Would adding the criterion "not a bull-headed ideologue" fix this?

And what do you think of my ITW Endorsement Pre-commitment idea?

--- \/	 FROM Erik Talvitie AT 07.09.06 11:39 (Today)	\/ ---

>> According to yootles.com/candicalc we are overwhelmingly in favor of
>> Kucinich, as are (to a lesser extent) the other 150,000 people who
>> answered those same questions.  The selectsmart page (linked to at the top
>> of yootles.com/candicalc) says I like Ron Paul the best.
>
> Here's the thing about these calculators: they seem to assume that your
> ideal candidate is...you. To me, that's kind of an odd place to start
> from. I mean, obviously it is true that I take the political positions I
> take because I believe if the government were to take the same
> positions, we'd be a better nation for it. That said, I fully recognize
> that if I could perform a government transplant and replace our current
> one with one that agreed with me on every issue, we'd have a big problem
> on our hands. Because *most* people don't agree with me on at least some
> issue that is really important to them, and everything would just grid
> to a halt. So really I'd much rather have a government that most people
> can get along with, but one that is walking in my direction and bringing
> the nation with it.
>
> So when both calculators tell me Kucinich is the best candidate for me
> (yootles: 58, selectsmart: 98), I can see where they're coming from. I
> *like* Kucinich. I like what we has to say and I love to hear him speak.
> I think he's the most legitimately liberal candidate in the field. And
> that's why I would never vote for him. He can't even sell his platform
> to moderate dems, let alone die-hard conservatives. If he managed to
> magically get to the oval office, he'd be a complete waste of time. He'd
> never get anything done because no congressperson (democrat or
> republican) who wanted to get re-elected could have anything to do with
> him. The same goes for Gravel and Paul too, as far as I'm concerned.
> They all have great ideas for the Perfect America but they give no
> indication that they will be able to put that agenda aside and work with
> the contentious, confused, inertial country we've got right now. We've
> just suffered through 8 years of an ideological, bull-headed president
> who knows what's best for everyone, despite abysmal approval ratings. I
> don't want a repeat, even if I share the ideology this time around.
>
> So when I'm looking at candidates, I'm not looking for the one that is
> the best reflection of me, I'm looking for the one that will best
> champion my overall values to everyone else. I'd like the candidate who
> is most likely to be able to convince the nation as a whole that a
> couple of steps to the left ("and then a jump to the ri-i-i-i-ight!") in
> our policies will do us all some good. Even though I don't agree with
> them issue for issue (and even on some issues that are really important
> to me) I actually think the Democratic front-runners are probably the
> best we've got using that criterion (and maybe Biden too, if he could
> just gain some traction).
>
> Just my 2 pyoonies.
>
> Erik
>

-- 
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves  - -  search://"Daniel Reeves"

Build a man a fire, and he's warm for the
rest of the evening. Set a man on fire and
he's warm for the rest of his life.