Looking forward to the forum -- should be interesting to see how they stack up next to each other, and if anyone stands out. I'd love to know who the foot soldiers are for each of the leading candidates, and where their support is coming from.
Special Election does not necessarily mean low turnout: one high turn out special was the special to elect Bill Foster to replace Denny Hastert here in Illinois.
Special Election means no one knows who is going to turn out, or how many. Will voters be jazzed that Rep. Emanuel is now COS Emanuel and come out to elect someone new? Will they feel a mandate to keep change coming? Will they be bored with the whole election thing (didn't we just do that?)? No one knows.
I think Tom has a great shot to win this race, as does Mike Quigley. Fritchey has gotten a lot of good publicity lately, and he has some alderman/ward backing which could be helpful. But many of these wards are pretty independent: they may not vote the way the committeeman tells them to vote.
Hillary has only recently been reminded she needs to win the Democratic primary first. This is aimed at General voters: but if she keeps this up, she may disgust the Democratic base so much she loses the primary in a big way ...
And its a stupid way to play to the American people as well: guess what? most of America doesn't believe that the War in Iraq made them safer. Out now. And most of America remembers that 9/11 happened on the Republican watch... so it is just stupid to play into it.
I was a strong supporter of him in his Senate race, very enthusiastic and really happy to cast my vote for him. And then I've been a bit disappointed in his Senate career. Lieberman as a mentor? help. Some of his quotes have seemed ... over-cautious. I would like to see him out there leading. He is a rock star. He gives great, thoughtful speeches that are truly inspiring. He's drawing amazing crowds and inspiring them ... and yet I'm not sold yet. I would like to see him pushing his colleagues in the Senate to be "all they can be," not giving John McCain quotes to through back at us. ... Its distressing to see the right-wing media attempt to take him down with lies and innuendo though: they seem to feel he is now the real threat to their power base. So it will be very interesting to see how it plays out.
Just as Randi Rhodes has spent the week talking about institutional racism, I think the larger picture is institutional sexism. Many women are juggling work, kids, keeping a home somewhat respectably clean, cooking, etc. Women still do the majority of household chores in this country; women still have primary responsibility for childcare. Childcare is frequently an obstacle for women, but its never an obstacle for men (well, to be fair, rarely). Why is that? Many women, whether single parents or in committed relationships, feel like they have enough on their plate without throwing in responsiblity for a campaign or an elected office. You'll notice many women get into politics AFTER their kids have grown up.
I have a friend who's contemplating a run for Democratic committeeman in her ward -- she's single, no kids, good job. Me, single mom, mediocre job which doesn't quite cover the bills... I feel good that I get out to vote and to canvas once in a while for a candidate. Big difference in energy level and amount of time we can dedicate to politics. I could do a once-a-month board meeting :) but that's about it.
And there is so much about the electoral process that is so unappealing. I am completely turned off by the raising money aspect of campaigns: I don't want to spend any time on the phone calling people I don't know asking them for money. The thought gives me the absolute horrors. So I will probably never run for office, because there is no way I'd do that.
But my guess is the big issue for most women is TIME, especially women with kids. We already feel like there isn't enough of it in the week, let alone adding a campaign of any sort to it.
Well, it depends on whether you believe that the American system is a system of laws, and that no man is above the law -- or if you believe that the President -- as long as he's a Republican -- is God and no man has a right to question him, his actions, or his advisors and their actions.
Personally, I believe we're a nation of laws, and that subverting them to advance a political party is indecent .... but that's just me.
I don't watch much TV news because it is so shallow and lacking -- and I don't care about Anna Nicole Smith ... well, only in passing. I care about a 15 second blip, not an all-news all-the-time way. Oh too bad so sad, moving on ... what about the soldiers in Walter Reed? That's heartbreaking. The news programs seem to get the wrong message all the time: they keep dumbing down instead of getting more in-depth which is what I, for one, want. Its fine to have the trashy magazines for those who want them; how about giving us decent news magazines for those of us who want more in-depth? And even Nightline, since Ted Koppel left, has gotten into the less depth trap -- and running some very dull stories on pop culture that I could just care less about.
I agree on Rahm: would love to see a strong challenger take him out. Unfortunately, I don't know of any in the district. Plus, we'd need to find some willing to wear a mesh coat at all times to deflect the knives ... and preferrably with no close immediate family to be hurt by Rahm's tactics... and extremely well-funded.
Or we need Patrick Fitzgerald to indict more of the Chgo Dem Machine until it gets so close to Rahm that he can't avoid the stain ...
I have health insurance tied to my job, and after reading the comments above I'm certainly grateful for it. Still, premiums go up every year, way more than my salary does. And I do feel stuck in a less-than-great job because I need insurance for me and my kid. Hey, I had to go back to work after having him because we needed the insurance my job provided: no way I could quit to stay home with my baby. I have definitely made job decisions -- decisions to take a job, what kind of job to take, and to stick with a bad job -- because of the need for health insurance.
Um, we don't live in a monarchy or a soviet-style dictatorship. We're free to disagree, and to disagree with each other. I don't think, if you read carefully, that you'll see much disdain for Mr. Ford in the comments above: I didn't. What I saw was an attempt to come to terms with Ford's legacy -- good and bad. "Good man with noble intentions" -- maybe, maybe not. This is a forum where we can and should argue about these things: unlike, say, Mr. Ford's funeral, or a memorial book dedicated to Mr. Ford, which should be properly respectful and highlight the good points of his life. This is not that place. I also think its unfair to characterize the discussion above as "set in our beliefs and emotions" -- I think there's been a fair amount of willingness to learn from each other and an attempt to figure out what this man meant to us, both individually and collectively.
OK, I was a kid at the time as well, but I remember thinking that the pardon was a cover-up. There was more that would have come out, had the impeachment proceedings continued, and it would have been very bad stuff. So the pardon. I've no idea whether that was true or not: that's how it seemed to me at the time. I didn't feel it brought closure to a "national nightmare" -- I felt it swept it under the rug. The results of that decision solidified in the national mind that there is one justice system for the rich/powerful, and another for the rest of us -- and neither is "fair." And I do think that you can lay the shenanigans of the current administration right to the door of the pardon: yes, I think they think they can -- and should -- get away with anything, and a great deal of it has to do with their confidence in their ability to re-write history. So even if you walk free in disgrace, you can be "rehabilitated" at a later date (see Nixon: eulogies).
I grew up expecting national leaders to be shot. It has surprised me that we haven't had a major national figure shot since Reagan.
The best thing I know about Ford: his wife. She was (and probably remains) his better half, who had much better approval ratings than did her husband. The buttons I remember said "Betty/Liddy."