Quote:
Jason said:
A senator's voting record may very much reflect his constituents' opinions as much or moreso than his own. For a congressman, this is even more true. Once a candidate is running for president, he is no longer as accountable to the same constituency and has far greater flexibility in determining his own policy direction. And then, of course, once elected he can do whatever he wants.
Voting records tell no lies about what's been voted for. But it's hardly a steadfast predictor of a candidate's opinion or an amazing indicator of future advocacies.
|
It may not be a steadfast predictor of a canidates "opinion", or an amazing indicator of their future advocasies, but it surely shows just how much, and for how long they have been trying to change the system, and in what directions. Their recorded speeches, their time in front of their fellow elected officials and the opining of a greater America based on their "supposed" direction speaks volumes of their depth in the game behind the scenes in Washington with lobbyists and special intrest groups, mainly corporate.
Mike Gravel is the only one I saw up there who has the record of change, the record of truth to power, and the ability to do so without being a full socialist, which is rare in the Democratic party over the last 40 years. (hence I don't value Kucinich much, since he as far left as I have seen, though some of his ideas and facts are correct or promising.)
I think Mike Gravel would make a great "2nd fiddle" to Ron Pauls lead, based solely on voting records and consistency to strive for change back to Constitutional Law.