PhotoDude.com

Mon. Jan 26, 2004

One Foot Off The Fence

One Foot Off The Fence – I established my spot on the fence last August. And I have to admit, so far this political season has been quite interesting. But I also realize I probably view the political process a bit differently than most.

I really like choices. And I really like having someone to vote for, not against. No matter who is the incumbent, I like to see a strong viable candidate from the other party, not some foregone conclusion. It’s what’s healthy for democracy (and I might add, I’m often disappointed). Without viable choices, the political pendulum rusts in place.

This year, to my way of thinking, I get to make two choices, and I make a point of compartmentalizing then. On March 2, I get to vote in the Georgia primary, assuming there is still a candidate left in the running that I’d like to vote for. Though the field will be stirred and winnowed by the voters in the nineteen states with primaries prior to March 2, that’s my small opportunity to participate in the primary process.

I have no illusions that the candidate I choose to cast that single ballot for in the primary will end up with the nomination. But it’s still my first chance to choose. Sooner or later, the Democrats will settle on a nominee, and they’ll choose a running mate. And then I’ll get my second choice.

I’m sure that’s a simply alien concept to many people. The ones who’ve already made their choice, long before they get a chance to cast a ballot (or two). They can’t imagine any scenario that would make them swap their blue shirt for a red one, or vice versa. It’s simply a matter of what name will end up printed on the front of the shirt.

Well, I can imagine scenarios in which I might wear either. Or none. In fact, that was me in 2000. While everyone else neatly split into nearly equal ranks of red and blue, I remained shirtless. And I’ve pretty much remained that way ever since.

But I’m bringing one foot down off the fence. My first of two choices. Assuming he’s still on the ballot on March 2, and in the next four weeks doesn’t swallow his foot up to his knee, I’ll be voting for John Reid Edwards.

I don’t want to go into great detail as to the ”why.” That is partly a process of elimination, which means I’d have to say ugly things about various candidates supported by various people I know and respect. Call me unworthy of having a weblog, but I’m reluctant to do that.

But I can tell you a few of the reasons I was drawn to Edwards. When I first did a ”skim assessment” of the nine candidates many months ago, he caught my eye for an obvious reason, one he is leaning on heavily in South Carolina. Roots. Though he was born in South Carolina, he’s spent the majority of his life in the same place I spent the majority of my formative years, Raleigh, N.C. The first time I heard him speak a sentence, I knew, he and I are from the same place. To be sure, it’s not a political distinction, but it’s one of which we’re all guilty in one way or another. We both favor those who are from the same roots as us, and feel we can ”read” them better. It’s social, not political.

But whenever I looked at the way-too-early polls those months ago, he was down in single digits just above Sharpton and Kucinich. I immediately prejudged him as not a viable candidate, without any careful consideration, especially given that back then we were all sure who was going to be the nominee. What was the point spending a lot of time studying the policies of eight people who weren’t going to win? Silly me. That’ll teach me not to listen to the pundits.

Anyway, he caught my eye again in a debate in early November, the one where he took Dean to task for his comments about the South. It was enough to inspire me to go to his site and poke around, and though it wasn’t as fleshed out as it is today, I couldn’t really find many policies where we sharply disagreed. Nor could I find any polls that indicated anything more than a Single Digit Candidate.

I fit right into the mindset the pundits are talking about now. Voters are not only looking at the policy positions, they’re assessing candidate viability on two levels. Can they actually win the nomination, and are they a viable candidate with the best chance to defeat Bush in the general election?

I think that’s a large reason we’re seeing such volatility in the early results, at least, compared to the predictions. People are reassessing the various candidates’ viability based on new input. Lots of it. They’re making those reassessments very quickly for a reason: the Democrats front loaded the primary schedule, so each campaign day becomes magnified. As does each mistake. Judgement comes quicker, as does the vote right behind it.

Again, I’m a prime example of that. I’ve been able to reassess Edwards, not only due to the fact his rise in the polls gives him the viability I thought he lacked against Dean and Clark for the Democratic nomination. But also because, for the first time, that first viability test has allowed me to consider the second viability question: could Edwards beat Bush?

Of the Democratic candidates, I think he’d have the best shot. The debate (and there would surely only be one) would be a classic. Though there’s no telling how the Bush/Cheney/Rove machine might try to paint Edwards (or any other nominee), the obvious societal slur would be ”trial lawyer.” And my guess is that in a debate with Bush, Edwards would make them wish they’d never encountered one.

Then there’s that middle name. I only found out about it a couple days ago, so it didn’t really figure into my choice. It was more like a wax seal on it. Here’s an age peer, from the same part of the country, who also has the middle name ”Reid.” A minor point, but if I also find out he’s left handed, I’m going to take it as a Bonafide Sign.

But before you paint me blue for the next ten months, here’s the other half of the conundrum. Come November, I may not vote for the Democratic nominee, even if it is Edwards. I can’t say for sure. That’s what I mean about two choices, choices that I deliberately separate. Because I like choice, and I want both parties to put forth people who make me think hard about the right choice. I’m a real Pollyanna in that way, and am usually disappointed.

But there’s far too much road ahead. Look at what’s happened in just the last week. What happens if your chosen Golden Boy cripples himself by revealing unexpected … negative characteristics. For example, I voted for Clinton in ’92, but not in ’96 (shirtless again). Or, there’s The Scream heard ’round the political world a week ago. Anything can happen, even outside events beyond any candidate’s control. Imagine how the race would be changed by another terror attack on our soil, even of relatively small scale.

We all want to make the right choice. For me, that means not making a fast choice. I’m always seeking more input. But, in the simplest of terms, if my primary vote can help just one of the Democratic candidates towards the goal of a good race in the general election, John Edwards is my choice.