Saturday, September 15, 2007

Clark endorses Clinton

Subject: Soapbox
I'm a fan of General Clark's, donated a lot of money to his '04 primary bid, and even volunteered a little time -- which is very unusual for me when it comes to politics. I would have probably done the same if he jumped in for '08 as well.

I figured he didn't have a chance, though. Not this time.

Mostly because of last time. The media narrative gets locked into a narrow, factless droning that tries too hard to perpetuate the notion of a "winner" of the horserace before they've even gone 'round the first bend. And that kills the buzz, which kills the funding, which kills modern campaigns. They have to start too early, grease too much of the existing local political machines (most who control ballot access), and somehow overcome a hail of ostensibly "friendly" fire in order to allow anyone who is outside of an established politically-connected dynasty with a giant cache of campaign funds.

Ever wonder why there's so many Senators running this time? A loophole in the McCain-Feingold campaign finance "reform" bill allows money to be transferred from Federal campaign committees. Not so for state officeholders or other notable citizens. So a sitting Senator can rack up millions of fundraising long before declaring. A retired General, not so much.

At any rate, it's not a particular surprise that he's backing Hillary. All Arkansas Democrats are, though I'm sure there are other reasons that haven't been disclosed. And it's just another tick in what I've been perceiving as a "Hillary inevitability".

I'm kind of ambivilent about her myself. I don't have any of the illogical issues with her that a lot of the passionate ranters tend to drum up all the damn time. In the "real world", away from the blogs and AM radio, she's genuinely liked by normal, everyday people who keep themselves reasonably informed (by ignoring blogs and AM radio, I figure). I'm uncomfortable with the thought of a "Bush - Clinton - Bush - Clinton" line of succession, because I think that indicates a seriously broken system.

And frankly, I've never been a fan of corporate, triangulating, polling-instead-of-leading Democrats. Like I've said before, I'm "independent". Though, like I've said before, I've glumly accepted that an insubstantial third-party effort is completely useless in the winner-take-all system we've had. Republicans are a complete disaster right now and need to be routed for a while, which is an easy choice because I think all of the candidates are useless or damaged or dangerous.

So, I guess I'm going to maintain my ambivilence through the primary. I'm not interested in donating, let alone volunteering, for anyone. I'll probably think more about participating more local races instead.

And if somehow, after the primaries are over and Gen. Clark gets chosen to run as the VP on the ticket... Well, maybe I'll start paying attention again. *grin*

Until then, meh.

No comments: