My preferred candidate, Obama, has many shortcomings

[thesubstanceofdreams]

It is frustrating to see how many in GD/P (supporters of BOTH candidates) react angrily whenever a flaw in their candidate emerges or is pointed out, as if she or he was perfect and beyond any impurities. These are human beings we are talking about. And not just human beings, they are politicians, which are known to pander, spin, and exaggerate as part of their trade. They have for millennia.

There are many things to criticize in Obama as well as Clinton. Likewise, there are many things to celebrate in both. I support Obama because I believe his positive traits have more potential for real change than Clinton's and, also, Clinton's shortcomings are way more serious than Obama's. I also think Obama has a greater chance to win in the GE. But that doesn't mean that I give Obama a free pass, or that everything Obama does or says is good and everything Clinton does or says is wrong.

[man4allcats]

1. Aah, the sweet voice of reason!

K&R. :thumbsup: :toast:

[thesubstanceofdreams]

2. Kick

:hi:

[cali]

3. Completely agree

I've posted several times on my beefs with Obama- and I have quite a few; they go beyond the McClurkin cluster fuck. I haven't liked some of his votes, I think he's lacked leadership on Iraq. I didn't like his going to the 700 Club and the remarks he made there on abortion and how women approached that decision. I'm wary of him on trade policy. I don't like his plan to increase the military, etc. I by no means consider him perfect.

[usrbs]

4. And I have many problems with Clinton, too

although I am supporting her because I think she'll be the better president. But there's plenty I don't like, which is why I waited so long for Gore / Clark / Edwards.

Your sentiment is appreciated, though, and very welcome.

[usrbs]

5. And I have many problems with Clinton, too

although I am supporting her because I think she'll be the better president. But there's plenty I don't like, which is why I waited so long for Gore / Clark / Edwards.

Your sentiment is appreciated, though, and very welcome.

[rox63]

6. There's no such thing as a perfect candidate

They are all just human beings, and thus they are imperfect. But I see a world of potential in Senator Obama, and I see more of the same old s**t if we elect Senator Clinton.

[casus belli]

7. Traitor.

;)

I jest.

[thevoiceofreason]

8. Hmmmmmmm

Which candidate is it who has said he's not perfect? Thinking, thinking. Oh yeah! Barack, on his 2 minute commercials they ran in Texas.

That's what I like about him. Genuine humility. Not some false stuff, but genuine.

[Enrique]

9. mine too

:toast:

[eShirl]

10. kick, and a belated "Welcome to DU!"

:kick: :headbang:

[lastliberalintexas]

11. They are both good, reasoned candidates

who would each make fine presidents, even if not as left as I would personally like. But yes, they are also both humans and make mistakes and have faults. I personally think the good outweighs the bad, even if neither is my candidate.

Thank you for a such a rational, reasonable post. I don't see many of those these days. :)

[shadowknows69]

12. Well said

IMO our best two candidates aren't in the running anymore. Only Biden, Gravel or Dodd could have really stood toe to toe with McCain on matters of experience/foreign policy expertise. Richardson probably would have been better in the GE too and I think Edwards would have wiped the floor with probably anyone but McCain, but I think he still would have won. I have never had faith that Clinton could win a GE. Obama could do it if his infectious message is allowed to reach enough people.