Sunday, November 13


An article in WaPo says moderate Republicans are unhappy with the GOP. But, it goes on to say, they still don't consider voting Democrat a viable alternative.

This jibes with my own informal polling. However, several moderate Republicans I've queried have stated that they would, given the chance, vote for Bill Clinton (but not Hillary).

Their reasoning: Clinton was good for business, showed fiscal restraint, was smart and a strong leader, and popular around the globe. He was compassionate but not "recklessly" so. They also think that maybe if he'd left Hillary out of the equation his healthcare proposals might have received better notices.

Interesting stuff. What to make of it, I don't know. I'd prefer an Al Gore or John Edwards presidency (since Howard Dean has taken himself out of the running), but more and more I question whether Wesley Clark might not be our best choice in '08. He has many of the Big Dog's best qualities (charm, smarts), his patriotism can't be questioned by even the most vitriolic, hyperbolic right wing, and as a career soldier he has no legislative record to challenge or distort. He may be the only American alive who could truly be a "uniter, not a divider." I only question whether he'd get us out of Iraq.

Worth thinking about, seriously.

Tags: , , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home