Anonymous (not verified) says:

Zach E. (not verified) says:
"Seems odd someone would disavow candidate X over candidate Y just because they don't agree with the other groups supporting candidate X."
--------------
Actually, I can see full well why Buchanon is looking at it the way he is. There is a difference, albeit possibly minimal, in the historical stances of the two leading dem candidates. Obama, in all his state and US Senate history has leaned clearly to the far, far left and has a very limited history of being able to reach out across the aisle to find common ground on major issues. Both McCain and Clinton have a more centrist leaning history and have show great skills in working across the aisle. This is very important, or at least it is to this moderate democratic voter (me), when our choices this year may be between a potentially a far, far left liberal democrat and a "maverick" repub, both of them sitting senators with no administrative background. So for me, I can see the reasoning behind Buchanon's seeming to "back" Clinton over Obama - he's simply stating facts, Clinton IS the truly less liberal of the two dems. And I, as a moderate dem will vote for McCain over Obama if the dem candidate turns out to be him over Clinton.

Reply

The content of this field is kept private
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br> <p> <i> <b> <embed> <img> <blockquote> <span> <strikethrough> <u>
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

By checking this box you are giving permission for Observer staff to contact you to obtain contact information and permissions required for publication.