The last poll had some flaws that were helpfully pointed out, and I am interested in the results so we're going to do this poll a bit more professionally this time. All the candidates who have filed with the Federal Elections Commission are listed, and you can only vote once. Furthermore, the voting is limited in time, so after the time is past we can actually get a winner and then do an actual "election."

 

Select the one candidate you you would support as nominee for President of the United States from the Democratic Party. Obviously, it misses the point if you vote for someone you don't like because you don't like Democrats. Vote for the candidate you could honestly support.

 

I back Biden, by the way. Post who you support if you wish.

The Democratics, eh?

The Democratics, eh?

 

Gah... I do this every time.

The Democratics, eh?

 

Sounds like a british rock band...

Why do people like Obama so much? Sure he represents change and all that, but are his policies really that different then Clintons? I watched the debates briefly and it seemed like they agreed on plenty of issues, but different slightly on the details.

I'll answer that. There's quite a lot I like about Barrack Obama. I like his intelligence, his maturity, his perspective on race, and his respect for all points of view. In his short time in the Senate he's sponsored some of the most thoughtful, balanced and measuredly progressive legislation that that body has presented during the last few years. And I think of all the candidates currently running for president, Barrack Obama probably has the best chance of being "a uniter not a divider".

 

Are his policies really that different from the Clintons'? No, they aren't. And that's hurting him quite a bit. And people should be asking why that's the case, and whether that's an indication of the better candidate winning out, or whether it means business as usual.

 

I also have plenty of reasons why I wouldn't vote for him, but that wasn't your question so I guess I'll stop there.

I would've expected him to be more strongly against the war... but maybe that's something that makes him a uniter?

 

didn't he cosponsor one of the transparency bills? I like that one too.

I think our country and planet are in need of someone who can bring people together. Someone who can form a consensus and work with those who disagree. I think Obama demostrates that ability better than all the rest. I like him because I think he's what we need right now to move forward, not backward. That's just me though.

I think our country and planet are in need of someone who can bring people together. Someone who can form a consensus and work with those who disagree. I think Obama demostrates that ability better than all the rest. I like him because I think he's what we need right now to move forward, not backward. That's just me though.

 

Biden's had a record of that, too. But he's been declared "third tier" and doomed from the onset, not that he has the charisma or honestly probably the energy to make a campaign work in '08. I'm hoping for him to get a Sec of State position in a forthcoming Democratic (or McCain) presidency. McCain has the potential of a unifier too, but that's for the other thread.

As much as I've always liked McCain, I'm afraid I have to agree with iNow that his potential as a "uniter" is pretty low. Whether that's the fault of his position on certain issues, or the degree of opposition he typically faces, is open to debate, but one need look no further than the typical reception he gets at a college campus these days in order to see how unlikely he is to unite this country.

 

I think a "uniter" could come from the right, but no one in the current field leaps out at me with that kind of potential.

Survey says! That over the last 20 years, only the tax-and-spend liberals have proven that they are capable of controlling the budget deficit, though Bush has somehow shown promise during times of war. I think this is the most significant issue considering the future. Thoughts?

However, according to this report, the biggest problem won't be the aging of baby boomers, but rather, the progressively rising costs of healthcare. Almost looks like too much extra taxes to pay. Definitely helps the case for UNIVERSAL health coverage. Oh yeah, universal health coverage was kind of a bad deal, as well.

 

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/87xx/doc8758/Intro.shtml

You should start your own thread to discuss these topics, agentchange, unless you can specifically show how you are tying them to the discussion at hand regarding the current candidates for the Democratic nomination. I am getting a real sense that you are (whether intentionally or not) hijacking this thread.

 

Can you relate your last two posts to the OP? If so, please explain clearly. If not, then please open a new thread... Or, just ignore me completely since I'm not a staff member at SFN.

Well, the ideology I was talking about is primarily Democratic, but I see your point.

If you want to start a new thread to discuss those points I'll be happy to move some messages for you. I've never quite bought the argument that Clinton was directly responsible for the surplus, and we haven't discussed that issue in a while so it might be interesting.

Obama completely lost it for me a ten days ago or so with his plan to gut NASA's exploration initiative in favor of space and science education.

 

Some articles and comments at

Daily Kos

MSNBC's Cosmic Log

Wired.com

Later again at Daily Kos

 

So where will all the kiddies Obama wants to educate in science and technology find jobs? Pharma is evil; Democratic plans for the pharmacological industry will gut R&D there. Defense is worse than evil; Democrats would like to see a Defense budget smaller than NASA's paltry 0.5% of the federal budget. NASA itself will be gutted thanks to this plan.

 

Overseas? Does Obama foresee a brain drain on the US? Gutting the major sources of R&D work certainly will help facilitate a US brain drain. Moreover, the timing coincides with the pending Social Security disaster. Having our kiddos send Euros, Yen, and Yuan home might be a solution!

Obama completely lost it for me a ten days ago or so with his plan to gut NASA's exploration initiative in favor of space and science education.

<...>

NASA itself will be gutted thanks to this plan.

 

 

Below is an exact quote from a link you shared:

 

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama released a new $18 billion education plan yesterday that he proposes to pay for by delaying the NASA Constellation program (to return humans to the moon) five years.

 

I ask you, is it really fair to use the term "gutted" when referring to Obama's plan considering his proposal is only to delay returning humans to the moon by five years?

 

I'd say, at the very least, it's an extreme POV considering the situation, but that's just me.

 

 

More informatoin on the program which Obama intends to delay by this education proposal:

 

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/constellation/main/index.html

I ask you, is it really fair to use the term "gutted" when referring to Obama's plan considering his proposal is only to delay returning humans to the moon by five years?

 

I'd say, at the very least, it's an extreme POV considering the situation, but that's just me.

 

Actually I do have mixed feelings about that.

 

We have, after all, been throwing more and more money at the education problem for a couple of decades now, and its only been getting worse and worse. I don't think his proposal is a good idea at all.

I ask you, is it really fair to use the term "gutted" when referring to Obama's plan considering his proposal is only to delay returning humans to the moon by five years?

 

I'd say, at the very least, it's an extreme POV considering the situation, but that's just me.

 

There is already a five year lag between the end of the Shuttle program and the first flight of the CEV. To make budget plans work, operations people will have to be laid off during that five year hiatus. This presents a big problem for NASA. Those people are not going to wait around for five years to get their jobs back. They will get jobs elsewhere. The workforce will need to be built up. The five year extension severely exacerbates this problem.

 

That five year holding pattern will have a marked impact on the ones who are spared the pink slips as well. Look at any industry that has suffered a downturn. Corners are cut in an attempt to keep the workforce intact. The sharpest people leave. To this day, NASA is still recovering from the last hiatus between the end of Apollo and the onset of Shuttle operations. NASA's has a significant shortage of middle-aged workers because of this hiatus. Either cut it or fund it fully. Half-assed funding will result in a half-assed program.

 

Even if he rescinds the funding side of this plan, I will never vote for Obama. Even in the case of my personal nightmare tickets, Obama versus Huckabee or Obama versus Paul, I will not vote for Obama. (I won't vote for Huckabee or Paul either. I'll pick some third party candidate.)

That five year holding pattern will have a marked impact on the ones who are spared the pink slips as well. Look at any industry that has suffered a downturn. Corners are cut in an attempt to keep the workforce intact. The sharpest people leave. To this day, NASA is still recovering from the last hiatus between the end of Apollo and the onset of Shuttle operations. NASA's has a significant shortage of middle-aged workers because of this hiatus. Either cut it or fund it fully. Half-assed funding will result in a half-assed program.

To be clear, I'm a card carrying member of The Planetary Society. I fully support exploration of our solar system and beyond. I am thankful for the efforts of the scientists (and everyone involved from the bright eyed child staring at the stars to the mega billionare contributing), and recongize the ripple effects of their work and efforts.

 

However, this is just one mission among many others NOT being cut.

I am reassured since the other missions are still being pursued... missions which go to places we have not already been...

I challenged your rhetoric of "gutting" since those other programs are still moving forward without delay.

 

 

Even if he rescinds the funding side of this plan, I will never vote for Obama. Even in the case of my personal nightmare tickets, Obama versus Huckabee or Obama versus Paul, I will not vote for Obama. (I won't vote for Huckabee or Paul either. I'll pick some third party candidate.)

 

I guess that says it all right there. Your problem is not with his plan, it's with him.

 

 

 

 

We have, after all, been throwing more and more money at the education problem for a couple of decades now, and its only been getting worse and worse. I don't think his proposal is a good idea at all.

 

Can you be more specific? Is your problem with the idea of cutting another mission to the moon, or something within the education plan itself (something about it's operational/logistic details, perhaps)?

 

Btw... I fully agree that the current education system in the US needs more than just "throwing money at it." The true problem is that we don't teach ID and creationism, or pray over the intercom...

 

 

So... Have any of the other candidates shared a plan for education against which we can compare this, or is Obama trying to get out ahead of the pack by sharing this so early?

Can you be more specific? Is your problem with the idea of cutting another mission to the moon, or something within the education plan itself (something about it's operational/logistic details, perhaps)?

 

Both actually. First, I keep hearing about he (well, any candidate actually) will supposedly improve our education here but he doesn't really go into any details, other than that he is going to put more money toward it. Now we as a nation already pay much more for education than any other industrialized or developing country and yet the standards of education are still getting worse. So I'm a bit skeptical about it.

 

And second, why cut funds from NASA. I'm pretty certain that there will be a lot to gain from it's current program, including learning more about the universe and various economic benefits that may arise. Why not cut funds from, say, the defense budget. I hear that a large part of it goes to funding obsolete cold war weapons and missile systems, among other wasteful programs. You can see right here: http://www.sensibleiowans.org/Birddog/birddogging_questions.php

 

 

Or, why not cut funds from pursuing all sorts of quack medicine (ahem, I mean "alternative medicine") and put that to education, or real health care and real medical research at least? --> http://genefinding.blogspot.com/2007/10/oh-great-more-alternative-medicine.html

 

It seems to me that the only reason they cut funds from NASA is because they know that the general public is pretty indifferent and/or is unaware about it and the various contributions they have made in improving human life and understanding. Likewise, if you suggest cutting funds from the Pentagon, well, now that would be unthinkable...

 

Btw... I fully agree that the current education system in the US needs more than just "throwing money at it."

 

Have any of the other candidates shared a plan for education against which we can compare this, or is Obama trying to get out ahead of the pack?

 

Well, I haven't really reviewed the plans of others yet, so I can't really say. But right now I am very pessimistic about any of these plans, and in all honesty I'm really not that interested in hearing about them. The only thing I care about is the actions.

To be clear, I'm a card carrying member of The Planetary Society. I fully support exploration of our solar system and beyond. I am thankful for the efforts of the scientists (and everyone involved from the bright eyed child staring at the stars to the mega billionare contributing), and recongize the ripple effects of their work and efforts.

 

However, this is just one mission among many others NOT being cut.

 

I know that many advocates of NASA's unmanned efforts decry the bulk of NASA's expenditures on human spaceflight. If only NASA would spend that much on unmanned spaceflight ... You do realize that in the eyes of many, the primary reason we send unmanned probes to other planets is because we might eventually be sending people there? The unmanned program exists in part because it is the forerunner for human space flight.

 

Unmanned spaceflight looks cheap in comparison to human spaceflight, but it looks very expensive when compared to Earth-based science. Canceling just one of those billion dollar probes to Mars would enable funding of many Earth-based science projects. When unmanned spaceflight has to compete on its own, it can't. Don't believe me? The last time that human spaceflight faced massive big budget cuts at the end of the Apollo program, drastic cuts to NASA's unmanned efforts soon followed.

 

I guess that says it all right there. Your problem is not with his plan, it's with him.

 

Wrong. He is a bit more liberal than I like, but I was not particularly against him until this proposal. This proposal did not just turn me against him, it turned me deadset against him.

So wait, Obama is proposing delaying one particular (albeit prominent) NASA program by five years. Is that all?

So wait, Obama is proposing delaying one particular (albeit prominent) NASA program by five years. Is that all?

 

I don't know if it is just that particular one. The Constellation program does not just have one particular goal however; it is also an effort to revamp the entire space fleet and NASA itself. That is why it is critical, cutting funds to that could easily put the entire organization in serious trouble (not that it wasn't already in one beforehand).

 

In any case, NASA has been the target of massive budget cuts ever since the Apollo days, and it has taken a toll on their ability to do any space-based project or research in general, never mind the ability to pursue more ambitious goals.

 

Some people don't really realize the benefits of space-based research because, well, it is something that we don't experience in everyday life. But, was it not for research into manned and unmanned spaceflights, the computer you are posting on right now in front probably would not exist. Neither would reliable weather forecasts, knowledge of global warming (global warming was first discovered on Venus), modern firefighting and scuba-diving equipment, various medical advances (especially regarding disease resistance), sanitation, modern and theoretical physics advances, internet, etc. A lot of technology and products we use today came directly from research into manned spaceflight. It is an important part of our everyday lives, and, well, people also do have some sense of adventure too, even though that is more aesthetic than practical.

 

 

===============================================

 

I'm not saying that education isn't important, but just how is more money going to solve our already dire situation on that front? I get the feeling that the only reason they look at throwing more money at the problem is because people are just too damned stubborn and lazy to actually make little changes in their habits or methods or their daily lives. It is, after all, much more convenient to do to use money rather than going out and doing something about it, of which might actually have an affect. It sounds good too, after all; who could oppose putting more money into something that everyone wants by taking it away from someone or something that nobody cares about?

Doesn't anyone here see the delicious irony in funding education for science and technology by making drastic cuts in an arena where those kids educated in science and technology might have been able to get a job had those drastic funding cuts not been made?