Democrats only-Who do you endorse?

[gorkay]

I haven't decided yet.

[gorkay]

One of the problems I'm having with deciding who to support is that some of the candidates who have the most to offer are the same ones who seem to have little, if any, chance to win the nomination. I could still support one of them, but what's the use? By the time I get to vote in my state's primary, they'll all be out of the race in all probability. It points to the fact that the selection process is terrible, and getting worse all the time... a classic case of how the indiscriminate, unthinking use of "democratic" process actually makes things less democratic. I mean, look at Biden: he has tons of experience and probably more policy knowledge than anyone else in the race. He's also the only one who has any ideas about Iraq that are concrete and sensible enough to call a "plan." Sure, he has flaws too, but no worse than some of the other candidates. But it doesn't look as if he has a chance in hell. The same goes for Richardson and Dodd: they are both highly qualified, serious candidates who deserve a lot more consideration, but they've been relegated to the back bench along with the risible likes of Gravel and Kucinich. Dodd, Biden, and Richardson probably each have more political and governmental experience than the top three candidates put together. But Clinton has a name, Edwards has bucks, and Obama has "charisma" (or so I'm told; I've seen little evidence of it myself). So it's going to be one of those three, each of whom leaves me cold.

At least I can console myself with the fact that the situation isn't any better for the Republicans. Of their three front-runners, one has never held statewide or national elective office, and the other two have a grand total of one term as governor of a mid-sized state and one term in the Senate during which he distinguished himself for nothing besides lazy work habits.