I supported Howard Dean not only because he was one of the few candidates that thought similarly to I on the issues, but he was also one of the few candidates who early on stood up to NeoCon Bush policies from the war, the Patriot Act and to NCLB and stood up to the Democrats who seemed to lie down on the job.
I will not vote for Kerry. Here is a man that not only voted for the war, for the Patriot Act and for NCLB, but who recently stated that he'd consider a FMA if the 'wording' were acceptable (would ANY wording be acceptable?). I haven't yet been able to be convinced that he has a conviction on any of the subjects I find important.
I will have to look at Edwards closer, I definitely do NOT like his tendency towards protectionism and I am a bit reluctant to vote for a man who has barely any experience.
I could vote for Dean still, but would that be throwing away my vote? probably, maybe not.
But then I'm faced with voting for the lesser of two lessers again, like nearly every vote I've made in my life (save this last mayoral election in SF where for the first time I LIKED both candidates and would have been happy with either).
Hmm, maybe the lesser of two lessers here is at least still a thousands times greater than what we have now. So off I go to get reaquainted with Edwards,
anyone have any convincing arguments one way or the other? Especially Dean supporters? what do you think?