I mean, whatever. So we only get a choice between two candidates, or three this year, which is nice. And the debates are a sham, fine. I heard Beej and Scott Baumgardner talking about this, which is true: candidates only rehash like three points, and people all think what the candidates say. "Hillary has experience." "Obama wants change." Okay, so I'm going to vote for Obama because I want change. But it would be nice if I had a nice list of the issues and how they stand, so I could have a good reason to vote for a candidate instead of that candidate's sound bytes. Could someone bring up net neutrality or waterboarding? Then I'd get into it.
Also, here's where I show how I can see both sides of issues:
- Barack, shut up about how you voted against the war! Hell, I don't even know if I would have voted for the war or not if I'd been in the Senate at that time, based on the intelligence we had and my former political beliefs. It's true that I appreciate that a candidate has foresight and that, had he been president, we might not be mired in this mess. But it seems like he's basing a campaign on one ballot he happened to get right.
- New York Times, shut up about McCain. Now, I want a Dem to win as much as the next guy, but geez oh man, not because of sensationalistic "he had an affair!" stories. I am not going to try to say something clever about how remember that time Bill Clinton and etc. because that joke is too obvious but instead I will say SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP.
No comments:
Post a Comment