THE PRIMARIES
The reason Huckabee and Obama are winning Iowa is the same reason George W Bush won: personality.
You know who I want for a President? I want someone who stands in front of the news camera, and says "Here's the thing: I'm divorced. My wife/husband left me because I'm always at work and I have no time for anything else. I'm a workaholic, I chain smoke, I don't sleep, but if I am President of the United States I will work my ass off and be the best damn President you've ever seen. Now get out of my way, I have some shit to do."
S/he would totally get my vote. I don't give a rat's ass what the candidates do for fun (staged in front of cameras).
That's all I'm saying about that.
Word.
Posted by: diana | January 03, 2008 at 08:38 PM
Double word.
Posted by: Brian | January 03, 2008 at 09:58 PM
I wouldn't mind a candidate who admits to having an alcohol problem.
Posted by: Joseph | January 04, 2008 at 04:11 AM
This is the first time I have EVER read anything remotley political that I agree with!!!
Hallie
Posted by: Hallie | January 04, 2008 at 05:20 AM
Dare us all to dream...
Posted by: Michael | January 04, 2008 at 07:35 AM
I think it is the fault of the news organizations that put so much emphasis on this caucus and run updates across the bottom of the screen every 5 minutes that make people think it is so important and confusing to Independents (which I believe you are, Dan). And this is just the FIRST caucus on the election year.
No wonder America is sick and tired of politics by November!
Posted by: Mary | January 04, 2008 at 08:44 AM
Personality plays a part but the caucuses are so intensive and the questioning is endless by these folks. They aren't just personality dupes, they liked what they heard, not just who said it. It's also a very homogenous population so their preferences do not reflect the general population. Expect things to change a lot between now and Super Tuesday (I refuse to call it super-duper, that's just stupid).
Posted by: David | January 04, 2008 at 08:57 AM
Mary: There is ONLY 1 caucus. The other elections that happen before the general election are called primaries. The Iowa caucus doesn't even factor into who will get the party's nomination. XX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
NOTE: This comment edited due to name-calling by the commenter, which of course is only permitted by the guy who owns the blog. And that person would be me, not "abc."--Dan
Posted by: abc | January 04, 2008 at 10:25 AM
Actually, abc, Iowa is not the only state that has caucuses. One or both parties also hold caucuses instead of primaries in Alaska, Colorado, DC, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, and North Dakota. And caucus results do dictate the awarding of delegates.
Posted by: TED | January 04, 2008 at 01:42 PM
works for me
Posted by: art | January 04, 2008 at 02:12 PM
sounds fantastic.
Posted by: s | January 04, 2008 at 03:39 PM
From your lips....
Posted by: blackbird | January 04, 2008 at 04:36 PM
I also agree. I don't care about voting for the fun guy, or the charming guy, or whatever. I just want whoever will vote for what I want them to vote for, and screw whatever or whoever they blow on their own time. I don't care.
Posted by: Jennifer | January 04, 2008 at 04:43 PM
I agree with Dan 100%. Give me a nice hard-working nerd any day if we want RESULTS.
However, America has always voted for the guy with the best smile. Apparently that is reassuring to Americans. The only exceptions to this were the 68 and 72 elections, in which neither candidate had a terrific smile. McGovern was a great man but his smile was quite weird looking.
Posted by: Hephaestion | January 04, 2008 at 05:19 PM
You got it right Dan. Why can't all of America think like you?
Posted by: Peter | January 04, 2008 at 07:18 PM
You know how to fix the personality problem? Take ALL election coverage off of television. ALL of it. Put it on the radio so that the candidates can't rely on a smile or an aw-shucks attitude to convince people to like them. Issues, dammit. ISSUES.
Huckabee also won because he's a white, male evangelical lunatic. Iowa seems to like those just fine.
Posted by: Yummsh | January 05, 2008 at 01:46 PM
Washington state has a primary AND a caucus... and because our primary system has been under some fire, at least the Democrats are going to be selecting their delegates, and candidate(s) through the caucus system. I say candidate(s)as delegate votes are divided up by percentage (so, for instance, Obama could get 70 percent of the WA Dem. vote, and Kucinich could get 30 percent)
Oh, and considering whomever wins the Iowa caucus gets a big ol' head of steam going, not to mention lots of more positive press, it DOES factor into who gets the nomination.
(abc should check his facts before posting AND insulting)
BTW, Dan... apparently Obama has "fessed up" to some of his faults and foibles, in one of his books. Even admitted to doing drugs in his youth.
Posted by: Erica | January 05, 2008 at 02:03 PM
Frankly, I wish Dan would run for president since nobody in either party appeals to me.
You'd get my vote. Think about it...
Posted by: MkeLaurie | January 05, 2008 at 06:37 PM
Barack Obama won because he gives people hope. Beyond inspirng people to change, he inspires people to act. He makes people believe that change is possible. I don't want to "have a beer with him," I want to work for him to make our country into one that reflects the promise of our constitution.
Posted by: Cameron | January 06, 2008 at 01:25 AM
I would definitely vote for a Dan Rezni/Dan Savage presidential ticket. The Two Dans would be unbeatable.
Posted by: Hephaestion | January 06, 2008 at 07:51 AM
I am completely in agreement...with Cameron. Sorry to say it, Dan, but on this one you are full of pudding.
The words you put into the mouth of your presidential candidate are empty hubris. I want a president who will inspire me, who will speak frankly to me of his/her vision for America, give me an idea of how we can make it happen, then lead me there.
And smoking is just nasty.
Posted by: Aidan | January 06, 2008 at 06:04 PM
Cameron, are you wearing a Statue of Liberty costume right now?
Posted by: Yummsh | January 06, 2008 at 06:59 PM
Great idea, Cameron. But only if David Sedaris is Secretary of State.
Posted by: MkeLaurie | January 07, 2008 at 07:44 AM
Thanks, TED!!!
Being from Colorado, I would know, since I am my precincts Caucus Chair and that is many, many months away but I'm looking forward to it.
Posted by: Mary | January 10, 2008 at 07:39 AM