MoveOn unwisely allowed only Dean, Kucinich and Kerry, as the top three finishers in the straw poll, to send campaign e-mails directly to the 1.4 million members last week.
i'm on the MoveOn mailing list, and i had in fact been wondering why i received emails from only those three candidates. how perplexing.
also, i just wanted to tell you i share your frustration over the lack of objective information. i read over the MoveOn interviews before voting in the primary, but it really wasn't much help because all the candidates are so obviously aware that they're answering to a left-leaning audience.
i'll take a stab at your unanswered question though, with the caveat that i am doing so with only the most cursory information about any of the candidates. in my unsolicited opinion, dean has been successful because he comes off as refreshingly liberal... not just in ideology, but in (what is at least perceived as) practice. i had heard of howard dean in passing, back when vermont passed the gay marriage thing.... so by the time i heard he was running in the presidential primary, i was delighted because i already had formed positive associations between his name and the success of an issue i strongly support. so even if the real credit for said gay victory belongs to the voters of vermont, i find myself favoring dean as their representative.
whether this makes any strategical sense or not, i have no idea. i have a hard time voting based on strategy, especially because my conscience usually favors someone quite unlikely to win (i.e. ralph nader). *sigh* the psychology of politics is a curious thing.
lastly, HI! i'm a friend of missrachael's, and sometimes, i tend to ramble uninvited. =)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
thanks for the link....
Date: 2003-06-24 03:02 pm (UTC)i'm on the MoveOn mailing list, and i had in fact been wondering why i received emails from only those three candidates. how perplexing.
also, i just wanted to tell you i share your frustration over the lack of objective information. i read over the MoveOn interviews before voting in the primary, but it really wasn't much help because all the candidates are so obviously aware that they're answering to a left-leaning audience.
i'll take a stab at your unanswered question though, with the caveat that i am doing so with only the most cursory information about any of the candidates. in my unsolicited opinion, dean has been successful because he comes off as refreshingly liberal... not just in ideology, but in (what is at least perceived as) practice. i had heard of howard dean in passing, back when vermont passed the gay marriage thing.... so by the time i heard he was running in the presidential primary, i was delighted because i already had formed positive associations between his name and the success of an issue i strongly support. so even if the real credit for said gay victory belongs to the voters of vermont, i find myself favoring dean as their representative.
whether this makes any strategical sense or not, i have no idea. i have a hard time voting based on strategy, especially because my conscience usually favors someone quite unlikely to win (i.e. ralph nader). *sigh* the psychology of politics is a curious thing.
lastly, HI! i'm a friend of missrachael's, and sometimes, i tend to ramble uninvited. =)