In the beginning. . .

Sadly, my personal affection for the study of politics, great love and respect for America and its principles, and total despise of the current state of politics that began, oh, we'll say, around the Nixon Administration years, have combined into one all-consuming, unnatural force that force me to create this space to bitch.

I am using this first bit to serve as a warning: Much of this will be incorrect. It is my opinion, and I will try to keep it as factually correct as possible. I encourage you to help me keep it that way. If I say something that's wrong, please, please correct me (but cite it, one wrong comment doesn't deserve another). I suppose that will be Rule #1. Rule #2 would be that there's no party-line bitching - except for me, of course. Or if it's funny. I'll say straight out that I tend to favor a Democratic point of view on issues. I'm a liberal, but that makes me a liberal, and not an anti-conservative. They have their good points, the Demo's have their bad. I may make more rules as I go along.

So, I guess we'll get started:

The purpose of this blog is going to be my severe disliking for the current trends of American politics. The wrong people, in general, have the power. I will be using the 2008 Presidential election to serve as a main format for this whining. Mostly, because it shows all sides of America as it is a different kind of election. For those of you who don't remember, before WWII, there was an election situation similar to the one we have currently. It is such that the incumbent President is inelligible for reelection (Thank god - W is on the way out 1 yr, 8 months, 10 days, 3 minutes, 35 seconds) and the incumbent Vice President has no intent to run ("If nominated I will not run, if elected I will not serve" - VP Dick Cheney - again, thank god, as there is some rise to the question as to whether Cheney will in fact serve to the end of the Administration as there is talk of his impeachment). This situation gives a wide open field for canidacy.

As most of you know, it appears that the main Democratic contenders are Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. The main candidates of the Repbulican party is somewhat unclear. In pure fundraising terms, it's Former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney. A really handy graphic map using data compiled from the Federal Election Commission can be found here.

In politics, as with life, money makes the world go round. In my crazy, clairvoyant predictions, I believe that if the election were today, either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama would be President of the United States. My reasoning comes from simple name recognition, and things associated with the histories of the canidates. Why it wouldn't be a Republican is that the most known is Rudy Guillani (also, I will spell people's names wrong, and frequently. . . you know who I mean). I believe he is unelectable by Republican standards due to his positions on abortion (being pro-choice), gay rights, and his several failed marriages.

Ironically, I also see a trend of people who "submit to the will of the beast" and, heads-down, accept the fate that Hillary Clinton will be the first female president. I think this may create a trend of "joiners" in Republican voters who will just vote with the crowd, or the way they think the crowd is going. . . Many would say "now hold on, Kyle, voters are independent thinkers!" Bullshit. High school continues on through adulthood. In nearly all cases, elections are a popularity contest, not a reasonable judgment based on the ability to faithfully execute the office. I suppose if all the wrong people having power is Problem #1, this would certainly be Problem #2, and I guess would be the "Chicken and the Egg Theory" of politics, did we elect the wrong people in the first place, or did they become the wrong people?. . .

On a sidebar, and I should've mentioned this earlier, a bunch of people, whether they are trusting of my viewpoints, or would like to have a good laugh about what I said amongst themselves later after I leave, have asked me what is becoming one of my most hated questions: "So, who are you going to vote for?" Usually, I have ample time to explain the following, and here it is: In the great state of Utah, where I reside, a beautiful system has been set that does not allow me to vote. That's right. Doesn't allow me, by law, to choose a candidate in a primary election. Why is that? Because I did at the bursting age of 18 what I like to call "registering with the enemy" or "joining Satan's forces." There's no black oath, no sacrifice, nothing at all difficult like that, you simply need to register as a Democrat. In many parts of Utah, this is becoming more and more acceptable, but overall, we fall heavily to the right, and the red, in our politics. Since it is at the discretion of the states to set up election rules, this is the sad truth I live in. I do not agree with this limiting of the primaries, at any level, for any reason. Now, and this is more important, because we're learning, the candidate field will narrow itself during the next year. In early next year, primary election will be held - if you are able to be involved and vote, I highly encourage you to do so. In fact, I just reregistered, so ha. The primaries will determine nominations by the Republican and Democratic parties in August and September 2008 at national conventions. Though I can't say for certain, it's highly highly likely that one of these two people will be elected. This is why I don't waste all that much time thinking about it - people will be chosen. Independent candidates do run, and do get votes, the most notable being ross perot in 92. Usually, however, the Independent candidate is only pulling votes from the ideological side they are on and making it easier for the other side of the spectrum to win. To understand the political spectrum, imagine a line. Everything to the left of the center represents a Liberal, generally Democratic point of view. Everything on the right of the center shows a Conservative, generally Republican point of view. Ross Perot, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton ran in 92, Clinton as a Demo, H.W. as a 'pub, and Ross Perot as a "Green Party" candidate. Perot's views were far to the right, and as such, he "stole" much of H. W.'s vote. Though Bill got less than 50%, he was elected, and there are more examples. The last point being that with the electoral system, the publics vote can be reversed anyhow by faithless electoral voters.

tomorrow, or at some point we'll answer this: "well then, who can perform job correctly?" I hope you don't hate politics as much as I do at this point.