about 60 east of Kansas City.  The home of the B-2 bomber is 10 miles away; as a consequence, there is a lot of military and retired military.

    This morning my spouse goes out to get the paper.  Our next door neighbor, a twenty-something white male, comes out and shows her the Obama button I have give him in December.  

    Obama will bring in that twenty-something vote in historic numbers. Clinton won't bring in the numbers Obama will.  Perhaps Edwards will.

    Obama truly offers a dramatic change.  Edwards does too, but he has not sparked the movement that Obama has.  

    by MoDem on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:48:03 AM PDT

    •  I agree

      And that is great that those twenty somethings will vote, even if it is for Obama, but that is no reason for me or anybody else to vote for Obama.

      If Obama can win more ower to him, but if he can't beat the competition in a Democratic primary then he has no business running against the pugs. If he wants our votes he should prove himself worthy of our votes.

      Voting for him because young people who have not had the experiences or seen the things I have seen in my life is no sway on my vote. Voting for him only to deny Senator Clinton the nomination is no sway on my vote. I am in my mid forties, I have lived a pretty rough and tumble life I served I have earned my vote and I vote for people not against people.

      My daughter who is twenty three fully supports John Edwards does that sway your vote? Then why would another young persons opinion sway mine. He has to come up with reasons to vote for him  other than the message it would seend, these are perilous times, our country is on the presipice and a feel good vote isn't going to fix it.

      by LaEscapee on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:11:50 AM PDT

•  Kucinich - to send a strong signal

  Kucinich - to send a strong signal that the Bush/Cheney Administration must be held accountable for its crimes (illegal wiretaps, the illegal invasion of Iraq on false pretenses), that we must end the occupation of Iraq, avoid war with Iran, and create true equality at home here in the U.S. with single-payer health insurance, free speech, and strengthened rights to collective bargaining for employees.

  by ImpeccableLiberalCredentials on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:17:42 AM PDT

•  Vote for the candidate you like best.

  Don't vote for your second choice because you think s/he has the best chance (if things go well and the polls are right and nobody makes a mistake and Jupiter aligns with Mars) of beating your third choice.

  Elections are supposed to determine how many people like which candidates. Period.

  by Leo in NJ on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:20:11 AM PDT

•  if I have to vote for someone i'm not crazy about

  might as well wait until november to do it. thanks again.

  by hester on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:20:59 AM PDT

•  When two outsiders split the vote...

  advantage insider.

  Edwards by running is helping that which he so passionately wants to defeat.
  (Ain't life paradoxical).

  by crystal eyes on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:22:06 AM PDT

•  Keep your vote and collect as many as you can...

  ...and redeem them here for one of our great prizes!

  Wait, that's not right...

  by JR on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:23:38 AM PDT

•  Your vote matter on the issues and the delegates

  Every vote for JRE forces the frontrunners to run on more progressive platforms.
  The more delegates he brings to the convention the better for the progressives.

  by votermom on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:24:48 AM PDT

•  If progressive values matter to you, you should

  support Obama. I agree Edwards has been using the most progressive sounding rhetoric of late, but Obama's has the most progressive voting record of anyone running:

  http://www.dailykos.com/...

  by greenboy on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:28:38 AM PDT

  •  No Obama doesn't have a progressive record

    He has a cautious record that looks liberal but on key issues he is a corporate Democrat.  See my post about.

    by pioneer111 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:49:48 AM PDT

    •  So you're a better judge of ideology than the

      National Journal?

      by greenboy on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:57:16 AM PDT

      •  My ideology yes n/t

        by LaEscapee on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:19:18 AM PDT

•  Vote your conscience

  If you support John Edwards and he is still in the primaries when your state holds its primary, I say you should vote for John Edwards.

  If Edwards, for whatever reason, chose to drop out of the race before your state's primary, I'd say you've got to go with your gut. Look at whether or not Edwards urges you to go one way or the other. If he endoirses one of the other candidates, take a hard look at that candidate and make up your own mind. If he does not endorse, take a hard look at the other candidates and determine whther you would prefer to make a statement against the field that remains by still voting Edwards or whether one of the other candidates should gain your support.

  In the end, always vote your cosncience.

  - Albert Einstein

  by Walt starr on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:32:49 AM PDT

•  To turn it around

  The solution lies not in what voters should do, but the candidates.

  Edwards and Obama should form a coalition for change.

  What if Obama announced today that Edwards would be his VP.
  Obama and Edwards could campaign as a team on a reform platform.

  New rules for challenging times would send home the message that  
  real change means doing things differently.  Why not join progressive forces and combine strengths and resources?

  by crystal eyes on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:33:12 AM PDT

•  This quote bothered me

  I trust Senator Obama more, but his homo-aversion is off-putting.

  I assume you're refering to the fact that Obama had some homophobic gay African American gospel singer perform for him?  Obama has made clear his strong disagreement with the singer's comments, and his record of support for gay issues is quite strong.

  Hillary has yet to comment on Rupert Murdoch who held a fundraiser for her, and has made anti-gay comments himself:

  http://gawker.com/...

  http://www.livermorereport.com/...

  Now I'm not implying Hillary is anyway homophobic and I think guilt by association is stupid; I'm just pointing out the double standard.

  by greenboy on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:34:48 AM PDT

•  The case for Obama

  I laid out a case for Obama here - skip the early snark, after the jump I've got some really info on Obama.

  I'll also point you to Project Vote Smart and Progressive Punch.

  Since it sounds like you're most interested in real positions -- I think history is likely your best guide.  

  Of course - none of these "scorecard methods" are perfect.  I use them all in evaluating candidates.

  For example - Progressive Punch gives Hillary Clinton a slight scorecard lead... but my response as an Obama backer is that it only seems to take Federal voting records into account.

  Project Vote Smart is more apolitical -- it's neither liberal or conservative, but rather -- it has an amalgam of virtually ALL "niche" group ratings.   You'll get quick links to all the significant issue-based groups you're likely to care about... the ACLU, the League of Conservation Voters, Planned Parenthood, etc.

  Finally -- here's another good source--- the ADA (Americans for Democratic Action).   Their scorecard can be found here (PDF).

  I think Senator Obama rates quite well -- you'll be surprised to see that despite concerns about his commitment to progressive values -- many organizations would rate him as the most progressive candidate.  

  While I hope you ultimately choose to cast your vote for Senator Obama (and hope... and change :-) -- all of our remaining candidates have strong progressive records to be proud of.

  by zonk on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:37:53 AM PDT

  •  Obama's record in these rating scales

    is irrelevant.  He avoids hard votes.  He games the system from my view.  I look at what he has done with the key issues that matter to a progressive like the war, free trade, jobs and the environment.  His votes are to get along with what ever group he thinks has power for his use at the time.

    by pioneer111 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:52:45 AM PDT

    •  This is absolutely false

      Are you talking about the "present" votes?  The ones that, say, Planned Parenthood asked him to vote present on?

      I'm sorry, but as somebody who lived in Chicago and examined his record very carefully several years ago, before he was a star, I find your line of reasoning unsupported and your conclusions ludicrous.  

      As for his continued "support" of the Iraq war, where was Clinton on this?  Where was Webb?  Is Obama the only one of our Senators who is going to be castigated for voting to pay for body armor in a war which he had no part in starting?

      Come on.

      by Chicago Lulu on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:00:47 AM PDT

    •  The National Journal's ranking

      is extremely respected and they include hard votes. In fact if they only inlcuded easy votes the ranking would not discriminate among senators because they would all be voting the same. The rankings can only be done using votes where people disagree. As for the war, Obama opposed it when it mattered; before the war began.  Now that the war has started there are no good solutions. And while he did not have the opportunity to vote against the Kyle/Lieberman resolution, I give him marks for speaking out against it at the time; in sharp contrast to Hillary who showed up to support the resolution.

      by greenboy on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:05:12 AM PDT

    •  "I look at what he has done"?

      I'm sorry - but you don't.

      Votes on Environmental Issues?  In 2003, Barack Obama was one of only 6 state senators to receive a 100% voting record award from the Illinois League of Conservation Voters.  The national LCV gave him the top score of ANY Democrat in the race on environmental issues.

      Sorry... but NO - you're NOT looking at what he's done.  You're looking at the spin the other campaigns (one in particular) have dished on him.  You've swallowed their talking points hook, line, and sinker.... and that's sad.

      He's not your first choice because you like someone else better?  Fine.  Fare thee well -- we'll hug when the nominee is chosen.

      But please -- PLEASE -- quit pretending you've been some long-time Obama watcher and consumer of Illinois politics who knows the "real" Obama... you don't.  The argument you make against him makes that obvious.  You're buying HRC camp spin.

      by zonk on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:10:15 AM PDT

      •  Pretty obvious

        You know not of which you speak. Everything is Hillary spin?

        How about Steve Skirsch, you know who he is?

        Reasoned argument, not spin.

        by LaEscapee on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 08:57:11 AM PDT

•  Would

  John back down and take a second choice? Would John put aside his beliefs "just in case"?  Would John fight to have you elected?

  WWJD?

  by ScrewJack on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:39:55 AM PDT

•  Vote your conscience.

  Only you can decide that.  For my self, I plan to vote for John Edwards Feb 5.  He is my first choice by a wide margin.  I will not choose the lesser of evils.   I will not try to game the system based on what I think the outcome might be.  Too many things can change between now and the convention, and even moreso between now and the GE.

  As I've commented other places,  I can live with Hillary or Barack, but John has my heart.

  by ignorant bystander on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:54:36 AM PDT

•  Edwards vote in Massachusetts, here.

  The results in Iowa and New Hampshire made me move toward Obama, because it looked like Edwards was becoming a non-entity here.  But I thought about it a bit and realized that while I think Obama would make a good president, I still think Edwards would make a better president.  Further, if Edwards stays in and keeps picking up delegates, he could ensure that no one has a majority of delegates before the Denver convention, where he could play kingmaker.

  That's key for me.  I, too, am concerned that a Clinton nomination would not only bring out Republicans in droves, but would also depress Democratic turnout and cost us not only the White House but a good number of House and Senate seats during a year when we ought to pick up a whole lot of them.  I sincerely believe that Americans would elect a woman as president, but we don't need to test that by daring them to elect an unelectable woman.

  Vote your conscience.  Then the candidates' delegates get to the convention and hammer out a platform.  That's the way the process is supposed to work.  I'm still sending Obama money, but I'm sending more to Edwards, and I'm voting for Edwards, too.

  See you at the polls.

  by Larry McAwful on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:18:14 AM PDT