Pros & Cons of Obama, Clinton, Edwards, Richardson, Biden & Dodd
Held today, the last Democratic debate before the Iowa caucus vote on January 3, 2008 probably changed few votes.
As a result of this last crucial collective event, each candidate will certainly retain their avid supporters. And the undecided voters will finally have to follow their leanings, hunches and gut-level reactions.
(And yes, I've finally made my decision as to which presidential candidate I will vote for in the primary. Read on... )
Logic dictates that Hillary Clinton will NOT win the Iowa caucus, in large part because no one is undecided about Sen. Clinton. Since the Iowa polls all tell us that Obama, Edwards and Clinton are in a statistical dead heat, the undecideds will make the difference in determining who places first, second and third in Iowa.
Few Major Differences on the Issues
In this last public pair-up, each of the six candidates remained true to their platforms and proposals, and were consistent with their campaign stump personalities.
Truth is, except for free trade policies and Sen. Clinton's twin votes to support President Bush on Iraq (2002) and Iran (2007), there are few significant differences between Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Richardson, Biden and Dodd on the issues important to liberals in 2007-08, including:
- Ending the Iraq War
- International diplomacy
- Education reform
- Universal health care
- Social Security
- Human rights, including habeas corpus and torture
- Immigration reform and border security
- Fiscal prudence
Personas of the Democratic Candidates
As I wrote at Obama vs. Clinton: The Iowa Niceness Factor, Iowans, and most Democrats, will cast their primary/caucus votes based mainly on their perception of candidates' characters and personalities:
- Do I like this person?
- Do I trust this person?
- Do I admire this person?
- Do I feel comfortable with this person?
- Does this person have sound judgment?
- Does this person have depth of relevant experience?
The six candidates' public personas and appeals, on display again today, can be summed up as follows:
Hillary Clinton - Intelligent, strong, caring, competent, detailed, and authoritative. Perceived by detractors as pushy, arrogant, dishonest, shrill, and politically slick. (See Cumulative Report Card for Hillary Clinton.)
Barack Obama - Honest, forthright, fair, respectable, competent, family-oriented, religious, and very bright. Perceived by detractors as inexperienced, mild, too intellectual, naive, and woefully short on policy specifics. (See Cumulative Report Card for Barack Obama.)
John Edwards - Passionate and compassionate, charismatic, energetic, smart and strongly progressive. A true populist who cares about middle-class workers and the downtrodden. Seen by detractors as superficial, hypocritical, flip-flopping, inexperienced, and lacking concrete workable plans. (See Cumulative Report Card for John Edwards.)
Bill Richardson - Diplomatic, positive, honest, self-effacing, compassionate, competent, intelligent, and highly experienced. Seen by detractors as frumpy and rumpled, not well-spoken, and lacking strong authority. (See Cumulative Report Card for Bill Richardson .)
Joe Biden - Decisive, bright, articulate, great fun, and highly experienced and knowledgable in foreign relations. Seen by detractors as verbose and a foot-in-the-mouth loose cannon. (See Cumulative Report Card for Joe Biden.)
Chris Dodd - Authoritative, experienced, good judgment, and dignified. Seen by detractors as boring, uninspiring, and unimaginative. Chris Dodd is viewed by many as the ultimate D.C. establishment Democrat in the 2008 president race. (See Cumulative Report Card for Chris Dodd .)
My Primary Vote
I believe that any of these six distinguished Democratic leaders would be an outstanding President of the United States. Many to most complaints by detractors (listed above) are unfair, incorrect, frivolous or exaggerated.
I pledge to proudly vote in November 2008 for whichever of these six candidates wins the Democratic nomination for the 2008 presidential race.
But I can only vote for one in the California primary. So here is my personal decision...
I cannot cast my primary vote for Hillary Clinton, mainly because she is the ONLY candidate to support Bush-Cheney on both Iraq and Iran via her Senate vote. I don't feel that I can trust her judgment on urgent matters of war and peace. I also detest the last-minute dirty, rumor-mill tricks by her campaign against competitors.
My top two preferences are Barack Obama and Bill Richardson.
If casting my ballot on January 3, 2008 at the Iowa caucus, I would vote for Bill Richardson for two reasons:
- Gov. Richardson's decades-long experience and great success as a diplomat, a member of Congress, as Energy Secretary and U.N. Ambassador under President Clinton, and as a governor who has balanced a budget, and solved education and health care crises.
- Unanswered questions and lingering suspicions about Sen. Obama's health care proposals, as eloquently analyzed by respected progressive Princeton University economist Paul Krugman in his New York Times column.
If Barack Obama responds with clarity, transparency and honesty to the legitimate questions raised by Professor Krugman about this vital issue, I may still switch my vote to the senator from Illinois.
Barring that, I will vote for Bill Richardson. And if asked, I would urge my readers to do the same.
(Photo taken in Des Moines, Iowa on Dec 13, 2007 at the last Democratic debate prior to the Iowa caucus on Jan 3, 2008: Pool/Getty Images)
Related Reading
Profile of Gov. Bill Richardson
Profile of Sen. Barack Obama
Profile of Sen. Hillary Clinton
Profile of Barbara Richardson, Married to Gov. Richardson
Profile of Michelle Obama, Married to Sen. Obama
Profile of Bill Clinton, Married to Sen. Clinton
Comments
There are PLENTY of articles which show that Clinton’s INSURANCE MANDATES will leave 15% of Americans out. (Barack’s so-called 15 million equals about 5%.) Hopefully, you will look at others’ articles about the problems with Hillary’s vs. Obama’s plans.
P.S. I am pleased you live in California, as you have some additional research to do!
I have to disagree with your assertion that the complaints from the candidates’ detractors are “unfair, incorrect or frivolous.” That is simply not true.
For example, you are quick to condemn the “dirty tricks” of Hilary’s campaign, but then take unusually great pains to make her out to be this amazingly compassionate, virtuous woman. It was HER campaign, under HER watch. What, do you think she had a gun to her head when she hired those slime-balls? The truth is, Hilary Clinton IS pushy, arrogant, dishonest, shrill, and politically slick. Yet time and time again in numerous articles here you brush aside her numerous poor attributes and trumpet her few admirable ones. Why?
Also, saying that the accusations of Biden as a “smarmy…foot-in-the-mouth loose cannon” being wrong is hypocritical, since YOU have accused him (and Dodd) of those very things. May I remind you of you your article, ‘Top Five Worst Moments of the MSNBC Democratic Debate’? Here are a few things you said about the Senators:
“Chris Dodd and Joe Biden are the very essence of the old-white-boys’ D.C. establishment, and the heart of the Senate old guard.” “What their blatant rudeness screams is that they’re closed to new ideas and fresh approaches. What their unbecoming disrespect says is that they support status quo, and that their vision is limited to stale, inside-the-beltway thinking.” “…these two self-appointed guardians of Democratic political truths assume a certain seniority entitlement…” “…they fail to focus on sharpening their own dying campaigns.”
Sound familiar? Those are your words, not mine. Are you now admitting that you were wrong about Biden and Dodd?
Speaking of Chris Dodd, I can also attest that he IS boring, uninspiring, and unimaginative. When was the last time Senator Dodd gave a speech that made you want to cheer? When was the last time Senator Dodd had an idea that sounded like a much-needed break from ‘politics as usual?’ When was the last time the media ever described Senator Dodd as anything more than an ‘also-ran?’
And yes, Barack Obama IS inexperienced. That doesn’t mean he would necessarily be a bad president, but to try and deny that a mere two years in the Senate is hardly enough to be a proven candidate is ridiculous.
Finally, Bill Richardson, despite being one of the best candidates of this race, is clearly not a well-spoken politician. Now I personally don’t care about his misstatements. I mean, hell, he’s certainly more eloquent than the current POTUS. But still, why are you trying to sweep Richardson’s obvious shortcomings under the rug?
after having just finished watching the debate, i wanted to comment that chris dodd said a couple of things that made me like him better–most notably, his statement about hearing his father speak about being a well-intentioned public servant. i also appreciated obama’s statement of support for biden’s civil rights record.
i thought obama finally sounded like an actual candidate for the first time ever, more than just a slick orator. it didn’t sell me on the notion that he can handle a national campaign and the presidency that would likely follow.
i thought hillary’s voice was really shrill and kind of pissy, even though she made some really clear, honest distinctions that were niether defensive nor offensive, just honest and clear. maybe she had a cold or something, but even as a hillary supporter, i wanted to her to stop talking. she just sounded upset.
that’s it. it was really an odd forum for me, maybe the result of bad lighting (even edwards and obama looked really old and tired) and the fact that, at this point, they’re mostly just reciting the talking points they know will work.
i did want to throw out that CNN interviewed a couple of undecided voters before the debate, and they said they were between clinton and obama….just since you said you don’t think anyone’s undecided about clinton. i think a lot of people (my age, at least) are still waffling between clinton and obama.
Deb - KUDOS! I’ve been a Bill Richardson fan from Day One. I sincerely hope Iowans and my neighbors in NH see the forest thru the trees where Bill is concerned. Not only is he the most experienced, he is most electable in a general against any of the crazies out there who could end up on the Republican ticket.
Like you, Obama is my 2nd choice, though I could live with Edwards too.
Happy Holidays!
Not voting for Hillary Clinton would be the stupidest thing liberals could do.
Read this fantastic analysis to see why there is absolutely no chance that Obama, given his inabity to articulate specific plans, will not win the election…
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/011500.php