The Philadelphia Inquirer printed yesterday an analysis of which Democrat candidate is the most electable, including whether Barack would be the stronger candidate because of his gender or Hillary the stronger candidate because of her race.
I detest using electability as the criteria for choosing candidates. To exclude Barack as the nominee because some voters are racist empowers racism; to exclude Hillary because of her gender empowers sexism. Instead of using electability as our selection criteria, let's support the candidate who we think would be the best President.
Certainly, any of the three candidates (Obama, Clinton, McCain) would be better than the existing President.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Agree that "electability" is an artificial standard because of the fast pace of politics in the primary season. The candidate that's most electable this week may not fare so well next week because of campaign dynamics and external influences. Frankly, I think it's more of a cushion for superdelegates to fall back on to support their choices. They should have the political backbone to weigh the merits of all the candidates and make their choice based--as you said--on who they believe to be the best qualified.
Post a Comment